By Mary Jones and Tony Bruce | Thursday, August 15, 2024 | 5 min read
In a recent article by Fox News journalist Danielle Wallace, the case of a Minnesota grandmother jailed for defying the state’s COVID-19 lockdown orders has drawn significant attention. The woman, who criticized Governor Tim Walz’s mandates, described the lockdown measures as a form of “tyranny,” sparking debate over the balance between public health mandates and individual freedoms.
The incident took place during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, as the United States grappled with rising infection rates and over one million deaths nationwide. In an effort to contain the virus, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, like many other state leaders, imposed strict lockdown measures. These included stay-at-home orders, restrictions on businesses, and limitations on public gatherings, all aimed at curbing the spread of the virus and saving lives.
However, not everyone agreed with the approach. Some, like Lisa Hanson, a former wine and coffee bistro owner, became a central figure in the debate over COVID-19 lockdown orders after she was jailed for defying Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s pandemic restrictions. In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, Hanson shared her frustration with the government’s handling of the pandemic, accusing now-Democrat vice presidential candidate Walz of essentially “shutting down and destroying” her small business. Hanson warned Americans, “You do not want tyranny at this level,” as she reflected on the harsh consequences of her decision to keep her business open in defiance of state mandates.
A mother of eight children and soon-to-be grandmother of 18, Hanson described herself as a lifelong law-abiding citizen. Before the pandemic, she and her husband had successfully owned and operated businesses for more than 30 years. Her coffee and wine bistro, Interchange Wine & Coffee Bistro in Albert Lea—about 90 miles south of Minneapolis—had been open for eight years at the time the COVID-19 pandemic struck in 2020.
In her interview, Hanson expressed that her decision to stay open was driven by the need to survive economically, as the pandemic threatened to permanently close the doors of her business. She maintained that besides a speeding ticket as a teenager, she had no history of breaking the law. But when it came to the lockdown orders, she felt she had no choice but to resist what she saw as overreach by the state government.
This case brings to light the ongoing tension between public health measures and individual freedoms that played out across the country during the pandemic. Supporters of lockdowns and mandates argue that they were necessary to prevent the healthcare system from being overwhelmed and to save lives during an unprecedented crisis. The staggering death toll of over one million Americans underscores the severity of the situation, making the case for stringent measures.
However, opponents, like Lisa Hanson, contend that these restrictions went beyond protecting public health, instead becoming a form of government control that damaged businesses, livelihoods, and individual rights. They argue that people should have had the freedom to make their own choices regarding their health and how they navigated the pandemic.
WHEY PROTEIN POWDER: OPTIMUM NUTRITION GOLD STANDARD
The pandemic’s impact on the economy and public life became a deeply political issue. As Wallace’s article highlights, Lisa Hanson’s case is emblematic of the growing frustration among certain groups that felt targeted by government overreach. Many conservative voices, including those on platforms like Fox News, have echoed these concerns, with some labeling strict pandemic policies as tyrannical or authoritarian.
Governor Walz defended the restrictions at the time, arguing that the measures were grounded in science and aimed at preventing a public health catastrophe. Yet, as the lockdowns persisted, lawsuits and protests erupted across the country, and many small business owners, including the grandmother in this case, found themselves at odds with state authorities.
While her individual case may seem unique, it’s a reflection of the wider resistance to COVID-19 mandates in the United States. The pandemic left many Americans grappling with questions of governmental authority, civil liberties, and the role of public policy in personal life. With millions of Americans out of work and small businesses closing at unprecedented rates, the economic toll of lockdowns weighed heavily on the nation.
For those who suffered economically, the experience felt like an overextension of government power. The grandmother’s description of “tyranny” captures the growing distrust in state and federal policies that some viewed as stripping away autonomy without clear justification.
Danielle Wallace’s article on the jailed Minnesota grandmother offers a window into how Fox News continues to support former President Donald Trump and push narratives that resonate with his base. By highlighting stories like that of Lisa Hanson jailed for defying COVID-19 lockdown orders, Fox News taps into broader grievances around government overreach, personal freedoms, and resistance to pandemic-related restrictions—key themes in Trump’s rhetoric.
The portrayal of Hanson as a victim of “tyranny” aligns with Trump’s repeated claims that government mandates during the pandemic were oppressive and harmful to individual liberties. While the narrative emphasizes personal freedom and resistance to state control, it omits the broader context of public health concerns that led to the imposition of lockdown measures in the first place. This selective reporting risks misleading readers or viewers by framing the issue as one of unjust government oppression, without fully addressing the critical health risks that led to over one million American deaths during the pandemic.
By focusing on such stories, Fox News continues to cultivate an audience that views government mandates as infringing on their freedoms, reinforcing the populist, anti-establishment messaging championed by Trump. In doing so, they perpetuate a narrative that resonates deeply with their audience but doesn’t always present a balanced perspective on complex issues like public health policy, economic hardship, and governmental responsibility during crises.
