Under this standard, there is no doubt that quarantine, “shelter in place,” and closure requirements are constitutional as a way of stopping the spread of COVID-19, even though they restrict freedom.

….

These orders are constitutional even when they preclude people from assembling for religious worship. A number of lawsuits have been filed by those who wish to gather for religious services, saying they have a 1st Amendment right to gather. But the Supreme Court has been clear that there is no exception to general laws for religion. Moreover, if people gather in large groups for this or any other purpose there is the serious risk of spreading COVID-19.

Source: Yes, government can restrict your liberty to protect public health – Los Angeles Times

On the last point, Courts, in fact, ruled that public health orders were unconstitutional. So much for the LA Times. In fact, courts ruled against public health authoritarianism over 50 times (my list). It seems courts did not agree with the LA Times assertion that public health can disband the Constitution.

Some argue that since climate is a public health issue, that the government can suspend the Constitution to enact change there too. Seriously.

None of these NPI measures stopped the pandemic. None at all. The pandemic gradually wound down due to widespread immunity. Nearly everyone in the U.S. is thought to have had Covid by the end of 2022. Immunity comes from vaccines, infection, both, and that the viruses will tend to mutate to less virulent forms, over time.