Doesn't matter. If there is a travel advisory not to travel and someone cuts you off and it was non essential travel you still get fined. Let the people take their own risks instead of pulling the nanny state BS.
For example here in the PNW if you cross a pass without chains and it says chains required, someone cuts you off and forces you into a ditch, guess what, you still pay a fine for not having chains. The same would apply.
How much traffic per day on these passes where chains are required? Do they move 100,000 commuters plus delivery trucks?
Reason I am saying that is, it would tear up the roads something fierce to have that much traffic all required to have chains on.
Travel requirements and conditions are really different in different areas, there is no one size fits all situation. And some areas have gotten deep snow, it wasn't all "hype". the weather service made a call, some areas they got it, other areas not much, but if anyone bothered to look at the sat pics from the day before, you would have been hard pressed to NOT predict a major nor easter heavy snowfall over a wide area.
I still contend, the weather service is taking a lot of unfair criticism here.
As to what various elected leaders did or didn't do, they went on best information at the time. It would have been irresponsible as hell to strand millions, not rural east buggywhip dozens, but millions of folks out on the roads in the middle of a major blizzard, had it been as widespread and heavy as the earlier models indicated. Plus a serious major PITA to try and clear roads all over with stuck cars, etc.
It was a close, but not perfect call, no more, no less. The bulk of the heavy stuff hit a little east and then north of NYC and surroundings,and on up, that it didn't hit there is a luck out. It wasn't hyped, they lucked out, as opposed to sandy, when they got hit hard and didn't luck out. Just as much or more news coverage then as now, the weather guys hit it closer on that one.