Hell State.
Wonder where CA has built their concentration camps.
Read somewhere last year about new private prisons there, empty, skeleton staffed, and ready to go . . . hmm, where was that . . .
Yeah, great idea.
Wait until the virus blows over and then propose an employee inoculation mandate.
Sounds like legitimate science to me.
/s
It’s too late for that nonsense. The momentum is going in the other direction. More states are removing Mask requirements.
The same will happen with vax requirements.
Where this BS hits a wall is with remote employees and contractors who live out of state.
Was CA exempt from the SCOTUS ruling? Or was it just on “Federal” mandates being unconstitutional?
Idiots are not learning anything from Canada.
Course, spineless Americans don’t seem to be either.
If the courts allow this to stand, the out migration will become a fire hose.
I’m convinced The Left wants a civil war or revolution. It feels it can’t just kill us, so it wants us to rise-up so it can claim to be acting in self-defense. That’s why The Left keeps pressing regarding Coronavirus regulations.
It is becoming more and more obvious even to the indoctrinated that the “vaccines” no longer work... at all. So yes, they need more and more mandates even to keep the boosters going. If people stop taking them... those multibillion dollar profits the big drug companies have been making are going to go flat. Their valuations will drop by who knows how much. So they are having to pull the strings and get their puppets to go into action wherever they can.
How is this a Bad Thing? Fer sh!t's sake, they keep fiddle f&cking with the formula, and now they want to continue the jabs forever, every four months, to infinitude.
It's a cull, and we will be able to move in and mop up the leftover Stupids.
These jerks live in a black hole. The entire planet is protesting against this crap, and these clowns are upping the ante on vaccinations.
Good grief, these people are nasty and evil.
and every employee moves to another state ...
Primary Holding
A state may enact a compulsory vaccination law, since the legislature has the discretion to decide whether vaccination is the best way to prevent smallpox and protect public health. The legislature may exempt children from the law without violating the equal protection rights of adults if the law applies equally among adults.
Facts:
A Massachusetts law provided that the board of health of a city or town may require and enforce vaccination and revaccination of its inhabitants, while providing them with a way to get free vaccinations. The state imposed a $5 fine for people over 21 who violated this law, although it provided an exception for children with a doctor's certificate stating that they are not fit for vaccination. The city of Cambridge adopted a regulation requiring all of its inhabitants who were not vaccinated against smallpox in the last five years to be vaccinated or revaccinated. (This was based on the increasing presence of smallpox in the city.) A certain physician was authorized to enforce the vaccination policy. The plaintiff in this case was an individual over 21 who refused to comply with the vaccination requirement and then faced a criminal complaint. He was found guilty and fined, and the court ordered him held in custody until the fine was paid.
Majority
John Marshall Harlan (Author, Melville Weston Fuller, Henry Billings Brown, Edward Douglass White, Joseph McKenna, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., William Rufus Day
Harlan ruled that the vaccination law did not violate the 14th Amendment because the police power of the state may be allowed to constrain individual liberties through reasonable regulations when required to protect public safety. He reasoned that individual liberty does not allow people to take actions regardless of the harm that they could cause to others. Harlan felt that the plaintiff had failed to show that the vaccination law was arbitrary or oppressive, or not reasonably required for the safety of the public. He noted the increasing presence of smallpox, which prevented the plaintiff from convincingly asserting that the rule had no real or substantial relation to protecting public health and safety. Although the plaintiff presented evidence that some doctors believed that the smallpox vaccine was not effective and could cause further diseases, Harlan pointed out that the opposite view represents the common medical belief and is followed by more reputable doctors.
Continuing their self destruction, these Democrats are!
Already ruled unconstitional. Effing little dictators.