Posted on 11/01/2021 10:06:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Eighteen states filed three separate lawsuits Friday to stop President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors, arguing that the requirement violates federal law.
Attorneys general from Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming signed on to one lawsuit, which was filed in a federal district court in Missouri. Another group of states including Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Georgia.
Texas also sued individually on Friday.
The states asked a federal judge to block Biden’s requirement that all employees of federal contractors be vaccinated against the coronavirus by Dec. 8, arguing that the mandate violates federal procurement law and is an overreach of federal power.
“If the federal government attempts to unconstitutionally exert its will and force federal contractors to mandate vaccinations, the workforce and businesses could be decimated, further exacerbating the supply chain and workforce crises,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican, said in a statement. “The federal government should not be mandating vaccinations, and that’s why we filed suit today – to halt this illegal, unconstitutional action.”
New Hampshire’s Republican Attorney General John Formella said in a statement that COVID vaccines are safe, effective, and encouraged but that the benefits “do not justify violating the law.”
Florida sued on Thursday, bringing to 19 the number of states challenging the Biden administration mandate in four federal courts.
Biden has argued that sweeping vaccine mandates will help end the deadly pandemic, but Republicans nationwide have opposed the vaccination requirements and have threatened to bring similar legal challenges.
Texas filed a similar lawsuit Friday in a federal district court in a federal court in Galveston, Texas, seeking to block enforcement of the mandate.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
The courts will say they have no standing.
We’ve seen this movie before.
Lets Go Brandon!
Lets Go Brandon!
No the courts “allowed” the mandate via States rights I’m thinking so Florida and Texas should be OK telling the resident Let’s go Brandon!
31 to go.
We’ll soon see. Our legal system is so politicized I don’t have any confidence in a favorable outcome.
So far SCOTUS has gone toward the mandates being legit. Not sure what their reasoning is.
This is the Cloward/Piven chaos these Dems have been looking for. Their objective is to collapse the system and introduce their Marxist paradise.
If the states had the power to mandate vaccines, I don't think it would be legal for states to apply the mandate only to federal workers who are in the state. It would apply to all the citizens of the state. The federal government could argue that the state cannot mandate what happens on federal property to stop some states from trying to nullify the federal mandate within their states.
The court could rule that the federal government can mandate vaccines for people who work on federal property, but cannot mandate vaccines for private business employees. Further, the courts might rule that the federal government cannot mandate private "contract workers" who do not work on federal property, as they are then covered by state laws.
This whole OSHA backdoor is likely not Constitutional.
-PJ
It should be 40
The concept of standing has become so thoroughly abused that I think we’d be better off if courts had to take every case and just dismiss the ones that turned out to be frivolous. “Standing” is often now used as just an excuse to deny citizens access to the legal system. At a bare minimum, judges should be forced to explain why they denied a plaintiff standing (in detail). The plaintiff should be presumed to have standing unless denial is clearly and explicitly justified.
Where’s Indiana? I was told that our AG said he had everything ready to go as soon as the mandate became written down. If all these other states are suing, why isn’t Indiana?
It'll be the 'ol election legal double-shuffle again, either too early or too late to hear or rule on. My bet is this issue never sees the inside of the SC chamber.
Lots of people will lose their jobs over this (myself included).
My bet is this issue never sees the inside of the SC chamber.
**************
That would be the Supreme Kangaroo Kourt.
Because Indiana’s governor is part of the problem..
Sadly, you’re right. I wish DeSantis were my Governor.
This is why the Pfascists insisted this be called a “vaccine”. This is why the CDC Center for Domination and Control changed the definition of “vaccine” multiple times in the past year so that these genetic treatments met the criteria for being a “vaccine”.
Jacobsen vs. Mass. in 1905 was upheld by the Supreme Court and established that the state can mandate vaccines.
And this is why the courts side with the Pfascists.
Yep. The Ninth Circuit held this summer than neither parent-taxpayers nor their student children had standing to challenge the Portland Public Schools’ hijacking the school system for days on end to organize massive “student”-led rallies, e.g., against gun rights. Standing doctrine is generally a one-way street for Leftists and against the Right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.