Posted on 11/17/2021 7:05:55 AM PST by Kaslin
As you’ve likely heard by now, there are a number of challenges to resident Biden’s vaccine mandates working their way through the courts at the moment. Because these challenges are coming up through disparate court circuits, one of them had to be chosen to consolidate the various challenges together and hear them as a group. Using an odd but traditional process to make the selection, the 6th Circuit Court wound up being given the honor of deciding the matter. (At least for now.) And how did they make that decision? By literally pulling a ping pong ball out of a bin. But when the Associated Press tackled the topic, more time was spent identifying the 6th Circuit as being “right-wing” and comprised of judges “nominated by Republicans” than the actual substance of the challenges.
Challenges to resident Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private employers will be consolidated in the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, a panel dominated by judges appointed by Republicans.
The Cincinnati-based court was selected Tuesday in a random drawing using ping-pong balls, a process employed when challenges to certain federal agency actions are filed in multiple courts.
The selection could be good news for those challenging the administration’s vaccine requirement, which includes officials in 27 Republican-led states, employers and several conservative and business organizations. They argue the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration does not have the authority to impose the mandate.
This AP coverage is kind of amazing in the way it fixates entirely on the makeup of the court. The headline for the article starts with “GOP-majority court chosen…” Then, as you can see in the excerpt above, the first three paragraphs are primarily focused on the number of challenges coming from “Republican-led states” and “conservative organizations.”
The article then goes on to break down the numbers, showing that eleven of the 16 full-time judges on the 6th Circuit were appointed by Republican presidents. Adding in the “semi-retired” judges who also hear cases, they conclude that the split is “19-9 in favor of Republicans.” The article then sweetens the deal further by pointing out that six of the judges were nominated by Donald Trump.
We are next helpfully informed that the court where the mandate was put on hold was the 5th Circuit. That court is described as “another court where a majority of judges were nominated by Republicans.” The article then moves on to describe unnamed “legal experts” who are “concerned about… the politicization of both federal and state courts,” questioning whether “justice is fairly administered or dispensed through a partisan lens.”
The next seven paragraphs consist of nothing but a discussion of which presidents nominated judges to each court and how unfair this all must seem. You have to work your way down to the 17th paragraph of the article before any serious discussion of the mandates themselves and the basis for the challenges that are being considered is seen.
One other thing that’s missing from this report is any mention of the fact that none of these court selection proceedings may wind up mattering in the end. Thus far, the Supreme Court has been more than generous in allowing executive mandates to stand, at least if they come from the state level. Despite the obvious five and a half to three and a half split on the Supreme Court in favor of more conservative-leaning justices (you can really only count Roberts half of the time at best), there is no assurance that SCOTUS will strike down the mandate when this lands in their laps.
But what the Associated Press and a number of other liberal-leaning news outlets are actually doing here is paving the way for later complaints if the mandate isn’t eventually upheld. They are questioning the validity of the courts, preparing to say (if it doesn’t go their way) that the mandate was only struck down because of biased, ideologically slanted courts. I’d love to be wrong, but I think it’s a pretty safe bet that this story is going to turn out that way.
The AssPress is Pravda. I really wish we could find a new wire service and start boycotting local media outlets that continue to use the AssPress.
Doesn’t matter. It will end up at the Supreme Court and Roberts will just declare the vaccine mandate a tax....
Funny how the media is only concerned with the “politicization of the courts” when it leans Republican.
Just try showing this information to the “ open minded crowd “, and they just roll their eyes and say “there he goes again”.
They are incapable of seeing the bias themselves, but it’s either “I don’t have time to spend watching the news like you do”, or it’s “hey, I consider myself well informed-I watch ALL the news shows, ABC, CNN, MSNBC…..”
The APe doesn’t believe Traitor Roberts?
“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” Mr. Roberts said . “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”
maybe by then enough people will have died off that court rulings won’t matter.
I see reporting on “excess” deaths from “unknown” and “mysterious” causes mounting up.
The neighbor died the other day. Older guy, happy and active, out working in the fields, leg turned blue on Wednesday night, surgery for clots on Friday, recovering a little, got up to go to the bathroom before being released him and died from another clot on Wednesday. Family was told nothing about cause until I mentioned the clot shots. He had just gotten his three weeks before he died.
Funny. They never refer to the 9th a “liberal”
L
OSHA Suspends Implementation and Enforcement of Vaccine Mandate Pending Litigation - https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4013482/posts
A lifelong friend of my wife's was diabetic, and had her leg amputated years ago. She went in for clot surgery in her stump, and they found many more clots than originally anticipated. She died a day later. She had received the Johnson Jab three weeks prior.
Was the Jab the cause of the excess clots? Who knows. She was scheduled for the clot surgery prior to the Jab, and had to get the Jab in order to get the surgery.
The Traitor Media, inclusive of the AP, may actually be using the premise of judges appointed by Republicans to give more weight to a pro-mandate decision from the 6th Circuit Court.
How did it get to the 6th Circuit when the 5th Circuit was the one with the hold? Funny how things never bounce our way.
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.