Posted on 01/08/2022 6:20:07 AM PST by rktman
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday cited the Biden administration's admission that his COVID mandate for Americans is a "work-around," a path that essentially goes around what the law would require or allow.
His comments came as the six-member majority of the court that appear to be more conservative hinted about their decision in the pending case that challenges Joe Biden's demands that health care workers, and workers at large companies, can be forced to accept the experimental COVID shots.
Fox News noted that the justices seemed "split along ideological lines on vaccine requirements affecting nearly 100 million workers."
The three liberals on the court, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer entered the courtroom with an agenda to affirm a decision that would allow Biden to do what he wants.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Breyer probably meant to say 750K but Sotomayer is just an ignorant racist.
Who will then immediately vote it unconstitutional. They may even vote that unconstitutional beforehand in this case.
Good post.
Another way of putting it is the U.S. Constitution doesn’t AUTHORIZE to the federal government at least half of the power they wield.
If it ain’t in the Constitution, the CREATOR of the federal government, it ain’t a legitimate federal government power.
People here and elsewhere get all tangled up with that because details like high-tech rockets and modern things are not listed in the Constitution. But they’re confusing MEANS with ENDS. The limited powers enumerated mostly in Art 1, Sec. 8 authorizes the purposes not the means of the limited and enumerated powers of the feds.
Hearing her now…. She is suggesting OSHA overstepped
Roberts is compromised. He will vote for the mandates.
This is getting down to what Robert Barnes feared when ACB was appointed. I hope he is wrong, but it is playing out exactly to what he predicted last year.
Does the View still need a “conservative” host.
I nominate Roberts.
Did anybody in the oral arguments mention that the Democratic controlled Senate voted AGAINST the mandates? That seems pretty clear that these mandates would never pass congress.
The ball should be in the court of Congress, the elected representatives of the people. Any mandates, constitutional or not, should come from them not some Executive Order or government agency. IMO SCOTUS will cite this as the reason to rule against the mandates.
But, how much damage is already done by companies that already have gone all in? Not likely to rescind their rules without a costly law suit.
Breyer said 750 million people came down with the COVID just the day before.
—
Everyone got it twice; once in the morning, then once in the afternoon. And for good measure, some got it 3 times.
I didn’t think any of the justices came off as intelligent or informed.
After two years in the works....It is NOT an emergency.
Compromised?? NO ONE knows that...it's a story that got slipped into the news with "0" supporting info.
You cannot trust what a Justice says during arguments. I remember Kennedy during the Gay marriage issue. He expressed real misgivings about upending a thousand years of human culture and tradition then voted to do just that.
why is congress and staff exempted from being vaccinated? What is the thinking behind this?
To Libs, facts are irrelevant. It always is about, and will always be about, the narrative. And part of that narrative is the continual amassing of power at the federal level.
Heads would have exploded.
Diogenesis wrote:
“...Article Six protects the American people.
[Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426, 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved,
there can be no ‘rule making’ or legislation
which would abrogate them.”
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958)]
“
Pinging cboldt; Does article 6 apply, can it be used to push back on mandates?
But then delayed it for two months.
Then the appeals from business to delay it over Christmas.
It calls into question the status of an "emergency."
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.