Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

John Roberts questions administration's concession COVID mandate is a 'work-around' Supreme Court's majority's questions lean away from Biden's demands
wnd.com ^ | 1/7/2022 1730 hrs et | Bob Unruh

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 ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: constitution; mandate; osha; scotus; vaccine; vaccines
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
To: pepsionice

They have a special vax just for elected officials and government employees they like. It might say it’s the vaccine on the bottle but it’s just saline


41 posted on 01/08/2022 7:35:11 AM PST by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Excellent point. These people are supposed to be really bright of the brightest yet some of them seem terribly uninformed and ignorant.

Our whole government has become an embarrassment.

42 posted on 01/08/2022 7:36:57 AM PST by dforest (Freaking insane world. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rktman
"But, how much damage is already done by companies that already have gone all in?"

BINGO! To them, it doesn't matter whether they win or not at this juncture. They managed to force millions to be vaccinated. And those lawsuits? Well, those will be against those mean nasty corporations that mandated vaccinations for employment. The OSHA statement was only "guidance", don't you know.......

43 posted on 01/08/2022 7:37:43 AM PST by cincinnati65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: rktman

They’re screwed anyways. I don’t believe anybody gave them immunity from vaccine caused deaths and injuries.


44 posted on 01/08/2022 7:39:44 AM PST by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Infant trafficking and adoption fraud.


45 posted on 01/08/2022 7:41:09 AM PST by marcusmaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn

What I’ve been thinking all along.

πŸ˜¨πŸ˜·πŸ’‰πŸ‚πŸ’¨πŸ’©πŸ’Έ


46 posted on 01/08/2022 7:45:26 AM PST by rktman (Destroy America from within? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this? πŸ˜•)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

A big problem with OSHA regulations is their permanence.

COVID is transitory, by nature. It will soon fade away, completely. Omicron is merely a signpost along the way.

But the OSHA vaccination requirement in the workplace will endure, long after any necessity (real or imagined) has evaporated.

What I find most interesting is how this mandate is proceeding, outside of the regulatory promulgation process. Usually there is a notice of rule making posted in the Federal Register. A proposed regulation drafted and posted. Comment period, etc. Then a Final Rule,and effectively date.

This is an end run around the entire regulatory process, among other strange things.


47 posted on 01/08/2022 7:47:06 AM PST by steve in DC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

I think I read there were 750,000 new cases the previous day, so yeah...he probably misspoke. But still, you would hope for precise and correct utterances from someone at this level of the game.


48 posted on 01/08/2022 7:49:56 AM PST by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rktman

The companies put themselves at legal risk depending upon how the SCOTUS rulings come down. And how much do the companies want to shackle themselves with these regulations that cost them money and make them less competitive in attracting new employees?

I guess the question that must be asked is whether the OSHA mandate was welcomed by the companies so they could have the legal support to enact policies they wanted or that they are being forced to enact these policies due to pressure from Washington? I believe it is the latter.


49 posted on 01/08/2022 7:53:39 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57
-- Does article 6 apply, can it be used to push back on mandates? --

Article 6 is where government officers are required to "be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution."

The oath has no teeth at all. There is no penalty for violating it, and indeed, 100% of the officials who violate the oath will swear that they are upholding it.

The cited case stands for the proposition that a federal ruling will always be held superior over a state ruling. And too, that the feds cannot, by definition, overstep. The feds are our protectors, so what they say is always properly superior. The issue in that case was school segregation on racial basis.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no `rule making' or legislation which would abrogate them."

That statement will be declared upheld no matter which way SCOTUS rules on the OSHA regulation. There is no right in the constitution, to be free from forced vaccination. The government has the power to force you to wage violence (war), so forcing you to take medicine is easily a government power. All the court is trying to figure is whether this is a federal power and if so (they already decided it can be a federal power) who in the government is authorized to assert it.

Contrary to popular statement, the constitution IS a suicide pact. There is no limit to the power the feds will claim to themselves. Just give it time ...

50 posted on 01/08/2022 8:08:12 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Exactly. If this was proposed very early on in the Pandemic, say in May 20 20, or around that time frame then they may have a point to mandate things. But two years in and with supposedly 16 to 75% of the country vaccinated, you can’t claim emergency anymore.


51 posted on 01/08/2022 8:15:25 AM PST by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: matt04
Couldn't be before the vaccines came out...but if anyone was going to mandate...it would have been then.

In the meantime, millions have been working with no vaccination...and the death rate and/or hospitalization rate has not changed........even with millions vaccinated.

52 posted on 01/08/2022 8:25:34 AM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: rktman
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.

Whatever Joe says, goes without question. Rubber stamp. It's an atrocity, really. Can you imagine the horror if Her Nastiness had won in 2016 and appointed three leftists in the same mold as these idiots? We'd have only Alito and Thomas as reliable constitutionalists and a whole slew of 7-2 or 6-3 decisions advancing the New World Order.


53 posted on 01/08/2022 8:32:56 AM PST by Deo volente ("When we see the image of a baby in the womb, we glimpse the majesty of God's creation." Pres. Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

I listened to the 3 liberals & couldn’t believe the shrill, angry lies that spewed from their mouths! It was beyond embarrassing..
The wise Latina was the worst, so ignorant.


54 posted on 01/08/2022 8:38:37 AM PST by rainee (Trump won! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

C’mon man! It’s a TAX!


55 posted on 01/08/2022 8:53:04 AM PST by RKBA Democrat (Cultural separation and divorce. Not partisan politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

agree, should of been 30 days tops, to give time for congress to act or not act.


56 posted on 01/08/2022 9:03:29 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: rktman

COVID money has turned into a money laundering gift of the blue states and side operations wager some real arm twisting going on in the court now.


57 posted on 01/08/2022 9:03:39 AM PST by Vaduz ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moovova

Is Bryer losing his mental capacities, also???


58 posted on 01/08/2022 9:49:12 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: moovova

Is Breyer losing his mental capacities, also???


59 posted on 01/08/2022 9:49:29 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles

Did he ever have them?


60 posted on 01/08/2022 9:49:34 AM PST by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson