SCOTUS Oral Argument Audio (Vaccine Mandates) LIVE THREAD [2nd case starts at reply 279]

SCOTUS ^ | 01/07/2022 | SCOTUS

[TexasGurl24]

Two cases will be argued today beginning at 10.

National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor (OSHA Mandate)

and Biden v. Missouri (Healthcare mandate)

Audio here:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx

[HypatiaTaught]

No kidding...

I am livid. I can’t listen to this anymore. I will only read from the comments here.

“vaccinated people are also GETTING AND SPREADING the cold virus.

SO this is pure B.S. to mandate the jab.

I sure hope the court rules against the mandate. PLEASE today’s my birthday!

[rainee]

Typical liberal & the problem when they’re knighted with robes..constitution be damned, it’s how they feel..they rule on emotions, not logic.

[TexasGurl24]

Kavanaugh seems to be leaning toward us, but he is hard to read.

[Sacajaweau]

The usual Dem girls always vote “party”. 7-2

[CAluvdubya]

I was listening on Newsmax and they cut it off. I was getting too mad about points not being made or Justices outright ignoring the points.

I'll just read comments now. So frustrating.

[infool7]

Anyone want to ping this entire thread with replies?

Here is the list... so far

9yearlurker;butlerweave;caluvdubya;cboldt;clearcaseguy;depcom;eqandybuzz;fireman15;flipwilson;fury;gregh;harpotoo;houseatreides;infool7;janelong;jimrobinson;lakesidegranny;mrrogers;pghbaldy;rainee;ronaldusmagnus;safrguns;semimojo;sopo;texasgurl24;tornadoalley3;trumpgirlkitcat

[gswilder]

Good point on how aggressive and biased the 3 liberals are. I think they are angry, just not about the vaccine mandate, but because the vote has already occurred on the abortion hearing from December.

[TexasGurl24]

Barrett’s question is a little hard to read too, but she seems to be countering Kagan and Robert’s questions.

[CAluvdubya]

I think they are angry, just not about the vaccine mandate, but because the vote has already occurred on the abortion hearing from December.

That's an interesting thought. Would definitely explain the anger.

[DrewsMum]

Thank you!

[struggle]

I see it 6-3 against the mandates.

[DrewsMum]

Barrett seems to be tipping her hand

[TexasGurl24]

Running count.

AT BEST this will be 5-4 for us.

Clearly and absolutely against us: Roberts, Kagan, Breyer and Sotomayor.

Clearly for us: Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch.

Leaning toward us: Kavanaugh and Barrett.

The last two are hard to read.

[DEPcom]

Looks like 5 against Mandates and 4 for Mandates

[Cboldt]

The mandate upheld in the past was imposed by a state, not by the feds.

In addition to the question of whether the feds have this power, there is the question of whther or not OSHA has the power.

[CottonBall]

Thanks for the ping, Jane. I didn’t know the Mandate was being seen by the SC already.

[TexasGurl24]

Barrett’s questions seemed to be geared to countering the emotional arguments of Kagan and Roberts.

[TexasGurl24]

At best. But it’s going to be close.

Kavanaugh and Barrett will decide this.

[blackdog]

"Sotmajor on there is no mandate."

A mandate is not a law. I think that's her intent there.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Barrett seems friendly but appears to be trying to create a compromise with masks.

My prediction is that the court will deny the stay now but then eventually, years from now, undo the order by upholding a ruling against it once someone who has been harmed by it has standing.