Posted on 01/07/2022 2:54:28 PM PST by Hostage
On Friday, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the constitutionality of President Joe Biden's Wuhan coronavirus vaccine mandates for private companies with more than 100 employees. In September 2021, Biden tasked OSHA with implementing and enforcing the mandates. In the time since, the administration has been sued by multiple parties.
During questioning, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor made a number of false statements about the vaccine's ability to prevent transmission of the virus. While it may protect against death or hospitalization, the vaccine does not prevent transmission.
"They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death – they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission," CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said in an interview with CNN over the summer.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
I pray you are right.
Yes, Roberts is traitorous.
But Barrett is as big a concern.
What is their connection?
Federalist Society brought both Roberts and Barrett.
Lost in the noise was $17+ million to the grifter class (DC lawyer racket) paid to “shepherd” Barrett to Trump for the nomination/appointment.
Barbara Lagoa, Cuban-American Judge from Florida was also a nominee. She’s a solid conservative constitutionalist anti-communist. Had she been selected, none of this would be in front of us.
Then there’s this:
And this:
https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html
Both should be before SCOTUS now on the Biden Tyranny case. Both relate to EFFING Pfizer whose executive suite should be summarily shot by firing squad or drop shipped over Tehran. Crimes against humanity.
On the second link, ask me if you have any questions or difficulty following. It’s my wheelhouse and I’m maximally passed off which should make for good melodramatic entertainment.
They are not mistakes, they are deliberate lies.
i have to think this would be the way as well. It has a way to far-reaching effect. Allow states to make mandates, that’s one thing. and there is a case from 1905 that supports that. So I think it’s going down. But we’ll see Roberts si way too much of a wild card for me.
Our side for the most part, doesn’t believe in marxists evil.
Hope your Zen Master is correct.
I thought the Supremes were supposed to rule on Constitutionality of laws—not the efficacy of vaccines or severity of the pandemic.
Robert Barnes of Barnes Law, who streamed the whole thing, agreed 6-3 or 5-4 against vaxxes.
Since when does having a law degree equate to having a medical degree?
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.