Split the baby, apply the tyranny slowly so as not to spook the sheep.
So the SCOTUS statists will want to punish those workers for not obeying the party.
I think that a vaccinate *or* regular testing requirement might be a reasonable one for health care workers...and maybe others as well. But a vaccinate or be fired requirement is *never* justified.
Good for Alito for pointing this out. It’s even more ludicrous when you consider that OSHA mandate is behind issued under an Emergency Temporary Standard. There’s nothing “temporary” about a vaccine.
Mandating a vaccine as a workplace safety measure is the equivalent of requiring construction workers to get hard hats surgically attached to their heads.
I’ve found Amy Howe’s takes mostly on the mark, so this may cause some folks some heartburn.
I’ve been listening to the audio. What the hell was going on with AJ Kagan? I don’t believe I have ever heard her so agitated.. It was noticeable.
Sotomayor and Breyer need to at least educate themselves enough that they aren’t spouting nonsensical statistics before they vote on anything.
Activist judges trying to write legislation.
What does the Constitution say?
Does the federal government really have power to say anything on this? Where?
And does the Constitution single out healthcare workers for a labor area where the federal government gets special control?
Is it OK to control this profession, but not that profession? How do we know where these lines are drawn?
The whole thing is totally inappropriate.
One might (possibly) think it’s all a really swell idea. But that doesn’t make it permissible.
It’s interesting because it was split on the law wording - Medical people because the medicare contracts state that they have to abide by government rulings to get the money. OSHA may get blocked because it’s outside their legal powers for workplace regulations.
I’m stuck under the executive order mandate for government subcontractors though and I don’t think either of these rulings will apply to me.
No one seems to care that the treatment being mandated doesn’t stop the disease from spreading. It seems that the Chief Justice would approve a mandate for all healthcare workers to eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches if that is what HHS demanded.
The judicial branch has no more businesses mucking around in personal health decisions then the other two, but here we are.
Any idea when the Court will act? Right now the Mandate is in place. Waiting to issue a decision invalidates the entire reason for hearing the case in an emergency session
I know one thing. The military service men can’t tell the military they can’t vaccinate them.. When I was going overseas we got all kinds of vaccinations!! We couldn’t opt out!
I don’t trust SCOTUS to do anything right. They don’t represent the constitution only whatever seems popular.
Pure scum... even if they happen to get this one right.
If you can mandate this vaccine for one group...you can mandate for all. This is picking and choosing again who wins and who loses. Period. Not Constitutional!
What a repulsive discussion. Why the Bell is there any discussion of the efficacy of the vaccine? Or any medical topic? They are supposed to decide if the Constitution permits the mandate. Supreme. Kurt Nustices babbling about hospital capacity and how many kids have COVID??
And same for the discussion about negative impacts on industry. Meaningless!! If it had no effect on business it’s still not Constitutional for our government to force injections. I wish they would e gone straight for the heart. Many good attorneys could’ve done that. What idiots.
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Military and federal employment-related issues aside, misguided (imo), post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated Supreme Court justices are predictably stubbornly continuing to ignore the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to tax and spend for INTRAstate healthcare (Obamacare unconstitutonal imo).
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphasis added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
By continuing to ignore Congress's constitutionally limited powers, post-17th Amendment ratification activist justices are wrongly helping to unconstitutionally expand the powers of the already unconstitutionally big federal government imo.
Corrections, insights welcome.
The ultimate remedy for unconstitutionally big, alleged election-stealing, Democratic Party-pirated federal and state governments allegedly manufacturing crises to oppress everybody under their boots...
Consider that the states effectively have "veto power" over continued unpopular, unconstitutional actions of the feds.
More specifically, the states can effectively “secede” from the unconstitutionally big federal government by doing the following.
Patriots need to primary federal and state elected officials who don't send voters email ASAP that clearly promises to do the following.
Federal and state lawmakers need to promise in their emails to introduce resolutions no later than 100 days after start of new legislative sessions that propose an amendment to the Constitution to the states, the amendment limited to repealing the 16th and ill-conceived 17th Amendments (16&17A).
In fact, I challenge the states to ram the repeal amendment for 16&17A through the ratification process faster than Nancy Pelosi irresponsibly rammed unconstitutional Obamacare through the House. /semi-sarc
Again, insights welcome.
So it’s okay to require a vaccine document so you can go to work but it’s racist to require identification to vote. Makes no sense.
How is a person that has not been vaccinated more of a threat than anyone else?
Some of you almost rabid numbskulls should ask yourselves this: Did you get vaccinated for your own protection or for the protection of everyone else?
SCOTUS (government) "MAY ALLOW (AKA require)" for some but not others are scary words.
What amendment will they allow for some but not others?
The first?
The Second?
If SCOTUS is leaning to mandates for health care, Osete and Murrill should have argued for SCOTUS vigorously defending religious exemption.