re: Supreme Court Blocks Biden's Vaccine Mandate

quote:

---

This case did not even try to challenge the existing law. Just whether or not this mandate falls under that existing rule. And it clearly does. If you want to argue that the existing rule needs to be changed/abolished/amended/etc. fine. Thats a different discussion.

---

You said they have a right to choose to work for a different clinic/hospital and my point is that since Obamacare was forced upon the medical community it’s not really an option to just simply work for another facility when they’re almost all governed by Medicare/Medicaid.

quote:

---

All the government has to do is say that the vaccines decrease hospitalizations, or show that vaccines even slightly prevent the risk of transmission, and they'll be well clear of the bar. They simply DO--under current law--have broad authority here, especially with the federal strings attached to the medicare and medicaid funding.

---

Which would be a lie. Most people in the hospitals did get the injection and some are double jabbed.... but classified as unvaccinated.

quote:

---

---

Nice. I know a bunch of loudmouths here got them some erections over trying to discredit Q, however the story of Q is still being written.

I will say it, Future Proves Past. We are actually almost to where these people (Democrats) will not be able to walk down the street.

Still IN!!!!!

quote:

---

What evidence did Biden present that the vaccine was necessary to promote PATIENT health, in light of the now relatively undisputed fact that it doesn’t prevent transmission by vaccinated staff to patients?

---

It's not up to the SCOTUS to judge if the vaccine works or not as that was not the case presented to them.

This particular case was only about "does he have the authority" to mandate the vaccine. Both Louisiana and Missouri contend that the Secretary of Health and Hospitals did not have the authority to issue this mandate. Not whether or not this particular mandate was worth a shite or not.

the wording of the authority Congress gave the secretary is pretty vague and broad:

quote:

---

Congress has authorized the Secretary to impose conditions on the receipt of Medicaid and Medicare funds that “the Secretary finds necessary in the interest of the health and safety of individuals who are furnished services.”

---

Congress very clearly gives him the authority to determine if this vaccine is necessary and to mandate it.


Everything outside of the "can he" is window dressing.
Does it work, or not work was not the question presented to the court, so it was not answered.
How many people does this effect/not effect was not the question presented to the court, so it was not answered.
How easy is it to find employment outside of this mandates reach was not the question asked of the court, so it was not answered.

They were asked "Does the secretary have the authority to issue a vaccine mandate?"
Not "Do you agree with this particular vaccine mandate?"
Not "Is this particular mandate different from other vaccine mandates."
Not "Does this mandate even accomplish anything."

Simply "Can he actually issue this mandate?"

and the answer to that question is, yes.
Congress gives him the authority to issue mandates such as this one.

quote:

---

Pretty sure the Federal government gets the money from the people.

So what am I choosing again?

---

the congressmen who create the rules

quote:

---

100% certain. After reading their dissent, they are truly political puppets.

---

agree they only vaguely touched upon any legal reasoning why the OSHA mandate should be upheld.
It's mostly just COVID-19 fear porn.

From my employer, sent out 20 minutes ago:

quote:

---

As you may be aware, various COVID-19 vaccination mandates potentially applicable to our business have been the subject of recent court challenge and litigation. While the U.S. Supreme Court recently blocked enforcement of the OSHA vaccine requirement, the vaccine mandate applicable to federal contractors (and thus our operations) remains undecided.

As of this date, the federal contractor mandate is pending in U.S. federal courts and the enforcement deadline, should this mandate ultimately be upheld, has been delayed. Our position is that we will comply with federal, state and local regulations regarding vaccine mandates as they go into effect.

However, noting that these mandates have not gone into effect, we will not be taking any actions with respect to employees who are not in compliance with the previously announced federal vaccine mandate deadline unless required to do so under applicable law. Currently, that law and deadline has not been cleared and thusly, we will sit on our hands in this regard.

---

I guess they didn't care for Joe's begging of companies to voluntarily mandate his lawless mandate.

about the healthcare ruling, the majority opinion stated that healthcare workers are obligated to the vax because it protects against transmission to their patients. The obvious problem with the statement is that the latest science confirms that the vaccines do not protect against transmission. So the SCOTUS fails on that misinformation. Maybe that was a bone thrown to Sotomayor

quote:

---

The obvious problem with the statement is that the latest science confirms that the vaccines do not protect against transmission. So the SCOTUS fails on that misinformation.

---

One day people will understand that the issue before SCOTUS this time concerned the authority of the government to enact the mandate. NOT the merits of it, whether it’s advisable, whether it works, or anything else.

That day has not yet come.