re: Supreme Court Blocks Biden's Vaccine Mandate

17 pages and the opinion appears to not be adequately explained so here goes

1. They reinstated the stay as it applies to osha applying it to private business

The case does not go back to the 6th or the 5th circuit. Those are appellate courts. Cases go back to their respective district courts for evidence and more rulings.

2. As for Medicare, it appears that those businesses that accept Medicare and Medicaid are subject to greater rules and regulations by the government. I’m just guessing here but I don’t think they looked at it as a constitutional issue but, rather, what you are subject to for taking government money.

From a fun practical standpoint, I would love to see these places refuse to accept.

Another potential interesting argument is the conflict with the Florida constitution if any Florida cases are brought. Time will tell.

I’m also guessing the osha case sits for now as to private employers and maybe ends up getting dropped

quote:

---

Again, whether the vaccine actually works or actually prevents transmission is not at issue here, and whether it should be mandated will never be the issue in a legal sense. That will ALWAYS be a policy determination that is left to the government provided the government meets the very low standard for administrative deference.

---

Whether the vaccine prevents transmission is the factual predicate that the admin would have to meet to prove it acted within its statutory authority of protecting patients. What else would be the point of requiring the vaccine for Hosp staff?

If I’m representing a private hospital that has a problem with this - you can bet your arse I’m definitely entitled to know whether the administrator reviewed evidence that showed that the vaccine mandate complied with the statutory directive. It’s their entire burden of producing actual evidence that was sufficient to result in that conclusion.

All CMS did was argue - based on no evidence that the vaccine was necessary to protect patients. Didn’t show how.

quote:

---

Wednesday are talking osha or cms? We’re both involved?

---

Both OSHA and CMS (which is Medicare’s administrative arm) are members of the executive branch. The executive branch can’t write laws, the legislative branch (Congress) does.

The executive branch can write regulations- which are supposed to be guidance to citizens of when they will or will not enforce the laws passed by Congress. The executive branch cannot invent a new rule, that it then goes to enforce.

The issue with these mandates are whether the executive branch was enforcing some rule written by Congress when it wrote these mandates.

The SCOTUS held that when Congress passed thr OSHA law, it didn’t give the executive branch (thru the dept of labor) the statutory authority to pass write regulations that address general public health; only occupational health issue. Covid risks are not unique to the workplace. You can get Covid anywhere. Therefore, SCOTUS found so the executive branch did not have the authority to make the vaccine mandatory. Accordingly, the OSHA Rule is invalid and just bc a business has more than 100 employees, it is NOT required to mandate that its employees get the shot.

CMS is the entity that implements Medicare. It issued a rule applicable to entities that get money from Medicare, regardless of size. CMS has the authority to enact regulations that further Medicare’s statutory purpose. The Medicare statute has a provision indicating that its administrator in the executive branch should make sure patient health and safety is protected.

CMS claims its mandate was within its authority bc congress said it CMS could make sure that it protects health of patients In Medicare facilities.

In order for ANY reg to be valid, there has to be a showing that it would meet the statutory purpose. In the case of thr CMS reg, the concern would be - would the reg protect patients. If so, the reg is valid. if not, it is invalid.

I say that theres no evidence that the vax protects patients, bc there’s no evidence that it prevents transmission. Therefore, I think there was no statutory authority to enact rule by Executive branch requiring vax. Indefatigable thinks that the hunch that the vax protects patients is enough. The SCOTUS did not rely on either of our viewpoints, ai don’t think- but I do think it should have.

Actually it’s not shocking that SCOTUS didn’t discuss the effectiveness of the vaccines. That’s not their role.

SCOTUS is the final Court of Appeals. Appeals courts only look at the law and how it’s applied.