Biden V Mandate violates 14nth amendment.

a reply to: Phage

Law abiding citizens will BE forced or burdened with testing themselves for the so called world ending disease. This will also include those who are advised by their doctors it is not in their best interest to get the so called vaccination.

In August, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett dismissed a challenge to Indiana University's vaccine mandate in what many saw as an indication that the court would uphold the 1905 precedent. A lower court judge had cited Jacobson in ruling against the plaintiffs. [Source]

Also, state and federal government workers are not covered by federal OSHA.

Biden V Mandate violates 14nth amendment.

Joe Biden violates the Constitution .

a reply to: Gothmog

The Supreme Court of the US is the ONLY court that can adjudicate a Constitutional matter .

Yeah, hence the ruling about which we're talking: SCOTUS.

a reply to: game over man

So protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is what the masks and vaccines do.

But MANDATING does violate said Bill of Rights .
Abortion is Constitutional per the Supreme Court .
Now imagine if abortions were mandated .

Learn US Civics

They are trying to use an emergency provision of OSHA regs designed for situations where they is not enough time to use the normal regulatory process.

The trouble with this one is that they're going to have to convince someone how the current situation is different from what's been going on in the country for 18 months now. How are these exact times so extraordinarily different and more dangerous that we need to use those obscure emergency rules of OSHA's to lay on such a blanket mandate like they tried to wrangle the rent moratorium through the CDC.

It shouldn't go through.

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: Gothmog

The Supreme Court of the US is the ONLY court that can adjudicate a Constitutional matter .

Yeah, hence the ruling about which we're talking: SCOTUS.

Go back and reread .
The court in the OP was NOT the Supreme Court .
And used words like "possible"

Learn US Civics .

a reply to: ketsuko

The trouble with this one is that they're going to have to convince someone how the current situation is different from what's been going on in the country for 18 months now.

No vaccines were available for COVID-19 18 months ago.

a reply to: ketsuko

Let’s hope you’re right ketsuko. This kind of rhetoric, and bill being drafted is very dangerous to the freedom, of america. Never thought a virus was such a threat to the prosperity and existence of a experiment born over 200 yrs ago. That way of life conquered by a virus.. That’s state of the art warfare.

Anyhow that’s enough for tonight. Everyone stay safe and well.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: game over man

So protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is what the masks and vaccines do.

But MANDATING does violate said Bill of Rights .
Abortion is Constitutional per the Supreme Court .
Now imagine if abortions were mandated .

Learn US Civics

Soo, abortion is wrong because it violates the right to life, and my body my choice don't matter.

But....vaccines and mask mandates are also wrong because it's my body my choice when they are trying to save lives/right to life.

You guys are silly and don't make much sense.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ketsuko

The trouble with this one is that they're going to have to convince someone how the current situation is different from what's been going on in the country for 18 months now.

No vaccines were available for COVID-19 18 months ago.

Reread.

This situation of emergency with COVID has existed in the country for 18 months. They did not institute the mandate when the vaccines first came out. Same situation then; not enough of an issue to create that mandate.

That's the thing they're going to have to do. Prove that somehow the current times are somehow so much more deadly dangerous than when vaccines first become available and they did not try this move then.

Good luck.

Boy, you guys really want to have that WAR you've been talking about.

It's not gonna happen. But do you really think life will get better if we are all fighting among ourselves, in some kind of Civil War. Or do you think the rest of the world will use that time to speed up the process of our demise as a Country.

And all the whining about how bad it is in America. Learn your history. People in this Country right now have it better than they ever did. Only the whiners are whining. The rest of us are enjoying our lives, and they are really great! Life is really good for a lot of us right now.

a reply to: Brassmonkey

a reply to: Gothmog

The court in the OP was NOT the Supreme Court .

The OP didnt cite a court or a case, but an article. I cited a SCOTUS ruling.

a reply to: SirHardHarry

Yes the baby also presumably has both a body and a choice. You guys always want to ignore that because it's inconvenient to you.

a reply to: MiddleInsite

Reminder. You are the one whining about all those unvaccinated people ruining your life.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SirHardHarry

Yes the baby also presumably has both a body and a choice. You guys always want to ignore that because it's inconvenient to you.

A fetus or embryo is not a baby. You guys always want to ignore that.

Anyway, OT.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Brassmonkey

So congress and the courts get their religious freedoms but not 9 millions feds?

Collective bargaining agreements carry certain benefits, and drawbacks.

wow the mental gymnastics to justify this is astounding

but sadly just bs, more BS and piled high and deep.

collective bargaining DOES NOT NOR CANNOT OVERIDE the rule of law.
if its ILLEGAL OR REQUIRED under law , the collective bargaining is null and void

i can "collective bargain" that we wont allow say females to become supervisors.
by majority (that is how collective bargaining works) could approve this
it could be signed
then the LAW makes it null and void.

along with (as you missed) the "equal protection" means EVERYONE is treated equally unless clear medical or religious exemption.

you cant say "every company over 100" then claim "collective bargaining" for postal workers.

so either your mistaken, or a hypocrite

scrounger

originally posted by: Brassmonkey
Neither does your opinion matter either

Marbury Vs Madison says the only opinion that matters is SCOTUS. There is your case law since you complained about me not citing any case law.

Also, since Jacobson is the precedent for states to vaccinate individuals. How does this give the a Federal agency like OSHA the power to vaccinate?
Where in Article 2 of the constitution does the President have this authority for this edict?

What case law is there that gives the Federal government power to forcibly vaccinate private employees from private companies?



a reply to: SirHardHarry

Difference between State OSHA and Federal OSHA

Constitution shredded and "White House Down"

a reply to: ketsuko

They did not institute the mandate when the vaccines first came out.

True. They "came out" under EUAs. That has changed.

Same situation then; not enough of an issue to create that mandate.

Not the same. Cases and hospitalizations have exceeded those in the past.