We are still waiting for the Supreme Court to come out with their decision about the vax mandates but there are some telling questions that show us where this is going to go.

 

Still No Word

On Friday, the Supreme Court heard two arguments about the vaccine mandates that have been implemented by the Biden administration.

The first argument was the constitutionality of OSHA implementing vaccine mandates on private businesses that make up 100 employees or more. The second was the implementation of vaccine mandates on healthcare workers that work for companies that take Medicare and Medicaid. That is being run by the Department of Health and Homan Services.

According to a bunch of legal scholars, there might me a splitting of the baby between these two rulings. When it comes to the healthcare workers, the Conservative judges saw it as the red states were bring up the lawsuit and they might not be the right plaintives for the case.

CNN reported:

Justice Kavanaugh focused in on how the facilities that were the main targets of the regulations were not before the court challenging the requirement, suggested that that the red states that had brought the lawsuits were not the proper defendants for getting the mandate blocked. 

This is a big deal because John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh have both denied cases in the past, not because the cases were Constitutional, but because the wrong people brought the case in front of the Supreme Court.

I spent three hours listening to the arguments. Lets go over some of them because they are really telling. Unlike many outlets, I did not cut down on the talk. That’s because I want you to listen to how long-winded these people are and I want you to understand the pain I went through listening to this crap.

It is also interesting to hear what happens in these proceedings. One thing I have learned is that these people are not as smart as I thought they were and one can really tell where these people stand when it comes to the Constitution. Not surprisingly, a some of these justices really don’t care much for the Constitution.

 

The Arguments

I will be concentrating primarily on the case against Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) case. I think this is the case that invites the most abuse of the Constitution and seems to give all power to create law to the bureaucracies instead of going through the legislative process defined in the Constitution. It also gives the President a wide array of power.

The petitioner, those against the mandates, have a simple case.

1. OSHA does not have the legislative right to police businesses for vax and mask mandates. That’s the job of the legislature.
2. OSHA was not given the power to do any of this when it was created in 1970.
3. The federal government is stepping on the toes of the states. The states and local principalities have the rights to mandate.
4. The OSHA rules are trying to make workers safe from something that is a threat in all aspects of life. COVID is everywhere and businesses should not be burdened to protect people from something they could get at home.
5. This will destroy businesses. The government has not right to do this.
6. The court must rule a stay of the mandates because of the Major Question Doctrine.

The respondent, the one who defend the mandates, had some arguments too:

1. This pandemic is the deadliest thing in the last 100 years and unprecedented acts are necessary to keep people safe.
2. OSHA was given the authority to do this in 1970.

There is a term that is used throughout the proceeding called the Major Question Doctrine. The law school from the University if Michigan defines it as:

A court will not defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statutory provision in circumstances where the case involves an issue of deep economic or political significance or where the interpretive question could effectuate an enormous and transformative expansion of the agency’s regulatory authority. 

One of the reasons I like going through the actual proceedings is we get a clear indication of where the judges stand just on their comments, questions and even their interruptions of the arguing lawyers. I also feel that I should have gone into law every time I hear these lawyers argue.

The first clip come from Elena Kagen, who is a Leftist and activist judge.

Some things:

• This isn’t the greatest public health threat in the last 100 years. We had:
  • Spanish flu.
  • Measles.
  • Small pox.
  • Polio.
  • Anthrax.
  • Lyme’s disease.
  • Ebola.
• These diseases killed people at a much higher rate than COVID-19 did. Heck, polio killed a President.
• I also want to point out that all these mandates have created a mental health crisis.
• The number of deaths is also held into question. The CDC has admitted that some hospitalizations and deaths were not for COVID but were listed as COVID because the patients tested positive for COVID.
• The vaccines have not stopped the China virus. People who are vaccinated are catching it.
• She uses the term “incentivizing”. People are not being “incentivized” to get the vaccine, they are being forced or they lose their jobs. She uses this term on purpose (she’s smart) because forcing people to get vaccinated is unconstitutional and she knows it. This isn’t the first time liberal judges have done this. It was done during the Obamacare debate.
• Speaking of the Constitution, she never once mentioned the Constitution in any of her questions.

This next question by Elena Kagen I  find disheartening:

Some things:

• She is stating something that is being argued during this proceeding: OSHA did NOT get the right to determine this. They are a bureaucracy of unelected officials. They do not make law. They are not suppose to make law.
• The petitioner is right. It has not been defined that OSHA can require vaccinations. It has to be explicitly defined and no one knew of the China virus in 1970.
• We know he’s right because Kagen cuts him off.
• Kagen also keeps going along with this crap that this is not a vaccine mandate but an incentivization. If a company has an employee that is unvaxxed, OSHA can fine them tens of thousands of dollars. This is a mandate.
• And why can’t Congress come up with a solution or a law? Isn’t that their job? Don’t they have more resources than OSHA?

Here is Stephen Breyer pushing this same narrative but the petitioner lays the wood on him:

Some things:

• I love the way he just waves off that three percent may quit and does not seem to think twice about businesses.
• People who are that afraid of the virus are quitting. We are in a supply chain crisis.
• The petitioner really lays down the hammer on Breyer’s question:
  • He says the mandate is illegal more than once. It is illegal.
  • He says that someone who gets a vaccine cannot undo the vaccine. If something bad happens to this person, there’s nothing he can do about it.
  • He points out that the pandemic has changed. Delta is not omicron. Vaccinations are not stopping omicron and OSHA’s rules are not having the same affect.

Sonia Sotomayor goes at it, showing she is the dumbest Supreme Court justice:

Some things:

• Either she stupid or lying. Hearing her before, I choose stupid.
• There have been 3500 children put on ventilators over the last two years and less than 700 have died. All had severe comorbidities.
• Omicron is 80 times less deadly than Delta and it is the main variant now. What she is saying is not true (again).
• Hospital rates have gone up a little, but the average stay has gone down from 4 days to 1.6 days.
• People are not being put on respirators because the virus does not appear to go into the lungs, unlike delta.
• This statement was given 4 Pinocchios by the Washington Post, a very Left leaning publication.

I think this is Sonia Sotomayor making a point that really goes against the Constitution.

It’s in the Constitution why the states have power and the federal government wouldn’t. The states can ask the federal government for help and that’s up to the federal government to help but states have more power than the federal government. Has this brought ever read the Constitution? Does she even know what here job is?

That’s a term I have been waiting for. Interstate commerce. That term has been the reason why the federal government has been gaining power for the last 120 years. Everything has been deemed by the courts in the past as subject to interstate commerce.

Here’s the thing, according to the Constitution, the government has three jobs: Protect the homeland from foreign and domestic enemies, protect the borders and solve conflicts between states or interstate commerce. Most bureaucracies, such as OSHA and the EPA receive their power because of interstate commerce. Is Sotomayor saying that the China virus is an interstate commerce issue which would give the government the power to make these mandates? I wouldn’t be shocked if she it.

Here is part of the opening statement for the respondent, who wants to keep the mandates. Listen to this and think about why her argument should be ignored:

Remember what I have said in previous podcasts: if your introduction is bull crap then your argument is bull crap and I refuse to acknowledge you. None of the things she said is true. I could go over it again but I won’t due to repetition.

Here is John Roberts, a very moderate Conservative, asks a pretty good question to the respondent:

Some things:

• This has the respondent without words though she’s a lawyer and the word vomit went on for two minutes without an answer.
• What Roberts is saying is this thing is everywhere and, ruling for OSHA here, could open Pandora’s box for many other bureaucracies. The IRS could do it. The EPA could do it. the Department of Homeland Security could do it. Where would it end?
• His last point is very important. This is a way for the Biden administration and the Democratic Congress to get around the process. What process is this? The Legislative process.
• Congress is suppose to come up with laws not unelected bureaucrats. The legal process requires a bill, a debate and a vote. It’s not done in a vacuum.

Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito all came up with great questions like John Roberts. But the best question came from Amy Coney Barrett:

This is the question. Guess what? There’s no answer.

This thing is never going to end. They don’t want it to end. They want this pandemic to go on forever and they want bureaucracy to run everything so they can bypass the legal process as it has been defined in the Constitution.

 

CDC Gets Called Out

Remember this load of crap from Sonia Sotomayor:

Yeah, that.

Rochelle Walensky was asked about this by Brett Baier of Fox News:

Rochelle just decided to ignore Brett’s question and go off on the unvaccinated…again. But, Brett Baier is a good reporter. He calls her out.

Rochelle is flustered. She doesn’t want to contradict Sotomayor. She says, “yes” but then goes off on the vaccine thing. This interview would have gone a lot easier if she just said, “Yeah, she was wrong” and moved on. But she won’t do it.

Then the bomb:

Wait a minute. The CDC has:

• Shut down the economy.
• Required social distancing.
• Is pushing vax mandates.
• Required social distancing.
• Shut down schools.
• Didn’t allow families to bury their loved ones.
• Shut down churches and all holidays.

And she does not know how many people died of COVID or were in the hospital because of COVID? Isn’t that their job to know?

Well, Rochelle tried to clear herself from that crappy interview with Brett Baier with another interview the next day. It did not make her look any better.

Ugh! Did the CDC think this was something they could have told us earlier this year? Doesn’t that mean that the only people who should have been shut away should have been those with comorbidities and those without should get on with their lives?

This is something that was never brought to light. It also really undermines the need for a vaccine mandate.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/cdc-director-cant-say-how-many-of-836000-deaths-are-from-covid-and-how-many-are-with-covid
https://www.dailywire.com/news/washington-post-columnist-blasts-justice-neil-gorsuch-for-not-wearing-mask-during-vax-mandate-hearing
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/walensky-sotomayors-pediatric-covid-hospitalization-number-off-96-5
https://www.dailywire.com/news/politifact-slams-liberal-justice-sotomayor-for-claiming-100k-kids-in-serious-condition-with-covid
https://www.dailywire.com/news/amy-coney-barrett-asks-key-covid-19-question-when-will-the-emergency-end
https://www.dailywire.com/news/legal-expert-conservative-justices-bring-markedly-different-questions-during-vaccine-mandate-oral-arguments
https://www.dailywire.com/news/justice-sotomayor-slammed-for-comparing-humans-spewing-bloodborne-viruses-to-dangerous-machines
https://www.dailywire.com/news/justice-sotomayor-totally-botches-covid-19-facts-about-omicron-children-in-hospital-in-line-of-questioning