The Danger of the Supreme Court Undercutting Biden’s Vaccination Rules

The Supreme Court's ruling on Biden's vaccine mandate could have major implications for American life

1/16/2022 3:03:00 AM

'On its surface this is a case about vaccine mandates, but it is also a proxy war over the heart of the administrative state,' write I. Glenn Cohen and Carmel Shachar

The Supreme Court's ruling on Biden's vaccine mandate could have major implications for American life

reading statutes that courts should “expect Congress to speak clearly if it wishes to assign to an agency decisions of vast ‘economic and political significance.’” In this case, the Justices jousted over the language of Congress’ Occupational Safety and Health Act which authorizes OSHA to protect employees from “grave danger from exposure” in the workplace. The debate was over whether the language was broad enough to encompass OSHA compelling certain employers to either require COVID-19 vaccinations or tests and masking for all workers.

Read more: TIME »

Woman's Hour - Helen Fitzgerald, Abortion Clinic Harassment, Nuns and Juliet Stevenson on Acting Your Age - BBC Sounds

Author Helen Fitzgerald on sibling rivalry and a nun who's found fame on Tiktok. Read more >>

Your LIES have run its course. I've always decided what I put in my body and you won't change that. I have freedom to choose not you whose goal is to control all for your own personal gain! Couple of (5) months trading with rookiexbtrade are always profitable, I earn good return trading Bitcoin with Adriel and make huge profit, i withdraw my profit and convert to cash in the bank, DM him now and start earning massively.

Supreme Court BLOCKS Biden's vaccine mandates for private companiesThe conservative-leaning high court did however allow a vaccine mandate for employees at health care facilities receiving federal dollars to go into effect. Is he out of his mind ?..... the Courts are exactly for people like him .... Interesting how 2 of the 3 that are for it have never seen the courtroom from the judge's chair.

Supreme Court BLOCKS Biden's vaccine mandates for private companiesThe conservative-leaning high court did however allow a vaccine mandate for employees at health care facilities receiving federal dollars to go into effect. Where is RuleOfLaw? Thanks ChinaJoe.

Andrew´s accuser praises court ruling allowing civil sex case to...Ms Giuffre is suing the duke in the US for allegedly sexually assaulting her when she was a teenager, claiming she was forced to have sex with him three time when she was 17. Well, what are you doing hanging out with men?At 17 traveling to New York and UK,?Are you kidding? As a prostitute, is she above the law... Did she informed the men she had sex with that she was underage ... or did she remain silent, knowing that she could extort money from them albeit through a court. When will charges be laid against her parents for allowing to sell herself

Andrew´s accuser praises court ruling allowing civil sex case to...Ms Giuffre is suing the duke in the US for allegedly sexually assaulting her when she was a teenager, claiming she was forced to have sex with him three time when she was 17.

‘We’re not seeing results’: Biden supporters ‘apoplectic’ one year into presidencyBiden supporters ‘apoplectic’ one year into his presidency Not exactly his fault y'all have him a tied Senate FFS. Not seen the Dow Jones? Or unemployment figures? He did pass Infrastructure and has appointed a record ammount of judges. Everyone knows this is on Sinema and Manchin. Nice try with the doom and gloom, but most Biden suppoerters are not stupid.

Novak Djokovic says Australia’s immigration minister failed to ask him his views on vaccinationDjokovic’s lawyers dispute that the Serbian tennis player is an anti-vaxxer as federal court hearing on his last-ditch bid to avoid deportation begins Why is that relevant if i may ask? His visa is either accepted or it isn't regardless of this. Fascism at its best Novak's farts smell like Covid.

judicial rule for reading statutes that courts should “expect Congress to speak clearly if it wishes to assign to an agency decisions of vast ‘economic and political significance.’” In this case, the Justices jousted over the language of Congress’ Occupational Safety and Health Act which authorizes OSHA to protect employees from “grave danger from exposure” in the workplace. The debate was over whether the language was broad enough to encompass OSHA compelling certain employers to either require COVID-19 vaccinations or tests and masking for all workers. Read More: Can Your Employer Mandate that You Get Vaccinated? The major questions doctrine may sound like a dry crumb next to Justice Breyer’s admonitions, but how the Court applies the doctrine in this case could have even broader implications for our lives than the OSHA’s vaccination rule itself. At its heart, this is an argument over how much leeway federal agencies have to act or, as the Justices repeatedly put it in the argument, “Who Decides?” Justice Elena Kagan’s questions showed why federal agencies, which have significant expertise and can be held publicly accountable through presidential elections, should be given the leeway to take leadership positions on emerging issues such as vaccines to counter an unprecedented pandemic. Justice Neil Gorsuch’s questions, by contrast, suggested that Congress and State Governments should be the leader on major public health policies, noting that Congress has had a year to act on the question of vaccine mandates and chose not to. One answer to that challenge is that Congress has not acted because it gave that power to OSHA. A more realpolitik answer, though, is because there is no way the Democrats have the votes for such a law. On its surface this is a case about vaccine mandates, but it is also a proxy war over the heart of the administrative state. If the Court applies the major questions doctrine in this case, that precedent will be used to constrain other agencies from acting in new, unprecedented dramatic situations, forcing them to wait for explicit authorization from Congress to act; authorization that may never come. Depending on what you think of the balance of power between Congress and the Executive that could be good or bad. But, if as it appears likely, the conservative Justices will block the ETS on this or an adjacent theory, the immediate casualty of this proxy war is the public’s health. The rule is to save over 6,500 lives and prevent 250,00 hospitalizations over six months, although these estimates were pre-Omicron. On Friday the Justices also heard arguments in