Where’s the Constitution in the Supreme Court’s Discussion on Vax Mandate?
The nation is still waiting to hear the Supreme Court’s opinion on whether or not the Biden regime, through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), can force businesses to submit their employees to medical experimentation through jab mandates.
At the time of this writing, no decision has been made. But who knows, by the time it is published the opinion could have been made. Or maybe it will be even longer. And remember, it’s an opinion, not a ruling.
One of the striking things from all the coverage is that the Constitution doesn’t seem to exist. The questioning, from both those apparently wholly on board with the dictatorship and those skeptical, suggests the justices believe themselves to be doctors of medicine, not of law.
Justices weighed the arguments of the safety and efficacy of the so-called “vaccines.” Certainly, there is a place for such discussions, and of course, the evidence points to they are not safe nor effective, but that place is not in the courts. The court’s sole discussion should be on the law and government’s authority, period.
Of course, if one understands the role of government based on the founding principles of this nation, the decision would be open and shut. These mandates would be struck down as absurdly unconstitutional, and any government official who has attempted to enforce it would be hauled off in handcuffs for their criminal tyranny.
In fact, in a free country, not only would this be struck down as illegal, the court would permanently shut down OSHA which its very existence is illegal. The job of government is to protect individual liberty, not to maintain safety in the workplace. It is the job of private employees and employers to ensure safety in the workplace.
The court’s left argued the jabs are effective despite the evidence suggesting otherwise, and Justice Sonya Sotomayor made up complete falsehoods.
Justice Stephen Breyer, according to the Washington Free Beacon, said it’s “unbelievable” that the court is being asked to stop a mandate when there are “nearly 750,000 new cases every day.” No, Mr. Breyer, it’s unbelievable that a justice thinks it’s his job or the government’s to protect Americans from a virus. You are not a god, Mr. Breyer.
The Free Beacon reported that Justice Samuel Alito, who appears skeptical of the mandates, offered concerns for the economy if the mandates are allowed to continue. There is certainly legitimacy to those concerns, but again, the job of the court is not to concern itself with the economic impact. Its job is to determine if the government has the authority to mandate the jabs, which it obviously does not.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, according to The Hill, said: “We have flu vaccines. The flu kills, I believe, hundreds, thousands of people every year. OSHA has never purported to regulate on that basis.” Another legitimate point, but again, it strays away from the purpose of the Supreme Court.
I wouldn’t bet money on the court’s decision, but I suspect regardless of which way it goes it will be a 5-4 opinion.
In my estimation, the left has four reliable votes in major decisions with Breyer, Sotomayor, Justice Elena Kagen and Chief Justice John Roberts. The right has three reliable votes in Alito, Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas. Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh have shown themselves to be swing votes and reliably on the left in recent vax mandate cases. Of course, that’s a general rule. If you looked at the full body of work of justices, you’d probably be surprised how often you agree with those you thought you always disagreed with and how often you disagree with those you thought you always agreed with.
In this case, Barrett and Kavanaugh may join the right in a 5-4 decision to strike the mandate down. Or, they will split, likely conferring with each other beforehand, resulting in a 5-4 vote to allow the authoritarian dictate to continue. That is opinion which could turn out wrong, but I think the safe bet is a 5-4 decision, but there’s no safe bet on which way the decision goes.
With all of that said, don’t put too much stock in the decision regardless of which way it turns out. The real battle is right where you are in your everyday life. Even if the mandates are struck down, it won’t stop the mandates. State and local governments will mandate it, and I think it’s a far safer bet this Supreme Court will allow that. As recently reported, insurance companies are threatening businesses with higher prices if they don’t forcefully submit their employees to experimentation. Businesses will largely gladly oblige, and this Supreme Court will side with that.
Content syndicated from TheLibertyLoft.com with permission.
