Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Biden’s Unlawful Vaccine Mandate Just His Latest Power Grab

Biden’s Unlawful Vaccine Mandate Just His Latest Power Grab

In Federalist 48, James Madison observed that “power is of an encroaching nature,” and that it’s the natural tendency of those in power to exceed their authority. Madison must have been thinking about a politician like Joe Biden.

https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1370188126459719684

In Federalist 48, James Madison observed that “power is of an encroaching nature,” and that it’s the natural tendency of those in power to exceed their authority. Madison must have been thinking about a politician like Joe Biden.

By now, everyone knows that Biden prefers to circumvent the democratic process of legislative lawmaking and to govern by fiat.  He signed more executive orders during his first 100 days in office than any of the previous three presidents, and is on pace to issue more executive orders per year than any president since Harry Truman.  He has taken a sweeping view of executive agency power and thumbed his nose at the courts in the process – his nationwide eviction moratorium being just the latest example.  And he has repeatedly used his executive power to target red states whose laws he dislikes (see here and here and here).

This week, Biden did it again – reneging on an earlier pledge not to impose a federal vaccine mandate and announced a nationwide program which, through executive decree and emergency rulemaking, requires all federal employees and contractors to get the COVID-19 vaccine, and all employers with 100 or more employees to ensure that their employees are either vaccinated or undergoing weekly testing.  Businesses that ignore the policy could incur penalties of up to $14,000 per violation.

This mandate will affect up to 100 million Americans – approximately two-thirds of the U.S. workforce.

Section 655(c) of the OSH Act

To begin, vaccines requirements are the province of the states, which can mandate them pursuant to their general police power.  As the federal government has no police power, it has no general authority to require people to take certain vaccines.

Biden has tried to get around that problem by casting COVID-19 as a workplace safety issue, and to use the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, or OSH Act, to shoehorn in a vaccine mandate as a workplace safety standard.

Workplace standards are typically issued under Section 655(b) of the OSH Act, whereby interested parties are notified of the proposed rule, data and comments are solicited from the public, objections can be filed, and hearings can be held.

In putting in place this vaccine mandate, however, the Biden administration is relying on Section 655(c) of the OSH Act. That section allows the Secretary of Labor to immediately enact a rule – called an Emergency Temporary Standard, or ETS – that remains in effect for up to six months without going through the normal notice and public comment rulemaking process.

Because this emergency route dispenses with the full panoply of procedural protections, federal courts have described the ETS provision as “the most dramatic weapon in OSHA’s enforcement arsenal” and an “extraordinary power” that should be “delicately exercised.”

Indeed, even though the OSH Act has been around for over 50 years, its ETS provision has been used just nine times – and never to compel workers to take a vaccine.

This infrequency owes to the fact that, under the law, the Secretary can only implement an emergency rule if he first finds substantial evidence that workers are exposed to a “grave danger” from “new hazards” and that the emergency rule is “necessary” to protect them from such danger.

This standard is exceedingly difficult to satisfy.  While three of the nine previous emergency rules were not subjected to any legal challenges, courts stayed or struck down five of the remaining six.

That’s not a good batting average, and Biden’s vaccine mandate looks like it’s on track to strike out, as well.

Grave Danger

The first requirement for an ETS is that there be substantial evidence that workers are exposed to a “grave danger” from “new hazards.”

While phrase “grave danger” is not defined in the statute or any accompanying regulation, at the time of the OSH Act’s passage, the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare’s Subcommittee on Labor stated  that the emergency standards provision should not be interpreted to allow the government “to circumvent the regular standard-setting procedures.” Courts haven’t provided much guidance on what constitutes a “grave danger” either, but what little exists by way of case law suggests that it is a very high bar to clear.

In Florida Peach Growers Ass’n v. U.S. Dep’t  of Labor, the Fifth Circuit stated that a grave danger exists where there are “incurable, permanent, or fatal consequences to workers, as opposed to easily curable and fleeting effects on their health.”

And, in Dry Color Mfrs. Ass’n v. Department of Labor, the Third Circuit stated that a grave danger does not exist where the danger of developing a serious disease is speculative. In Asbestos Info. Ass’n v. OSHA, the Fifth Circuit came to the same conclusion.

To be sure, COVID-19 can, in some cases, lead to death.  But with most others, it is treatable and resolves in relatively short order with no lasting sequelae.  Further, the virus presents minimal risk to those who have developed a natural immunity to it as a result of having been infected previously.  In fact, a recent study out of Israel found that unvaccinated people who survived a COVID-19 infection were significantly less likely than vaccinated people to become severely ill from the virus.

At bottom, the risk of developing long-term complications from COVID-19 is speculative at best, and the number of people who will be spared that outcome if they are inoculated against the virus is uncertain.

These realities compel the conclusion that COVID-19 is not the type of “grave danger” needed to trigger the OSH Act’s emergency temporary standard provision.

Necessity

Even if the Secretary of Labor could show that workers are exposed to “grave danger” in the workplace from COVID, he would still have to demonstrate that mandating workers to receive the COVID vaccine is necessary to protect them from that danger during the six-month term that the emergency standard would be in effect.

This he cannot do.

First, the CDC admits that “[v]accinated people can still become infected and spread the virus to others.” It therefore does not protect workers from exposure to the virus.

The vaccine also has done little to prevent new cases of COVID-19.  According to data published by the CDC, the current 7-day moving average of daily new cases stands at 136,558 – that is 99.3% higher than the average was one year ago, before the vaccine rollout began.

And, while studies show that the vaccine is effective against hospitalization and death from the ancestral strain of the virus, they also show that the vaccine is less effective against most variants of the virus – and, according to the CDC, these variants are the ones causing the most hospitalizations and deaths.

Next, a vaccine is unnecessary if a person has developed natural immunity from being infected with COVID-19.  According to studies, natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization than a vaccine.

Similarly, the CDC acknowledges that “there are limited data on vaccine effectiveness in people who are immunocompromised.” Such limited data makes it impossible to establish that the vaccine works to protect them from danger.

In addition to all of this, studies show that the risk of COVID infection can be substantially reduced by disinfecting, mask wearing and social distancing. Thus, the goal of reducing the COVID infection rate can be achieved without mandating the vaccine or testing.

Moreover, contemporaneous to the enactment of the OSH Act, the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare’s Subcommittee on Labor stated  that where “a determination cannot be made as to whether such [an emergency standard] will protect employees … the Secretary [must] utilize the regular standard-setting procedures … not the emergency standard-setting authority.”

In other words, Congress intended that where, as here, the medical community is divided about the necessity of a particular rule, the federal government is not allowed to impose it under its emergency powers.

Conclusion

Biden cannot establish that workers across the country are exposed to a “grave danger” in the workplace from COVID-19 or that uniformly mandating vaccines and testing for most of the workforce is “necessary” to protect it from such danger.  After all, if that were the case, why did he exempt members of Congress and their staff from his program?

Sadly, the law is but an asterisk to Biden.  In announcing his nationwide mandate, Biden stated, “My message to unvaccinated Americans is this, what more is there to wait for? What more do you need to see?  …. We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin.”

We?  Our?  Biden plainly believes that the government knows best, and that the benighted masses and their silly laws should always bend to the will of their elected betters, even on issues of personal medical autonomy.

In Federalist 48, Madison cautioned that each branch’s power must be “restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.”  In enacting the OSH Act, Congress heeded that advice by conditioning the Secretary of Labor’s emergency power on a showing of “grave danger” and “necessity.”

If the courts honor those statutory restraints, Biden’s mandate will be struck down.  But if they allow the mandate to stand, then Justice Scalia was right that “words no longer have meaning.”

And that will be the gravest danger of all.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


 
 0 
 
 3
caseoftheblues | September 12, 2021 at 7:50 pm

And yet….. A spokesperson at the Congressional Institute told press that have asked….that the president cannot impose a vaccine mandate on Congress via executive order or in an agency or department regulation. So Congress critters and their staff are exempt….because of course


     
     0 
     
     2
    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to caseoftheblues. | September 12, 2021 at 8:08 pm

    They are exempt from a lot. Mandatory quota hiring comes to mind…


     
     0 
     
     2
    TX-rifraph in reply to caseoftheblues. | September 12, 2021 at 8:45 pm

    The ruling class is exempt because they make the rules for the lower classes.


     
     0 
     
     3
    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to caseoftheblues. | September 13, 2021 at 12:59 am

    Roberts shall rule that the vaccine mandate is actually a tax, and therefore permissible.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to caseoftheblues. | September 13, 2021 at 12:22 pm

    Yep. And so each Republican controlled state should pass legislation or adopt new public health regulations that require all in state federal employees to be vaccinated and be able to provide written documentation (ie. vaccine passport) as proof of vaccination. Or be forced to undergo weekly covid testing. Same for our Senators and Representatives in Congress. And put a $14,000 penalty/fine on them for violation of the rules/law.


     
     0 
     
     1
    Observer in reply to caseoftheblues. | September 13, 2021 at 1:23 pm

    It doesn’t matter. Biden has probably been told by the hacks on his staff that the law won’t hold up in court. Biden doesn’t care. He’s doing here exactly what he previously did with the eviction moratorium — knowingly announcing a new law that he knows exceeds his legal authority, figuring that it’ll take at least a year for the lawsuits to get to the Supreme Court, and in the meantime he gets to shove the illegal law down people’s throats.

    It is a blatant and deliberate violation of Biden’s oath of office to faithfully execute the laws, but so what? He knows he’ll never be impeached for it. That’s for Republican presidents.


       
       0 
       
       1
      GWB in reply to Observer. | September 13, 2021 at 4:54 pm

      It’s about demonstrating that the executive has the power to rule. Period.


         
         0 
         
         1
        Observer in reply to GWB. | September 13, 2021 at 8:02 pm

        Yes it is, but it’s completely improper, unethical, immoral, and wrong. There is no way that any competent lawyer looked at this OSHA rule and the relevant case law and said “oh yes, we have a good faith basis for using this rule to force a vaccine mandate on the working public.” No, they looked at it and said “this rule is clearly not applicable, but we’ll use it anyway since we can probably tie it up in the courts for at least a year, and that’ll give Biden some temporary cover for forcing this illegal mandate down the public’s throat.”

        This is an obvious, and an obviously despicable, misuse of the law, and it should not be tolerated — not by the courts, and not by the American public.


           
           0 
           
           0
          Lucifer Morningstar in reply to Observer. | September 14, 2021 at 10:28 am

          To be perfectly honest, since when have democrats ever been proper, ethical, moral, and right? This is exactly what Obama did with his famous “phone & pen” on steroids. Since Congress would never pass such a vaccine mandate into law you bypass Congress and get the fourth branch of government to pass a “rule” that has the force of law (but really isn’t law) to accomplish the same thing.


       
       0 
       
       0
      randian in reply to Observer. | September 13, 2021 at 8:19 pm

      Until the rule gets overturned employees are under threat of destitution if they don’t kowtow to the vaccine mandate. Most will cave. If it gets overturned later so what? The mandate will have accomplished what it set out to do. EPA did the same with its coal scrubber mandate.

Does Prime Minister Pelosi know that Biden thinks he is a king?
Joking, sort of.

It’s just so much easier to decree the way things will be than to lower yourself to democratic debate with people you don’t even like.


     
     0 
     
     8
    JHogan in reply to irv. | September 12, 2021 at 8:11 pm

    In the new fundamentally transformed America the Ruling Class does not think it owes the peasants explanations for its orders and decrees. The peasants should do as they are told, period. They are not allowed to ask questions or object. Much less demand evidence supporting the Ruling Class’s claims. Shut up and do as you are told, peasant.

The Puppeteers are having quite the joke is on you with Sundowner, it’s a win win for them as they will never get the blame for it when these ” So it be written, So it will be done” fails.
Read this from the horses mouth if you think there is a possibility Sundowner is doing this
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/11/remarks-by-president-biden-after-visiting-with-firefighters-and-their-families-on-the-20th-anniversary-of-the-september-11th-attacks/

First, the so-called vaccines are not really vaccines by the 100+ year definition of the word. They do not confer the kind of immunity traditionally expected from a ‘vaccine’. The CDC deciding to conveniently change the definition of the word ‘vaccine’ on August 31, 2021 doesn’t make it so.

Second, if Biden theoretically has this power, as some assert, where is the limit drawn? The Constitution does not grant unlimited power limit to anyone. So where is the limit?

At what point must the Legislature, the direct representatives of the people get a say?

Can the president mandate flu vaccines? Or any injected chemical the CDC decides to call a ‘vaccine’?

How safe must a ‘vaccine’ be in order for the president to be able to dictate an acceptable rate of death or disability from ‘vaccine’ side effects.

And so on and so forth.


     
     9 
     
     3
    Milhouse in reply to JHogan. | September 12, 2021 at 11:41 pm

    You seem to be barking up completely the wrong tree. This has nothing to do with the constitution. Biden is not asserting some sort of inherent presidential power to mandate anything. He’s claiming a power that the legislature has given him, via OSHA. You ask what are the limits? They are wherever the congress that passed it set them. That is all. And the power to determine exactly where that congress set the limits belongs not to the current congress, nor to the president, but to the courts.


       
       0 
       
       4
      ecreegan in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 12:43 am

      I have read the Constitution CAREFULLY looking for the section which authorizes Congress to delegate its lawmaking authority to another body (e.g. “workplace safety requirements are whatever the President’s delegates say they are”) and I have been unable to find it.


         
         5 
         
         3
        Milhouse in reply to ecreegan. | September 13, 2021 at 2:08 am

        On the contrary, the non-delegation doctrine is not to be found anywhere in the constitution! The constitution authorizes congress to legislate on 18 broad topics, and places no limits on such legislation. It’s the courts who invented the non-delegation doctrine, and said that when congress authorizes the executive to make regulations it must place some sort of limit on their scope. In practice the non-delegation is an almost dead letter. But in any case there’s no question that congress can certainly authorize OSHA to make the proposed rule we’re discussing; not even the strictest non-delegation proponent would say otherwise. Therefore there is no constitutional question here. The only question is whether the rule is within the authority congress has actually given OSHA. And the only ones who can answer that question are the courts.


           
           0 
           
           2
          ecreegan in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 9:38 am

          First, Congress has only the powers it is given. While these are broad, they are not infinite.

          Second, if you read delegation into the necessary and proper clause, it is an accepted principle that no legislature can bind its successors. Therefore, if Congress DID have this power, any grant of delegation would have to be renewed by every successive Congress.


           
           3 
           
           2
          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 10:00 am

          Congress (unlike state legislatures) is indeed limited to legislating on the enumerated topics. I said that. But it is not limited in any way when legislating on those topics. To quote you, “I have read the Constitution CAREFULLY looking for the section which forbids Congress from delegating its lawmaking authority to another body and I have been unable to find it”. The courts made it up, as courts do. So if you’re rejecting all court-made constitutional law then you can’t cite the nondelegation doctrine. And if you’re not then it should be sufficient that the courts — the same courts that said congress can’t delegate its powers — accept the delegation of regulatory power. You can’t have it both ways.

          That congress can’t bind its successors is (1) also a court-made doctrine, not to be found in the constitution; and (2) irrelevant, since the congress that gave the executive regulatory power did not bind its successors in any way. Subsequent congresses are free to repeal or amend OSHA in any way they like (subject to the president’s veto or an override). But so long as OSHA is the law, the executive has been delegated regulation-making authority, within limits the act sets. The only question that will be before the courts is whether Biden’s proposed rule is within those limits or not. No constitutional questions are involved.


           
           0 
           
           1
          GWB in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 4:59 pm

          To quote you
          You did not “quote” him, you turned his phrase.


           
           0 
           
           0
          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | September 14, 2021 at 12:37 pm

          It absolutely is found in the Constitution.

          Article I Section 1

          All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

          Vested: Settled, fixed, or absolute.

          Furthermore, Congress can’t delegate its powers to another branch because the powers are not Congress’ to delegate.

          Only the source of those powers can delegate them.


           
           0 
           
           0
          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | September 14, 2021 at 1:31 pm

          ‘Court-made Constitutional law???’

          There is no such legal thing.

          “If the three powers maintain their mutual independence on each other our Government may last long, but not so if either can assume the authorities of the other.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Charles Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:278

          “I said to [President Washington] that if the equilibrium of the three great bodies, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary, could be preserved, if the Legislature could be kept independent, I should never fear the result of such a government; but that I could not but be uneasy when I saw that the Executive had swallowed up the Legislative branch.” –Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1792. ME 1:318

          “The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

          This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive. For I agree, that “there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.”2 And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments…” Federalist Papers 78


       
       0 
       
       1
      NormPeterson in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 2:47 pm

      Wrong! Did you even read the article above? BTW, how long does an “emergency” last? When did the flu shot, which doesn’t last more than 9 months and is only 40% effective, become a vaccine? Next you’ll be saying Biden can dictate with an executive order that the entire federal workforce must wear safety helmets or face termination.


         
         0 
         
         2
        GWB in reply to NormPeterson. | September 13, 2021 at 5:03 pm

        This is the problem with the regulatory power Congress passed to OSHA: there is no effective limit. While you could argue the Bill of Rights limits it, recent history has shown otherwise in too many cases.

        (BTW, where is the authority within the Constitution for Congress or the Executive to have ANY power over businesses of 100 or more employees? Or even 10,000? If they do not commit interstate commerce there is NO authority over them. And I would argue that even if they transact interstate commerce, the federal gov’t has no authority over anything they do that is not actually that interstate commerce.)


         
         3 
         
         0
        Milhouse in reply to NormPeterson. | September 13, 2021 at 5:48 pm

        What the **** is wrong with you, you moron? Are you simply incapable of reading? Do you even know what is the topic here?

        We are discussing JHogan’s bizarre notion that the president is asserting some sort of inherent power to mandate things, independent of the legislature. He isn’t. That’s a fact, not an opinion, so JHogan is not entitled to his own, and neither are you.

        He is claiming that he is authorized to do this by OSHA. Either he’s right or he’s wrong. It depends entirely on how you interpret the text of OSHA, and how you apply it to the facts before us. And that is a matter for the courts and the courts alone. But regardless of what the answer turns out to be, no constitutional question is involved.


           
           0 
           
           2
          NormPeterson in reply to Milhouse. | September 13, 2021 at 8:10 pm

          Hey Milhouse, thanks but I know what was written. You see, I read what you wrote in response to that person, which is why I commented, but thanks for explaining it to us, genius. Your idiotic comments speak volumes about you. Keep thinking everything will get worked out in the courts. BTW, what’s the difference between the Taliban and us? The Taliban took back its country….and not in the courts


 
 0 
 
 10
Colonel Travis | September 12, 2021 at 8:41 pm

In addition to all of this, studies show that the risk of COVID infection can be substantially reduced by disinfecting, mask wearing and social distancing.

You linked to a study from June 2020, which stated that, at that time, we did not even understand how CV19 spread. Yet they knew certain measures protected us.

It is September 2021 and we have real-world data for a year and a half that shows this crap does not work. Nowhere on earth do masks work, we knew they didn’t work for influenza prior to 2020, we now know it doesn’t stick to surfaces long enough to spread, social distancing is an arbitrary number pulled out of someone’s rear. Yes, you can get CV19 from an infected person through close contact for a period of time. No, you’re not gonna get it from passing a random person at Costco who is exhibiting no symptoms.

Why people do not accept reality I will never understand. What happened to common sense and intellectual honesty? I seriously do not know why it’s all been thrown out the window.


     
     0 
     
     2
    JHogan in reply to Colonel Travis. | September 12, 2021 at 9:09 pm

    For some reason I was unable to upvote your comment. Nothing happened when I clicked on the up thumb. Tried several times. Logged in and out. Nothing.

    Consider this reply an upvote.

    I am still able to upvote other comments.

    I have yet to see a definitive study that shows mask wearing and ‘social distancing’ do any statistically significant good. The rationale is anecdotal.

    I also note the ‘experts’ condoned all of the non-socially distanced mostly peaceful BLM/Antifa protests last summer as worth the risk, because ‘racism’. If your political activity is blessed by the CDC ignoring mask and social distancing orders is okay.

    Sweden is a great base line control. And yet is ignored by the government ‘experts’. Because the data from Sweden contradicts their assertions and claims.


       
       0 
       
       3
      Colonel Travis in reply to JHogan. | September 12, 2021 at 10:03 pm

      I believe when you use the blockquote tag it prevents others from voting up or down, although I have one upvote, I have no clue!


         
         0 
         
         2
        henrybowman in reply to Colonel Travis. | September 12, 2021 at 10:53 pm

        If the very first thing is a blockquote tag, it blocks most browsers (though apparently not all) from clicking the thumbs. If you begin your post with a blockquote, stick a period before it first.


           
           0 
           
           0
          Milhouse in reply to henrybowman. | September 13, 2021 at 3:55 am

          This is less convoluted:
          —-
          // ==UserScript==
          // @name Legal Insurrection
          // @version 1
          // @grant none
          // @include https://legalinsurrection.com/*
          // ==/UserScript==

          var comments = document.getElementsByClassName(“commentContent”);
          for (var i=0; i < comments.length; ++i) {
          var fc = comments[i].firstElementChild;
          if (fc.tagName == "BLOCKQUOTE") {
          fc.style.paddingTop = '0';
          fc.style.marginTop = '28px';
          }
          }


         
         0 
         
         1
        Milhouse in reply to Colonel Travis. | September 13, 2021 at 3:13 am

        OK, I’ve had enough of this bug. Here is a greasemonkey script to fix it:

        —–
        // ==UserScript==
        // @name Legal Insurrection
        // @version 1
        // @grant none
        // @include https://legalinsurrection.com/*
        // ==/UserScript==

        function addGlobalStyle(css) {
        var head, style;
        head = document.getElementsByTagName(‘head’)[0];
        if (!head) { return; }
        style = document.createElement(‘style’);
        style.type = ‘text/css’;
        style.innerHTML = css;
        head.appendChild(style);
        }

        addGlobalStyle(‘blockquote:first-child { padding-top: 0; margin-top: 28px; }’);
        —-


         
         0 
         
         1
        amwick in reply to Colonel Travis. | September 13, 2021 at 6:38 am

        TY… blockquote also blocks votes…. kinda,,, in a weird way..


     
     0 
     
     0
    Wrathchilde in reply to Colonel Travis. | September 13, 2021 at 7:35 am

    Also unable to upvote on this one post. The posts above and below, the up/down can be interacted with, but not the Colonel’s.

    I seriously do not know why it’s all been thrown out the window.
    I do. On the part of the “public” it’s Zero Risk panic pr0n. On the part of the gov’ts it’s all about power, enabled by fear.


 
 0 
 
 4
TX-rifraph | September 12, 2021 at 8:50 pm

The mandate has nothing to do with health. It is to impose totalitarian rule. Watch what these people do. Ignore the words. Their actions indicate the agenda. Stop reading the side of the barn.

So, what happened to “My body, my choice?”

Hypocrite much?


     
     0 
     
     0
    randian in reply to navyvet. | September 13, 2021 at 8:24 pm

    When I point out that the same reasoning that allows forced vaccination would allow an employer to require female employees get abortions or be fired I usually get called an evil misogynist.

Forget this ‘dementia’ crap – Biden is insane, or he is simply on the payroll of Communist China (whether he wants to be or not).

I think the latter.

It’s illegal or it’s not depending the supreme court and how much deference to agencies to give. Congress delegated their legislative authority to the agency, but at some point congress didn’t vote on whatever the agency comes up with and so it’s illegitimate.


 
 0 
 
 5
Conservative Beaner | September 12, 2021 at 9:52 pm

If the feds want mandate vaccines for the people and exempt themselves and other interest groups may I suggest that we turn around this as fair play.

The Governors with the legislators should pass laws to require all federal employees within their state be vaccinated including US Representatives, US Senators and their staff. Include the excluded USPS and and all illegal aliens.

Go even further and require them to wear masks in public and restrict their access to indoor events such as dining and sporting events and all public transportation.

After all it’s for the public good.

    We should probably ban most politicians from public events and things like dining out anyway, just to protect the general public. Evidently their proclivity for a technocracy is contagious, and it should be stopped by quarantining them until all symptoms have passed.

    It’s definitely for the public good.

Laws, to god-damned hell with laws! We have no laws. In fact, we don’t need laws. I don’t have to show you any stinking laws.

With apologies to Bogart.

“It’s become clear that the destruction of the United States has been accomplished through good old-fashioned corruption. Yes, there were a few evil power-hungry people sprinkled into the mix, but most of those who managed to bring down the country were clearly co-opted through their venality. If you don’t believe in God, and are lacking in morality, then you don’t turn down a chance to make the big bucks. Hunter Biden’s laptop gave us a little peek into the way people at the highest level of power do business. Now we know why the CCP owns the country.”

https://gatesofvienna.net/2021/09/been-there-done-that/


 
 0 
 
 0
felixrigidus | September 13, 2021 at 7:03 am

“We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin.”

I believe your transcript is wrong. Shouldn’t it read:

“We’ve been patient, but Our patience is wearing thin.”


     
     1 
     
     1
    felixrigidus in reply to felixrigidus. | September 13, 2021 at 7:14 am

    I admit to possibly being wrong and the true transcript might have to read:

    WE‘ve been patient, but OUR patience is wearing thin.”

    as it seems entirely possible that President Asterisk doesn’t think he is King or Emperor but instead believes himself to be God.

Ameer Benno: After all, if that were the case, why did he exempt members of Congress and their staff from his program?

The President didn’t exempt Congress. The executive can’t regulate the legislature or the judiciary as they are separate and independent branches of government.

JHogan: the so-called vaccines are not really vaccines by the 100+ year definition of the word.

They prime the body’s immune response, so the vaccines are, indeed, vaccines.

Conservative Beaner: The Governors with the legislators should pass laws to require all federal employees within their state be vaccinated including US Representatives, US Senators and their staff. Include the excluded USPS and and all illegal aliens.

Federal employees are under the president’s executive order. USPS and undocumented aliens who work are covered by the new OSHA rules.

Any lawyers around Fargo ND looking for business today? I’d like to start a suit against this.

The exemptions created also call into question whether the motivation for the action is worker safety (the purpose of OSH) or something else, which would not be permitted.

For example, there does not appear to be a reason to treat defense contractors differently than large employers. Additionally, what is the justification for exempting the post office and its many non-vaccinated employees? Do postal workers not deserve the same “protections” as other workers?


     
     0 
     
     0
    dmacleo in reply to Think38. | September 13, 2021 at 2:14 pm

    the wapo article (I don’t have link handy now) that initially stated USPS exempt was an error and was corrected day or so later.
    USPS beholden to OSHA laws.
    congress isn’t.
    cause congress members hate the black/brown/whatever pronoun applies today people that work in their offices and does not care about their safety..
    congress as a whole is racist.

I’ll say it again.

Democrats have realized there are ABSOLUTELY NO CONSEQUENCES for issuing blatantly illegal and unconstitutional orders and being overruled by the Supreme Court.

So why would they NOT issue the mandate? Worst case scenario it goes to the Supreme Court and they get overruled.

They are taking advantage of the weakness and cowardice displayed by the Roberts court, which SHOULD have already ruled on a business mandate months ago when they started.

Mr. Benno pens an excellent post explaining why Xi-den’s caudillo fiat should be struck down as blatantly and brazenly exceeding his authority. Sadly, we know that there exists a surfeit of Dhimmi-crat activist-politicians costumed in black robes (playacting as so-called “judges”) and ensconced on the federal bench, who would gleefully rubber-stamp this imperially arrogant and lawless diktat, given the opportunity.

The sneaky Dhimmi-crats love using Administrative Agencies to accomplish by lawless diktat what can’t be accomplished by congressional action.

Let’s see if the law will prevail.


 
 0 
 
 1
NormPeterson | September 13, 2021 at 3:00 pm

Congress makes federal laws, not agencies, not the President or executive orders. Agencies make their own rules and regulations which apply to how they follow executive orders and existing laws, but they don’t make laws that apply to private sector employees.

OHSA, Social Security, Veterans’s Affairs etc. employees might have rules about lunch breaks or office Christmas parties, but they don’t apply to the plumbing supply company in small town USA.

The president is an elected politician, not a dictator. Words mean things, and the unelected permanent federal government does not get to run your life.

Now, Mr Benno, please do the same analysis on how it applies to gov’t contractors? I, for one, think it would require a contract adjustment for every single contract currently in existence, as well as cost increases on those contracts. Normally, the gov’t is required to pay for, provide paid contract time for, and facilitate achieving any requirement levied on the contractor after the awarding of the contract that is a requirement for the contractors to continue in their present position. So, if I get sick and am unable to work for a period of time because of a reaction to the vaccine, all that time laying around in bed is chargeable to the contract. That’s above and beyond the time required to get the vaccine (including travel time and the sitting-around-the-waiting-room-afterward time), and any costs.

“the current 7-day moving average of daily new cases stands at 136,558”

Which is a meaningless number without telling us how many PCR amplification cycles were used for those tests, compared to the number of cycles used in 2020.

“the risk of COVID infection can be substantially reduced by disinfecting, mask wearing and social distancing”

No believable study shows any of those things.


 
 0 
 
 0
Antifundamentalist | September 14, 2021 at 10:09 am

Can we just be honest and say “The Biden Administration” or “Biden’s Handlers” because we all know that Biden hasn’t got the mental capacity to make decisions, and we should not play into the fiction that he is.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend