LISTEN LIVE to U.S. Supreme Court Arguments on Federal Vaccine Mandates: 1/7/22 10 am EST

Government workers (common criminals) won't think twice before entering your property if told to do so

Agreed, I'm 55 and could care less about this earth any longer, its a shit show. im good i own my own business and have no worries. That said I work golf and fuck. I no longer care about this earth or the humanity on it.

It's far worse than that! 0ombombma is NOT an American. That usurper with his Brennan issued fraudulent birth certificate is what got LaRaza's Sotomayor and commie Kagan seated.

The court IS AN ILLEGAL, UNJUST FUCKING FRAUD

Never forget they're so corrupt they continued with empty seats after the MURDER of Scalia and the sick and dead RBG shitshow.

UNJUST WICKED USURPED SCOTUS CAN FUCK OFF!

What's the latest?

Still obsessed with the tingles you feel in your pee pee?

I don't believe its going to pass. Robert Barnes says that it is likely to be overturned, that 1/3 Conservative will vote for Constitution and rule of law against it, 1/3 Liberal appointees will vote for mandates, and the deciding factor will be Kavanaugh and Roberts, and Barrett. And they will likely side with Constitution and the Right.

I hope very strongly he is right, because this is tyranny and will affect environmental issues, having them dictate everything you eat and complete takeover or people man up strong resistance.

Any idea what time they will make their “ruling”?

mostly agree.
it's super dangerous to annoy us too much.

.

CNN: Supreme Court appears poised to block Biden's vaccine and testing rules for businesses



[link to www.msn.com (secure)]

Yes, what was decided for us free people?





.

Things like this usually drop after the bell on Wall Street on Friday so the effect on markets is diluted and so the rabble just go home and watch sports and dumb movies and forget the meathook realities of the world around them.

Ive recieved message from a friend saying they have already ruled against mandate. (?)

There is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows he has nothing left to lose. besides a million of them

Nothing yet afaik

Hopefully at least a stay against OSHA ETS before EOD

God had to be furious.

Is your friend a reliable source for that information? How did they acquire that info?

Thank you I pray this happens!

I listened.

Conservative justices were quiet, stayed on point, asked critical questions. The liberal justices dominated the discussion, issued forth word salads on COVID, made strange indefensible statements, and, thankfully, are outnumbered.

This is what I found on page 43 - I don't have the desire to read the other 42

[link to apnews.com (secure)]

Fully vaccinated and mostly masked, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared skeptical Friday of the Biden administration’s authority to impose a vaccine-or-testing requirement on the nation’s large employers. The court seemed more open to a separate vaccine mandate for most health care workers.

The arguments in the two cases come at a time of spiking coronavirus cases because of the omicron variant, and the decision Friday by seven justices to wear masks for the first time while hearing arguments reflected the new phase of the pandemic.

An eighth justice, Sonia Sotomayor, a diabetic since childhood, didn’t even appear in the courtroom, choosing to remain in her office at the court and take part remotely. Two lawyers, representing Ohio and Louisiana, argued by telephone after recent positive COVID-19 tests, state officials said.

************************

But the COVID circumstances did not appear to outweigh the views of the court’s six conservatives that the administration overstepped its authority in its vaccine-or-testing requirement for businesses with at least 100 employees.

“This is something the federal government has never done before,” Chief Justice John Roberts said, casting doubt on the administration’s argument that a half-century established law, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, confers such broad authority.

Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett probably hold the key to the outcome in both cases, as they have been more receptive to state-level vaccine requirements than the other three conservative justices. Barrett and Kavanaugh also had tough questions for Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer.

The court’s three liberal justices suggested support for the employer rule. Justice Elena Kagan said officials have shown “quite clearly that no other policy will prevent sickness and death to anywhere like the degree that this one will.” And Justice Stephen Breyer said he found it “unbelievable” that it could be in the “public interest” to put that rule on hold. He said that on Thursday there were some 750,000 new cases in the country and that hospitals are full.

Beginning Monday, unvaccinated employees in big companies are supposed to wear masks at work, unless the court blocks enforcement. But testing requirements and potential fines for employers don’t kick in until February.

Just imagine: The USSC rules against the mandates, and then Omicron proves to be toothless, and the vaxes prove to fail. What a win!

Armpit is a kill shot if you can get it

Last Edited by Building Momentum on 01/07/2022 03:49 PM

Sent me a link but I am not sure. Glp usually is first to break the news, I expected to read about it here

It sounded like Rachel Madow, David Muir and Jen Psaki up there.

The only Supremes I like are Diana, Mary, and Flo.

Soon or by the end of the month, Robert Barnes thought it was likely to be soon.

maybe but Barrett has a history...

[link to www.theindianalawyer.com (secure)]

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Thursday refused to block a plan by Indiana University to require students and employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19.

Barrett’s action came in response to an emergency request from eight students, and it marked the first time the high court has weighed in on a vaccine mandate. Some corporations, states and cities have adopted vaccine requirements for workers or even to dine indoors, and others are considering doing so.

The students said in court papers that they have “a constitutional right to bodily integrity, autonomy, and of medical treatment choice in the context of a vaccination mandate.” They wanted the high court to issue an order barring the university from enforcing the mandate. Seven of the students qualify for a religious exemption.

College officials across the country have struggled with whether to require vaccinations, with some schools mandating them and others questioning whether they have legal authority to do so. Similar lawsuits against student vaccine requirements have been filed in other states.

The court’s newest justice rejected the plea without even asking the university for a response or getting her colleagues to weigh in. Justices often act on their own in such situations when the legal question isn’t particularly close. Barrett handles emergency matters from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, which includes Indiana.

A three-judge federal appeals court panel, including two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump, was one of two lower courts to side with Indiana University and allow it to require the vaccinations, even as legal proceedings continue. The plan announced in May requires roughly 90,000 students and 40,000 employees on seven campuses to receive COVID-19 vaccinations for the fall semester.

Students who don’t comply will have their registration canceled and workers who don’t will lose their jobs. The policy does have religious and medical exemptions, but exempt students must be tested twice a week for the disease. The school recently announced that for now, everyone, regardless of vaccination status, must wear a mask indoors while on campus.

Ugh. All these statements saying they think they're going to issue the stay bothers me. They always let people think they're going to be alright before they put the screws to them.

That's like you drinking poison expecting me to die.