The law is going to have interesting years untwisting the pretzels of precedents that this court will set up.
Which can only occur after we get a different court.
10 Likes
Wasn’t really a thing without a vaccine, this one is squarely on the current Congress and their inability to pass gas, let alone legislation.
2 Likes
Every regulatory agency we have will become absolutely useless. If the experts can’t put forward reasonably based regulations, but have to leave it up to lawyers and career politicians, there will be no need for any of these agencies.
And that’s just the way the right wing wants it. Centralization of ALL power in their craven, short-fingered hands.
And we’re all gonna die, as a result, along with our kids and grandkids.
Who’s going to stop the madness we’re seeing here?
24 Likes
But Ted Cruz passes gas with every breath he takes!
3 Likes
Ummmm… Y’know, there’s this whole thing called the “Constitution”, and that kinda lays out who gets to decide what’s authorized and funded to do by the government? And that entity is the Legislative Branch?
You’re literally calling for the same thing that the Jan 6thers were, overthrow of our system of governance and the rule of law.
1 Like
I was thinking reason based when I read that.
The people who make public commentary have been amassing fortunes with the Trump phenomenon.
When they begin to understand and fear the state the nation is in, we will have a much better collective outlook…
My go-to example of this is this:
We still speak and write about the GOP as though it is a “conservative” organization instead of what it actually is.
10 Likes
But they have given zero example of that power in use for anything but keeping power.
Their dog is trying to catch car but have not a clue of what happens afterwards.
5 Likes
That’s probably not a popular opinion but I’m inclined to agree with you.
The fact that Congress won’t do this for whatever reason is a separate question from whether they’re the ones that should.
I think people are mixing political opinions up with the question of the constitutionality.
There’s also the question of whether the Supreme Court really is playing fast and loose with this issue (that is being hypocritical).
It’s probably also not a popular opinion but it’s completely possible that the headline here is spin and inaccurate —“Conservative Justices Express Hostility to Biden Administration’s Power”.
They might actually just want to incapacitate the executive branch altogether.
There is a conservative thought process that wants to incapicitate the Federal government entirely after all.
11 Likes
Elections have consequences and this is a consequence of the Democratic party refusing to be competitive in any number of tiny states that have two senators. As a result the senate is divided 50/50 by state count even though the Democrats represent 10s of millions more citizens than the very minority Republican party. So we should ask ourselves what the hell the air warriors in the Democratic party thought would happen when we abandoned states like Missouri, Wisconsin and others in the Midwest.
7 Likes
You don’t understand, Mister President, Sam Alito makes the decisions around here.
Not true
I’m not calling for anything.
I’m noting that the SC is possibly going to defang every regulatory agency we have. I’m asking who is going to stop that - is it going to be Congress? Not when half the Congress doesn’t want to offer power to anyone other than themselves. And I don’t think there are very many scientists and medical professionals in Congress that will make EDUCATED decisions based on Science. Half of that organization doesn’t believe in Science or we wouldn’t be having this discussion - it’s how we got here.
The budgetary process has much to do with precisely WHAT will be funded - I don’t believe the agencies get a blank check. If they do today, I don’t know that, should this ruling change that, we’ll get anything in the budget except stupid Ivermectin and bleach experiments to combat pandemics instead of vaccine research, which we now get.
I’m just having an issue with the court making a decision as to what these agencies, many of which have been in place for decades, can do when they’ve been accomplishing their missions successfully for just as long.
20 Likes
Yup. My basic take:
-
It looks very shaky as to whether this is actually constitutional, simply because there isn’t explicit statutory authority from Congress to mandate vaccines.
-
The Barrett Court absolutely is playing fast and loose with what they do/don’t consider constitutional, and they’d ignore the case if it was the trump administration.
12 Likes
“It’s not our role to decide public health questions,” [Gorsuch] said, adding that if there’s any ambiguity as to what agencies can do, the power to decide “belongs to the people’s representatives in the states and in the halls of Congress.”
Let’s not forget that Gorsuch is the son of Anne Gorsuch Burford who, as EPA Administrator under Reagan, tried - if I may paraphrase Grover Norquist - to shrink EPA so it was small enough to drag into the bathtub and drown. She subsequently resigned when it was learned to withheld EPA funding for the cleanup of a California Superfund Site in order to avoid helping Jerry Brown in his senatorial campaign.
You can bet that Gorsuch since his nomination has been salivating at the thought of continuing his mother’s dirty business and taking revenge on Democrats for her demise.
23 Likes
Well, they better watch their tushies.
1 Like
31 Likes
You cite a perfect example of where we could be headed. Political gain over science.
1 Like
Exactly. Which is the heart of the issue here. Congress has neither authorized DOL/HHS to mandate the vaccine nor appropriated funding to do so.
Twofer here, loss for the agencies on both counts (there are other cases where Congress does authorize something, but then declines to provide funding, those are interesting cases).
3 Likes
I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who stated something to the effect that human beings are to be identified as individuals and families; but there is no such thing as society. That being the case, individuals and families can govern themselves; government beyond that is unnecessary and oppressive. Some of us, however, recognize the relational character of being human. At our best we move toward rather than away or against one another, cooperatively attempting to help all of us to flourish together. Some of the Supremes appear to find community, as in “We the People,” problematic.
9 Likes
So what is the point of the agency if not to watch over the population? I’d be interested in knowing what their mission statement is - in fact, for all of the agencies this decision would affect.
3 Likes