Anti vax totalitarianism is a myth

[canadyjd]

Again, it is not force: no one is forced to get a vaccination.

Let me ask you a simple, clear question: do you believe employers have the right to establish requirements for employment subject, of course, to laws against discrimination based on race, gender etc.?

I will be interested to read your reply.

Yes. Is that simple and clear enough for you?

Now let me ask you a simple and clear question.

Does the President have the constitutional authority to mandate employers require their employees to get vaccinated or submit to weekly medical testing that employees will be required to share with the employer, who will in turn share that medical info with OSHA?

If yes, please point to the provision in the constitution that gives him that power.

I’ll save you some trouble, he doesn’t have the authority and his mandate will be reversed by the SCOTUS.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

it is completely untrue that both sides are equally guilty in this. It’s completely one sided

Perhaps. We do not have examples of pro-covid-vax people advocating forced vaccinations, so maybe you are correct.

BUT we do have examples of anti-covid-vaxers trying to keep people from being vaccinated (this happened in Atlanta).

So we know about anti-covid-vax thugs....maybe I just assumed there was a pro-covid-vax counterpart.

 

[Revmitchell]

Perhaps. We do not have examples of pro-covid-vax people advocating forced vaccinations, so maybe you are correct.

BUT we do have examples of anti-covid-vaxers trying to keep people from being vaccinated (this happened in Atlanta).

So we know about anti-covid-vax thugs....maybe I just assumed there was a pro-covid-vax counterpart.

bub you need to go take a nap. Give it a rest. There are far more important things to worry about

 

[Andre]

Yes. Is that simple and clear enough for you?

Now let me ask you a simple and clear question.

OK, thanks, that is a clear answer.

Does the President have the constitutional authority to mandate employers require their employees to get vaccinated or submit to weekly medical testing that employees will be required to share with the employer, who will in turn share that medical info with OSHA?

If yes, please point to the provision in the constitution that gives him that power.

I’ll save you some trouble, he doesn’t have the authority and his mandate will be reversed by the SCOTUS.

peace to you

I do not know if he has such authority.

But you are merely claiming, at least in this post, that he does not have such authority - please provide your argument. And please provide a citation to show that the President is in indeed considering such a mandate with all the provisions you have listed.

 

[canadyjd]

OK, thanks, that is a clear answer.


I do not know if he has such authority.

But you are merely claiming, at least in this post, that he does not have such authority - please provide your argument. And please provide a citation to show that the President is in indeed considering such a mandate with all the provisions you have listed.

The provisions were part of his executive order. I’m sure you can google it and read it yourself.

The WH chief of staff retweeted an opinion that this was an end run around the constitution.

Peace to you

 

[rlvaughn]

The provisions were part of his executive order. I’m sure you can google it and read it yourself.

The overall six-point plan can be found HERE. The executive order re Federal employees is HERE. One re Federal contractors is HERE. I think those are the only two executive orders re Covid vaccinations, at least so far.

The WH chief of staff retweeted an opinion that this was an end run around the constitution.

In that tweet he specifically meant the President using OSHA to mandate to the private sector businesses is an end run around the Constitution. I would say most of it is.

 

[Andre]

The provisions were part of his executive order. I’m sure you can google it and read it yourself.

Not how it works - your claim, you need to provide the evidence.

 

[canadyjd]

Not how it works - your claim, you need to provide the evidence.

I don’t have time to explain the US constitution to you. You should do your own research and you will remember it better.

peace to you

 

[Andre]

I don’t have time to explain the US constitution to you. You should do your own research and you will remember it better.

peace to you

Again, your claim, your responsibility to defend it.

 

[rlvaughn]

And please provide a citation to show that the President is in indeed considering such a mandate with all the provisions you have listed.

Links to this information can be found in Post # 46.

 

[canadyjd]

Again, your claim, your responsibility to defend it.

The the way constitution works in the US is as follows.

Lawmakers decide to consider a vaccine mandate. They hold committee hearings in the House of Representatives and the US Senate. During the hearings, both Dems and repubs call expert witnesses.

They consider as many variables as possible. They discuss pros and cons of the vaccine and the mandate. They consider natural immunity. They consider the effectiveness of the vaccine and possible side effects. They consider the economic impact to companies and employees. They consider personal freedom issues and religious objections.

Once the hearings are complete, the committees send a recommendation to the respective chambers for write up legislation. The House passes it’s version. The Senate passes their version. The House and Senate appoint a joint committee to reconcile the differences. Both Houses vote on the new bill. It goes to the President for his signature. And it the becomes law, subject to court challenges.

The people’s representatives are involved in the decision making process and answer to the voters.

The President does not make laws, his administration enforced laws.

The President is attempting to make law and conceal it as a public health issue covered by OSHA.

The courts will strike his actions down.

I hope I have enlightened you about the constitutional process in the US.

peace to you

 

[Andre]

The overall six-point plan can be found HERE. The executive order re Federal employees is HERE. One re Federal contractors is HERE. I think those are the only two executive orders re Covid vaccinations, at least so far.

OK , thanks. Can you provide the argument as to why what the President is considering doing would be unconstitutional?

 

[Andre]

The President does not make laws, his administration enforced laws.

The President is attempting to make law and conceal it as a public health issue covered by OSHA.

The courts will strike his actions down.

I hope I have enlightened you about the constitutional process in the US.

peace to you

At least one law professor disagrees:

Law professor says Biden vaccine mandate is 'completely constitutional': The aggressive push to vaccinate two-thirds of U.S workers does not come as a shock to Jody Lyneé Madeira, who is a professor of law at Indiana University-Bloomington....
"I think it's still going to be a bit of time until we see how exactly it will work out in practice but I do think it is completely constitutional," Madiera said Madeira says it will likely withstand legal challenges.

And from The Washington Post:

Even as vaccine mandates become the latest flash point in the coronavirus culture wars, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of them before.

In the lead-up to a 1905 case, a man named Henning Jacobson refused to get vaccinated against smallpox during an outbreak of the disease and after the health board of Cambridge, Mass., ordered residents to get vaccinated. He was fined and charged under Massachusetts law. He pleaded “not guilty” and argued the mandate violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, ruled that wasn’t the case.

.

 

[JonC]

At least one law professor disagrees:

Law professor says Biden vaccine mandate is 'completely constitutional': The aggressive push to vaccinate two-thirds of U.S workers does not come as a shock to Jody Lyneé Madeira, who is a professor of law at Indiana University-Bloomington....
"I think it's still going to be a bit of time until we see how exactly it will work out in practice but I do think it is completely constitutional," Madiera said Madeira says it will likely withstand legal challenges.

And from The Washington Post:

Even as vaccine mandates become the latest flash point in the coronavirus culture wars, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of them before.

In the lead-up to a 1905 case, a man named Henning Jacobson refused to get vaccinated against smallpox during an outbreak of the disease and after the health board of Cambridge, Mass., ordered residents to get vaccinated. He was fined and charged under Massachusetts law. He pleaded “not guilty” and argued the mandate violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, ruled that wasn’t the case.

.

This is a little different (it is vaccine OR testing, with legal exemptions for religious or medicL reasons). I still don't see how he has the authority, though,....not for private employers.

 

[777]

right, and Jacobson was an appeal to SCOTUS over a MA state law that did mandate vaccinations. However, the Biden mandate could be and probably is unconstitutional IMO - why? 10th, 14th Amendment springs to mind.

Let the US Congress pass it, then we'll talk, Biden is not a dictator that just can deem it so. Doesn't apply to illegals, refugees, or Biden staffers and at least 27 US governors are dragging it through the courts. For the legal reasoning behind it, I'll defer to Alan Dershowitz, who thinks it will be found constitutional but unenforceable.

 

[canadyjd]

At least one law professor disagrees:

Law professor says Biden vaccine mandate is 'completely constitutional': The aggressive push to vaccinate two-thirds of U.S workers does not come as a shock to Jody Lyneé Madeira, who is a professor of law at Indiana University-Bloomington....
"I think it's still going to be a bit of time until we see how exactly it will work out in practice but I do think it is completely constitutional," Madiera said Madeira says it will likely withstand legal challenges.

And from The Washington Post:

Even as vaccine mandates become the latest flash point in the coronavirus culture wars, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of them before.

In the lead-up to a 1905 case, a man named Henning Jacobson refused to get vaccinated against smallpox during an outbreak of the disease and after the health board of Cambridge, Mass., ordered residents to get vaccinated. He was fined and charged under Massachusetts law. He pleaded “not guilty” and argued the mandate violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, ruled that wasn’t the case.

.

Not unusual to find law professors with differing views.

I note that in the Jacobson v. Massachusetts case the man was convicted under State Law. The state constitutions have a similar process to the US constitution. The people’s representatives at the state level passed a law that was upheld by the SCOTUS.

There is no state of federal law that mandates the covid vaccine. This is purely an executive order by the President.

That also answers your question as to why it’s unconstitutional.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

Not unusual to find law professors with differing views.

I note that in the Jacobson v. Massachusetts case the man was convicted under State Law. The state constitutions have a similar process to the US constitution. The people’s representatives at the state level passed a law that was upheld by the SCOTUS.

There is no state of federal law that mandates the covid vaccine. This is purely an executive order by the President.

That also answers your question as to why it’s unconstitutional.

peace to you

But what was actually mandated fell under his authority for federal - contractor employment and perhaps for recipients of federal funding (depending on how he plays it).

 

[canadyjd]

But what was actually mandated fell under his authority for federal - contractor employment and perhaps for recipients of federal funding (depending on how he plays it).

Perhaps, but the OSHA push for employers to mandate vaccines or face stiff fines was what I was referring to.

Peace to you

 

[Andre]

This is purely an executive order by the President.

That also answers your question as to why it’s unconstitutional.

peace to you

It cannot be that simple - if it were this simple, why would a law professor think it will pass constitutional muster?

And here is another view from an expert:

Although legal challenges are likely, "the mandates are legal and will ultimately be upheld," said Peter Jacobson, professor emeritus of health law and policy at the University of Michigan, of the sweeping plan Biden announced Thursday to combat the pandemic.

And another:

Lance Gable, a professor of law at Wayne State University Law School, agreed that the mandates are likely to survive legal challenges.

"I think it's on pretty stable legal ground," he said. "The government's in a strong position here."

I am not saying that there are not qualified experts who agree with you.

But things clearly cannot be as black and white as you appear to be implying.

 

[JonC]

Perhaps, but the OSHA push for employers to mandate vaccines or face stiff fines was what I was referring to.

Peace to you

OK. I get that (I was focused on Biden).

I almost forgot about OSHA. I'm not sure that they do not have a point, but it seems like a workaround to mandating vaccinations.