6th circuit court of appeals reinstates OSHA vax mandate

[Ceasar]

The Democrats are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs.

[johnwk2]

@Ceasar

The Democrats are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs.

To be more accurate, the Democrat Part Leadership, which now controls the Democrat Party, " . . . are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs."

JWK

The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their most formidable domestic enemy.

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

To be more accurate, the Democrat Part Leadership , which now controls the Democrat Party, " . . . are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs."

To be totally accurate it the “ Democratic Party leadership” not what you posted.

Allan (striving for accuracy)

Allan

[Ceasar]

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

To be more accurate, the Democrat Part Leadership , which now controls the Democrat Party, " . . . are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs."

To be totally accurate it the “ Democratic Party leadership” not what you posted.

Allan (striving for accuracy)

Allan

True…so?

[johnwk2]

@Ceasar

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

To be more accurate, the Democrat Part Leadership , which now controls the Democrat Party, " . . . are just a bunch of control freaks & tyrants. Thugs."

To be totally accurate it the “ Democratic Party leadership” not what you posted.

Allan (striving for accuracy)

Allan

True…so?

Instead of the poster addressing the relevant content of what was written, the preference is to deflect and dwell upon something which is basically irrelevant.

In any event we may see tomorrow if a majority on our Supreme Court will apply the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to our Constitution in order to uphold Biden’s vaccine mandates.

JWK

What makes a Supreme Court opinion legitimate is when it is in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

Instead of the poster addressing the relevant content of what was written, the preference is to deflect and dwell upon something which is basically irrelevant.

Nothing irrelevant about being accurate in language.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

Instead of the poster addressing the relevant content of what was written, the preference is to deflect and dwell upon something which is basically irrelevant.

Nothing irrelevant about being accurate in language.

Allan

Says the one who pays little attention to the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative history, which gives context to its text.

JWK

The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

Says the one who pays little attention to the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative history, which gives context to its text.

JWK

The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

We shall see what SCOTUS says.

It’s just a waiting game now.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

Says the one who pays little attention to the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative history, which gives context to its text.

JWK

The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

We shall see what SCOTUS says.

Allan

Is it not more important to you what our Constitution “says”, and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text?

JWK

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

Is it not more important to you what our Constitution “says”, and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text?

JWK

In 2022, it’s more important what SCOTUS it says.

Allan

[johnwk2]

More important that what our Constitution actually says?

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

More important that what our Constitution actually says?

Yes, and there lies our differences.

SCOTUS opinion of what the constitution says > what the constitution says

It’s always been that way.

In 1896, separate but equal was the way the constitution was read by SCOTUS and the south passed laws that were constitutional at the time. Now 126 years later things have progressed.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

Yes, and there lies our differences.

And that difference is a difference between our system being governed by consent of the governed and the rule of law, our written constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text, as opposed to the whims and fancies of a majority on our Supreme Court being asserted to be the rule of law.

JWK

“The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice.” – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

And that difference is a difference between our system being governed by the rule of law, our written constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text, as opposed to the whims and fancies of a majority on our Supreme Court being asserted to be the rule of law

You don’t like SCOTUS and it’s opinions. Lol.

That’s not gonna bode well for you going forward.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

You don’t like SCOTUS and it’s opinions. Lol.

I do not appreciate you insulting and sweeping remark. Stop making crap up!

JWK

"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

I do not appreciate you insulting and sweeping remark. Stop making crap up!

So you like SCOTUS opinions or you don’t.

Make up your mind.

Allan

[johnwk2]

I agree with Supreme Court opinions when they are in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

JWK

Those who reject abiding by the text of our Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records and gives context to its text, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

Clearly OSHA has the task of making the workplace safe using the commerce clause of the constitution.

Allan

[biggestal99]

How about the healthcare facility mandate by HHS.

That mandate survived, @johnwk2

Thanks to kavanuagh and Robert’s

Two learned SCOTUS justices that taught us that not all federal mandates are unconstitutional.

Like I sez

One outta two ain’t bad.

Allan

[johnwk2]

Just fess up to your absurdity about the Commerce Clause and a federal healthcare mandate under it.

JWK

Why have a written constitution approved by the people if those who it is designed to limit and control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?