Did the S.C.’s majority opinion in Biden v. Missouri ignore the rule of law?

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

Now let me add to the above which lists your activities here, making crap up!

You offered no arguments. Stop making crap up!

JWK

Nope I posted the opinion, which I completely agree with.

The majority opinion has all my arguments.

The minority yours.

Allan

[Bill.in.PA]

Vaccination status of infected workers does nothing to affect the outcome for the patients. The patients will get just as sick whether the infected worker who gave them Omicron was vaccinated or not.

So many vaccinated workers are infected that hospitals are allowing COVID-positive workers with obvious symptoms to return to work. The basis for the mandate is a sham.

[biggestal99]

@Bill.in.PA

Vaccination status of infected workers does nothing to affect the outcome for the patients.

The stats simply don’t back that up.

If you are unvax you have a 5 times better chance of ending up in the hospital and a 13 times better chance of dying.

Those are the facts.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@Bill.in.PA

The ruling is about a requested stay in enforcement of the regulation. My understanding is that the court has not ruled on the regulation itself.

The legal basis of the vaccine mandate was to protect patients from COVID infection. The vaccines are not effective at preventing Omicron infections, and federal rules are now allowing infected (vaccinated) workers to continue working. The legislative authority for the rule is no longer valid.

A lower court should end the rule since it no longer protects patients, and it infringes on the rights of the workers.

Here is a quote from the ruling:

To that end, Congress authorized the Secretary to promulgate, as a
condition of a facility’s participation in the programs, such
“requirements as [he] finds necessary in the interest of the
health and safety of individuals who are furnished services
in the institution.” 42 U. S. C. §1395x(e)(9) (hospitals); see,
e.g., §§1395x(cc)(2)(J) (outpatient rehabilitation facilities),
1395i–3(d)(4)(B) (skilled nursing facilities), 1395k(a)(2)(F)
(i) (ambulatory surgical centers); see also §§1396r(d)(4)(B),
1396d(l)(1), 1396d(o) (corresponding provisions in Medicaid
Act)

In that respect (what you state above about the stay) I believe your thinking is spot on!

As to the healthcare workers’ rights, any government act which infringes upon a fundamental right is presumptively unconstitutional.” See: Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980) Also see City of Mobile v. Bolden, 466 U.S. 55, 76, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980)

Additionally, The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty [firing healthcare works due to a government act] on its exercise is patently unconstitutional., Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618

And, under such circumstances, our system of law requires the court to apply strict scrutiny to the act which:

• (A) must be narrowly tailored to achieve the government’s purpose,

• (B) the purpose must be clearly defined and be based upon scientific and logical reasoning,

• (C) and it must use the least restrictive means to achieve the government’s stated purpose.

This is fundamental law 101 and I agree with it.

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.

[Bill.in.PA]

Yes, that might be true if the mandate were for the patients and Delta were still the dominant variant.

Huge numbers of vaccinated workers are getting infected with Omicron, and patients are just as likely to catch the disease whether the worker is vaccinated or not. The fact that hospitals are allowing infected workers to continue working shows that the threat of infecting patients with Omicron is not major concern.

The legislative authority for the rule is based on the assumption that vaccinated workers are needed protect patients from infections. Omicron means that the assumption is clearly invalid.

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

Now let me add to the above which lists your activities here, making crap up!

You offered no arguments. Stop making crap up!

JWK

Nope I posted the opinion, which I completely agree with.

The majority opinion has all my arguments.

The minority yours.

Allan

There you go again, making crap up.

As I correctly posted above:

So, you are unable to successfully defend the rationality of the Court’s Majority opinion, nor show any defective reasoning in the Minority opinion, and once again offer nothing productive to advance the discussion. Seems quite clear your primary object is to instigate, agitate and obfuscate.

And that list is in addition to you constantly making crap up as you just did!

JWK

“Any excuse will serve a tyrant.” – Aesop

[johnwk2]

@Bill.in.PA

Yes, that might be true if the mandate were for the patients and Delta were still the dominant variant.

Huge numbers of vaccinated workers are getting infected with Omicron, and patients are just as likely to catch the disease whether the worker is vaccinated or not. The fact that hospitals are allowing infected workers to continue working shows that the threat of infecting patients with Omicron is not major concern.

The legislative authority for the rule is based on the assumption that vaccinated workers are needed protect patients from infections. Omicron means that the assumption is clearly invalid.

Also keep in mind what Justice Thomas stated which was absolutely correct:

5. “These cases are not about the efficacy or importance of COVID–19 vaccines. They are only about whether CMS has the statutory authority to force healthcare workers, by coercing their employers, to undergo a medical procedure they do not want and cannot undo. Because the Government has not made a strong showing that Congress gave CMS that broad authority, I would deny the stays pending appeal. I respectfully dissent.” Justice Thomas’ dissent can be found HERE along with the entire case.

JWK

[Bill.in.PA]

Yes, the 5-4 decision was based on whether there was statutory authority for the rule, not whether the statute itself was constitutional.

A lower court should still be able to rule that recent events with the Omicron outbreaks show that the rule no longer meets the statutory requirements and is therefore illegal.

The legal basis of the mandate is to protect the “health and safety” of patients. It does neither at this point.

[biggestal99]

@Bill.in.PA

Yes, that might be true if the mandate were for the patients and Delta were still the dominant variant

Why are people still dying (unvaxxed) at an high rate.

Allan

[biggestal99]

@johnwk2

Also keep in mind what Justice Thomas stated which was absolutely correct:

Correct. Debateable.

In the minority. Not debateable.

Still unsure why you are arguing with dissents.

It’s like me using sotomayer dissent.

Using losing arguments is not the way forward in this debate.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@Bill.in.PA

Yes, the 5-4 decision was based on whether there was statutory authority for the rule, not whether the statute itself was constitutional.

So, the question then seems to be, is there statutory authority granted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) “… to force healthcare workers (by a threat of being fired), by coercing their employers (with a threat of termination of their Medicare and Medicaid provider agreements), to undergo a medical procedure they do not want and cannot undo?

JWK

It would be an absurdity to believe that our founders, and those who ratified our Constitution, vested a power in Congress to delegate powers which it may not rightfully exercise itself.

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

Debateable.

What is not debatable as established in this thread LINK you are unable to successfully defend the rationality of the Court’s Majority opinion, nor show any defective reasoning in the Minority opinion, and once again offer nothing productive to advance the discussion. Seems quite clear your primary object is to instigate, agitate and obfuscate.

JWK

[Bill.in.PA]

The legal basis of the mandate is not protect the hospital workers. It is to protect their patients.

There is zero evidence that the vaccines do anything to prevent the spread of Omicron. At this point the mandates are arguably increasing the risks to patients as hospitals force infected to workers to keep on working instead bringing uninfected workers who are unvaccinated.

Rand Paul

[biggestal99]

Rand Paul. A expert. Lol.

Allan

[johnwk2]

I agree!

In fact, I came to the logical conclusion about six months ago, based on a wealth of documentation I accumulated, that the ordinary masks commonly worn, and being vaccinated as an additional protection against transmission of the virus, was a false sense of security encouraging people to let their guard down and may very well have been the cause of significant transmissions, hospitalizations and even deaths.

And now a Majority on our Supreme Court is perpetuating a faulty and dangerous policy, divorced from science and adopted by political hacks in a government agency.

JWK

It would be an absurdity to believe that our founders, and those who ratified our Constitution, vested a power in Congress to delegate powers which it may not rightfully exercise itself.

[johnwk2]

@biggestal99

Rand Paul. A expert. Lol.

Allan

Well, aren’t you the sweet one? Attacking the messenger and not his message.

JWK

It would be an absurdity to believe that our founders, and those who ratified our Constitution, vested a power in Congress to delegate and exercise powers which it may not rightfully exercise itself.

[Call_me_Ishmael]

@biggestal99

@johnwk2

Considering the fact that the mandate issued by CMC involves such an extraordinary set of circumstances, and, in the words of Justice Thomas, “. . . compels millions of healthcare workers to undergo an unwanted medical procedure that “cannot be removed at the end of the shift … ” it seems only too clear that to be within our Constitution’s framework that Congress, the people’s elected Representatives, and only the people’s elected Representatives, are constitutionally authorized to address this unique set of circumstances.

Once again using a dissent to make your argument.

It’s a minority opinion.

Allan

…and minorities don’t count. Right?

[Bill.in.PA]

I trust Dr. Rand Paul’s judgement much more than that of Dr. Fauci.

At this point any pretext for the mandate for health-care workers has disappeared. The vaccines don’t stop the spread. People are going to get the mild Omicron variant whether vaccinated or not.

If hospitals are serious about reducing risk of infection for the most vulnerable patients, the safest bet would be to use only workers who have recently recovered from Omicron whether vaccinated or not.

[biggestal99]

@Call_me_Ishmael

…and minorities don’t count. Right?

Not when it comes to SCOTUS opinion. Lol.

Dissents opinions are losers laments.

Allan

[johnwk2]

@Bill.in.PA

I trust Dr. Rand Paul’s judgement much more than that of Dr. Fauci.

At this point any pretext for the mandate for health-care workers has disappeared. The vaccines don’t stop the spread. People are going to get the mild Omicron variant whether vaccinated or not.

If hospitals are serious about reducing risk of infection for the most vulnerable patients, the safest bet would be to use only workers who have recently recovered from Omicron whether vaccinated or not.

As confirmed in this thread, you can lead a nitwit to facts, science and common sense, and that is where the effort apparently ends.

JWK

It would be an absurdity to believe that our founders, and those who ratified our Constitution, vested a power in Congress to delegate powers which it may not rightfully exercise itself.