Want to bet? An example.
from Chickenpox Vaccination: What Everyone Should Know | CDC
CDC recommends two doses of chickenpox vaccine for children, adolescents, and adults who have never had chickenpox and were never vaccinated.
No. Your response was specifically posted in answer to what I wrote. HERE is the evidence. My post was made long after your post had been removed and I asked:
"What, precisely, does your post have to do with “. . . if instead we simply applied our judicial system’s protection of strict scrutiny to specific mandates, we wouldn’t have to say “hello again to completely preventable diseases.” Do you agree?”
In response to my above question, you wrote: “Get rid of all vaccine mandates… we have a return of a lot of preventable disease.”
Dude… The original post where I was talking about getting rid of all vaccine mandates was in response to a post that brought up the Nuremburg codes.
That post was removed by a mod.
I am done trying to explain this.
Correction: a reference to the Nuremberg trials.
You can’t explain away the specific words you posted to me. They were crystal clear.
But hey, let us move on. Do you agree the protections of due process and strict scrutiny should be applied to mandated inoculations and regulations asserted to protect against the Covid outbreak?
Keep in mind due process is a guaranteed fundamental right under our judicial system, and the protection of strict scrutiny is required to be applied by our courts whenever a fundamental right is infringed upon by a government action. Under this protection the government act, to survive the strict scrutiny test, must be:
-
(A) 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.
In Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990) we find “The forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty."
Also see Rivers v. Katz (67 N.Y.2d 485) 1986 in which the Court stated:
”In Storar, we recognized that a patient’s right to determine the course of his medical treatment was paramount to what might otherwise be the doctor’s obligation to provide medical care, and that the right of a competent adult to refuse medical treatment must be honored, even though the recommended treatment may be beneficial or even necessary to preserve the patient’s life. This fundamental common-law right is coextensive with the patient’s liberty interest protected by the due process clause of our State Constitution.
In our system of a free government, where notions of individual autonomy and free choice are cherished, it is the individual who must have the final say in respect to decisions regarding his medical treatment in order to insure that the greatest possible protection is accorded his autonomy and freedom from unwanted interference with the furtherance of his own…”
And when a person’s liberty is infringed upon by government we find:
A government-imposed act which “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution 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)
And, “The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty on its exercise is patently unconstitutional.” Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618
So, do you not agree that the protections of due process and strict scrutiny should be applied to the current mandated inoculations and regulations asserted to protect against the Covid outbreak?
JWK
“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story
Did you miss my answer to your post?
6th Circuit Panel ruling lifting vaccine mandate stay, now on appeal
.
See Attorney General Alan Wilson Files Appeal On OSHA Vaccine Mandate Ruling
December 19, 2021
"The filing argues, among other things, that, “This case does not present the question whether vaccines or vaccine mandates are wise or desirable. Instead, it presents the narrow questions whether OSHA had authority to issue the Mandate, and whether it lawfully exercised whatever authority it had. After all, ‘our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully,’ even during a pandemic and ‘even in pursuit of desirable ends.’”
Indeed! Asserted emergencies do not allow folks in government to trample upon due process and the rights of American Citizens!
See: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, (2004)
“It is during our most challenging and uncertain moments that our Nation’s commitment to due process is most severely tested; and it is in those times that we must preserve our commitment at home to the principles for which we fight abroad. See Kennedy v. Mendoza&nbhyph;Martinez, 372 U.S. 144, 164—165 (1963) (“The imperative necessity for safeguarding these rights to procedural due process under the gravest of emergencies has existed throughout our constitutional history, for it is then, under the pressing exigencies of crisis, that there is the greatest temptation to dispense with guarantees which, it is feared, will inhibit government action”); see also United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258, 264 (1967) (“It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of one of those liberties … which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile”).”
JWK
" I believe that there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." ___ Madison Elliot`s Debates, vol. III, page 87
OHSA sworn duty is to keep workplaces safe and this rule achieves that end.
Allan
I think you made that up about OHSA’s “sworn duty”. Do you have a link to the oath OHSA employees take saying it’s their “duty is to keep workplaces safe”. I always though OHSA officers took an Oath of Office:
“I, ____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
Seems to me their oath is to support and defend our Constitution, and not what they may think they should do to keep the “workplace safe”.
JWK
1 Like
So, am I correct that you made that crap up?
JWK
“He has erected a multitude of new offices (Washington‘s existing political plum job Empire) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance” ___Declaration of Independence
Here is the opinion of the 6th court of appeals.
And now I guide you view to page 5 of the opinion.
“Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act or the Act) and established OSHA “to assure safe and healthful working conditions for the nation’s work force and to preserve the nation’s human resources.”
And
“ 29 U.S.C. § 651(a). OSHA is charged with ensuring worker safety and health “by developing innovative methods, techniques, and approaches for dealing with occupational safety and health problems.”
Allan
And that’s exactly what they did when issuing the vax mandate.
Allan
Once again you obfuscate.
Do you have a link to the oath OHSA employees take saying it’s their “duty is to keep workplaces safe”.?
Now, please point to the words in our Constitution authorizing un-elected public employees to impose draconian mandates upon the people of the United States.
JWK
“He has erected a multitude of new offices (Washington‘s existing political plum job Empire) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance” ___Declaration of Independence
Us law. 
I gave you the us statute number, if you care to you can look it up.
Allan
And if you forgot
29 U.S.C. § 651(a)
Read it and digest it.
And then come back to apologize.
Allan
Still obfuscating I see.
You asserted, “OHSA sworn duty is to keep workplaces safe”. Please provide a link where unelected public employees swear to keep the workplaces safe.
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their worst nightmare.
1 Like
Well, biggestal99, it’s plain to see you have not supplied the link or information requested. So, how about pointing to the words in our Constitution authorizing Congress to enact and enforce legislation demanding businesses owners within a state’s borders, force their employees to be inoculated with a foreign substance?
I kind of remember when studying the making of our Constitution no such power was ever entertained by those who framed and helped to ratify our Constitution. As a matter of fact, Hamilton summarized the defined and limited power of our federal government as follows:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." ___ Federalist No. 45
Additionally, the Tenth Amendment declares:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.
.
Seems crystal clear to me employees at OSHA are attempting to usurp, and exercise powers not granted by our Constitution.
JWK
" I believe that there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." ___ Madison Elliot`s Debates, vol. III, page 87
That’s not true.
And even if it were true, there is no power delegated by our Constitution allowing OSHA employees to demand businesses owners within a state’s borders, to force their employees to be inoculated with a foreign substance. LINK
The sad truth is, were amply warned about allowing our federal government to exercise powers not granted:
“When a free people submit to oppressive acts, passed in violation of their constitution, for a single day, they have thrown down the palladium of their liberty. Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud. It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism __ the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted is the beginning of the end of the nations ruin.” ___ The Old Guard, a monthly journal devoted to the principles of 1776 and 1787.
JWK
1 Like
Absolutely true.
Read the statute.
Allan
