* the vaccine trial runners (subscontractors like Ventavia) could not get / did not have enough people to handle the adverse event influx when they started jabbing trial participants
* OSHA will not have enough people to handle even a trickle of reported violations
22 year old guy, so yeah, most likely a dodgy PCR +ve, but ICE addict so who knows???
My point being: wtf is with the judiciary? I mean, the US has a fantastic constitution compared to the no personal protection we have here in Australia, but it almost appears useless in the light of recent SCOTUS decisions? Constitutional law seems as equally complex as immunology to me.
If we get out of this alive I feel we really need to work on individual protection legislation that is really simple to defend and use.
Modern Western legal systems were designed for the squirearchy - to protect wealthy land-owners against the king / the legislature. That's what they're good at; not strict mediation of the law.
The founders, in the tradition of Montesquieu, understood that the judiciary would not serve this function - the law cannot protect itself. The people must have a love of the law cultured through education, and no constitution could guarantee that outcome. At best, a coalition of small democracies (some with functional law, some essentially democratic tyrannies) could be yoked together so that ambition would cancel etc. Marshall established judicial review out of whole-cloth (negating nullification), ensuring that if the ambition-cancelling failed then so would the law (constitution) cease to have any true protection. The South used this to torment the North with fugitive laws; while the North got its tariffs. Not cancelling, but sort of yin and yang. Eventually the North had an upper hand and Lincoln declared an autocracy. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/state-of-emergency-giorgio-agamben The rest is history. Constitutions are just a pieces of paper.
Declaring an emergency is a helluva convenient loophole. Americans claim to have a love of their constitution, now is the time to express their passion.
The US supreme court is stacked with political appointees. The confirmation process has made this abundantly clear. Separation of the judiciary from the executive and legislative is a fiction.
So in order for a vaccine mandate to occur there should be 3 things in place. First the disease should be so deadly and a threat to healthy citizens, Second there's should be no approved treatments for the viral infection, and third the mandated vaccine should be safe and efficacious at stopping the disease. Not one of these 3 things is actually true.
Agree that all 3 are false. But at this point in my travels/research, I find all vaccines tantamount to transhumanism, and poisonous to the human experience.
Anyway, OSHA (unconstitutionally) self-assigns Congress unlimited power: "The Congress declares it to be its purpose and policy, through the exercise of its powers to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations and to provide for the general welfare, to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources" https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/oshact/completeoshact i.e., if you are a worker, you are a "resource" that can be preserved by literally whatever means your elected "representatives" see fit. Because interstate commerce. There is no requirement for a reasonable level of the "threat" being prevented. As far as I know this fundamental point has never been reviewed by SCOTUS.
Exactly. And were those three things to be true, there would be no need for a mandate. I never truly understood the banality of evil concept until covid revealed the incredible cowardice, narcissism, and repugnant greed for power over other citizens that the covid wars have revealed.
The lone dissenting opinion is excellent. I love it when people preface "you're an idiot" with "with respect". The main question now is whether scotus will take the case, and if they do, how quickly. The damage grows daily until this is resolved, and probably for a while thereafter. Eventually the response will turn violent. Maybe sanity will return before it gets too bad.
Thank you for pointing that out - I should have given it a read before posting. "With respect, [employer self-determination] was the state of federal law before the rule, not after" is a perfect chaser for my opening.
I've read elsewhere (SWC) that since there was a negative vote on the decision, the Sixth Circuit will most likely take on the case en banc. I certainly hope so. Sidebar: only a Corona Karen could have penned such an idiotic decision.
Interesting. I wonder why Stranch would bother with a divided decision if would only punt the case to the court at large to be reversed. Maybe the terms of her payout weren't written strictly enough, haha...
I've written about that as well - the War on Terror turned the country into an electronic panopticon that was instantly overwhelmed by its own input. I used to work for a company that couriered hard drives out to Sugar Grove Station (as well as other shady spots in the DC area). It would be one every other night. That was just in addition to whatever their normal shipments were, obviously.
There's a curious echo here:
* the vaccine trial runners (subscontractors like Ventavia) could not get / did not have enough people to handle the adverse event influx when they started jabbing trial participants
* OSHA will not have enough people to handle even a trickle of reported violations
It was disgusting reading the judgement of a judge here in Victoria, Australia who sentenced a man who "escaped" hotel quarantine to months in prison for "endangering lives" by getting on a tram during his brief stint of freedom - during a lock down (ie very low tram occupancy). My guess is the escapee was asymptomatic and the judge was talking out his ass about things he could not possibly know and that were most likely patently untrue. (Ugh I had to find the article, and it's worse than I remembered: https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-victoria-nathan-hetherington-jailed-before-melbourne-magistrates-court-for-trying-to-escape-quarantine-at-albert-road-clinic/a744c7f1-589d-4e10-8c9c-f71dea49087c)
22 year old guy, so yeah, most likely a dodgy PCR +ve, but ICE addict so who knows???
My point being: wtf is with the judiciary? I mean, the US has a fantastic constitution compared to the no personal protection we have here in Australia, but it almost appears useless in the light of recent SCOTUS decisions? Constitutional law seems as equally complex as immunology to me.
If we get out of this alive I feel we really need to work on individual protection legislation that is really simple to defend and use.
Modern Western legal systems were designed for the squirearchy - to protect wealthy land-owners against the king / the legislature. That's what they're good at; not strict mediation of the law.
The founders, in the tradition of Montesquieu, understood that the judiciary would not serve this function - the law cannot protect itself. The people must have a love of the law cultured through education, and no constitution could guarantee that outcome. At best, a coalition of small democracies (some with functional law, some essentially democratic tyrannies) could be yoked together so that ambition would cancel etc. Marshall established judicial review out of whole-cloth (negating nullification), ensuring that if the ambition-cancelling failed then so would the law (constitution) cease to have any true protection. The South used this to torment the North with fugitive laws; while the North got its tariffs. Not cancelling, but sort of yin and yang. Eventually the North had an upper hand and Lincoln declared an autocracy. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/state-of-emergency-giorgio-agamben The rest is history. Constitutions are just a pieces of paper.
Declaring an emergency is a helluva convenient loophole. Americans claim to have a love of their constitution, now is the time to express their passion.
The US supreme court is stacked with political appointees. The confirmation process has made this abundantly clear. Separation of the judiciary from the executive and legislative is a fiction.
Yes even a politically naive numpty like me could see that - still strange to see a Trump appointee flip like Kavanaugh has.
We shall see. Shoe hasn't quite dropped yet.
So in order for a vaccine mandate to occur there should be 3 things in place. First the disease should be so deadly and a threat to healthy citizens, Second there's should be no approved treatments for the viral infection, and third the mandated vaccine should be safe and efficacious at stopping the disease. Not one of these 3 things is actually true.
Agree that all 3 are false. But at this point in my travels/research, I find all vaccines tantamount to transhumanism, and poisonous to the human experience.
Anyway, OSHA (unconstitutionally) self-assigns Congress unlimited power: "The Congress declares it to be its purpose and policy, through the exercise of its powers to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations and to provide for the general welfare, to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources" https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/oshact/completeoshact i.e., if you are a worker, you are a "resource" that can be preserved by literally whatever means your elected "representatives" see fit. Because interstate commerce. There is no requirement for a reasonable level of the "threat" being prevented. As far as I know this fundamental point has never been reviewed by SCOTUS.
Exactly. And were those three things to be true, there would be no need for a mandate. I never truly understood the banality of evil concept until covid revealed the incredible cowardice, narcissism, and repugnant greed for power over other citizens that the covid wars have revealed.
The lone dissenting opinion is excellent. I love it when people preface "you're an idiot" with "with respect". The main question now is whether scotus will take the case, and if they do, how quickly. The damage grows daily until this is resolved, and probably for a while thereafter. Eventually the response will turn violent. Maybe sanity will return before it gets too bad.
Thank you for pointing that out - I should have given it a read before posting. "With respect, [employer self-determination] was the state of federal law before the rule, not after" is a perfect chaser for my opening.
Many corporations will gleefully get on board. They’re thrilled by this appalling decision.
Ah, those corporations whose leadership was chafing at the bit to hasten the Great Reset. Mere boycott is not nearly strong enough medicine for them.
I've read elsewhere (SWC) that since there was a negative vote on the decision, the Sixth Circuit will most likely take on the case en banc. I certainly hope so. Sidebar: only a Corona Karen could have penned such an idiotic decision.
Interesting. I wonder why Stranch would bother with a divided decision if would only punt the case to the court at large to be reversed. Maybe the terms of her payout weren't written strictly enough, haha...
Isn't it that she married her boss? In either case, she is now the top Google result for "Stranch." She's living the dream.
Ah, I missed her maiden name being right there in the firm title. This is why I do so poorly at Memory.
I've written about that as well - the War on Terror turned the country into an electronic panopticon that was instantly overwhelmed by its own input. I used to work for a company that couriered hard drives out to Sugar Grove Station (as well as other shady spots in the DC area). It would be one every other night. That was just in addition to whatever their normal shipments were, obviously.