Cant follow?
You made a claim that the DOJ was not following the constitution.
I made a statement that the DOJ did not do anything unconstitutional with its opinion and asked how you think they violated it.
You claimed they violated it by making a law.
I just pointed out they made no such move, there is nothing new in the opinion. It essentially states that employers may require the covid vaccination as a condition of employment - a right of association that has ALWAYS and continues to exist for both employees and employers. There does not need to be a law for employers to chose not to hire you because you did not take a vaccination, it is their right to dispense their property as they see fit to include paying you to do a job.
What you are looking for is a law that infringes upon that individuals right, the employer, to dispense their private property to pay you even if they do not want unvaccinated people employed at their business. Such a law does not, to my knowledge, exist. Therefore, should the DOJ have opined otherwise, it would then have been against the constitution, not the other way around as you claim.