Supreme Court turns away challenge to vaccine mandate.

[pknopp]

So it would seem our Conservative court isn't so much. 0 for 2 in my book as I see it.


The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a legal challenge to the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for health-care workers at facilities that receive federal funds.

The justices rejected an appeal submitted by the plaintiffs, including ten mostly Republican-controlled states, after a lower court declined to hear their petition. The vast majority of health-care workers nationwide, 10.4 million, are subject to the mandate, although there are medical and religious exemptions. The case is Missouri v. Biden.

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Health-Care-Worker Vaccine Mandate

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a legal challenge to the Biden administration's vaccine mandate for health-care workers at facilities that receive federal funds.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Darkwind]

So it would seem our Conservative court isn't so much. 0 for 2 in my book as I see it.


The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a legal challenge to the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for health-care workers at facilities that receive federal funds.

The justices rejected an appeal submitted by the plaintiffs, including ten mostly Republican-controlled states, after a lower court declined to hear their petition. The vast majority of health-care workers nationwide, 10.4 million, are subject to the mandate, although there are medical and religious exemptions. The case is Missouri v. Biden.

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Health-Care-Worker Vaccine Mandate

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a legal challenge to the Biden administration's vaccine mandate for health-care workers at facilities that receive federal funds.

www.yahoo.com

Yahoo news is about as biased as it gets. However, did they state why the SCOTUS declined the case? Sometimes they don't give a reason, they just reject the appeal.

 

[pknopp]

Yahoo news is about as biased as it gets. However, did they state why the SCOTUS declined the case? Sometimes they don't give a reason, they just reject the appeal.

Yahoo news has nothing to do with the court turning away the case.

 

[Darkwind]

Yahoo news has nothing to do with the court turning away the case.

Yahoo news, like 98% of them, will place a spin on a story instead of just reporting the facts. Anytime a news outlet has to explain anything to its readers, they are lying to you and provide in bright neon lights, what they think of your intelligence.

So, do you have an answer to My question?

 

[pknopp]

Yahoo news, like 98% of them, will place a spin on a story instead of just reporting the facts. Anytime a news outlet has to explain anything to its readers, they are lying to you and provide in bright neon lights, what they think of your intelligence.

So, do you have an answer to My question?

The facts are the Supreme Court turned away the challenge to the mandate.

It doesn't matter why. They turned it down.

 

[blackhawk]

So I guess at least for today the Supreme Court is not illegitimate to the left.

 

[Darkwind]

The facts are the Supreme Court turned away the challenge to the mandate.

It doesn't matter why. They turned it down.

It does matter why. The reason why speaks directly to the concept of law. Are they interpreting the law as to its original intent, or are they making it up again.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The facts are the Supreme Court turned away the challenge to the mandate.

It doesn't matter why. They turned it down.

The unread article does not say, but talks about a similar Nov 2021 ruling. Kavanaugh and Roberts...what a disappointment. We know Roberts is a Lolita Island visitor

 

[pknopp]

The unread article does not say, but talks about a similar Nov 2021 ruling. Kavanaugh and Roberts...what a disappointment. We know Roberts is a Lolita Island visitor

The earlier ruling was over "do no harm". Seems to me we have had post after post here stating that the vaccine does do harm.

 

[TNHarley]

This is bullshit. This is something they should have settled. Forcing people to undergo medical jabs that got fast tracked through the FDA? Are you fucking kidding me?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The facts are the Supreme Court turned away the challenge to the mandate.

It doesn't matter why. They turned it down.

It does matter why. There are rules in place for what cases the SCOTUS takes

 

[pknopp]

It does matter why. There are rules in place for what cases the SCOTUS takes

The rules are simply that 4 justices must vote to take it.

 

[1srelluc]

So it would seem our Conservative court isn't so much. 0 for 2 in my book as I see it.

OK, fair enough but the next time your ilk gets 6-3 decision against you I don't want to hear you people whining.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is bullshit. This is something they should have settled. Forcing people to undergo medical jabs that got fast tracked through the FDA? Are you fucking kidding me?

We had more freedom under the British

 

[Harpy Eagle]

OK, fair enough but the next time your ilk gets 6-3 decision against you I don't want to hear you people whining.

What ilk is that?

 

[1srelluc]

What ilk is that?

Assholes?

 

[TheGreatSatan]

This is bullshit. This is something they should have settled. Forcing people to undergo medical jabs that got fast tracked through the FDA? Are you fucking kidding me?

Every Democrats need to wear mask at all times and get al least 2 jabs a year.

 

[pknopp]

OK, fair enough but the next time your ilk gets 6-3 decision against you I don't want to hear you people whining.

Bite me. My ilk? I didn't complain about any of last year's major rulings outside of the one that went against the Native Americans.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The rules are simply that 4 justices must vote to take it.

And that is the problem.

They will not hear every case, regardless of how good the reason is to hear it.

They can only Grant certiorari to so many cases of year.

 

[pknopp]

And that is the problem.

They will not hear every case, regardless of how good the reason is to hear it.

They can only Grant certiorari to so many cases of year.

One would think a case that is directly related to our rights would qualify.