My Polka Dot Apron

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



January 16, 2022 12:55 am  #1


The limited reach of those recent SCOTUS decisions

Hmmmmmmm.  We didn't really GAIN anything, I guess.  Heaven forbid they should actually have to make a decision that MEANS anything to WE THE PEOPLE.  Bunch of rugrats, all of them.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/01/understanding_the_limited_reach_of_the_supreme_court_decisions_on_mandates.html

QUOTED MATERIAL FROM THE ABOVE LINK:

"It will surprise many people to learn that the Court did not address either the first or second issue in either case.  That is, the Supreme Court has not spoken about the federal government's authority to mandate vaccinations or Congress's power, if it has such an authority, to delegate the power to federal agencies.  Instead, in both cases, the Court limited itself to addressing the third issue only.  In NFIB v. OSHA, the court's answer is "no," and in Biden v. Missouri, the court's answer is "yes."

Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who has chosen a completely different path for Florida, clearly wanted the court to answer the first issue in the negative so he and other states' governors could have a free hand to do what's best for their citizens.  But both the majority and dissent in both decisions ignored the first two issues.  In effect, it was tacitly assumed by all nine that the answers to Issues No. 1 and No. 2 are that the government has the power to order Americans to get vaccinated and can farm that power out to federal agencies.

The tacit "yes" to Issue No. 1 raises an important question: is there any coercive power the federal government does not have?

The tacit "yes" to Issue No. 2 raises an equally important question: is there any legislative power granted to Congress by Article I of the federal Constitution that Congress cannot delegate to an executive agency?

Taken together, these two questions become, is there any coercive power that cannot be legally assigned to the president?"


A government which robs Peter to
pay Paul can always depend on
the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw
 

January 16, 2022 2:25 am  #2


Re: The limited reach of those recent SCOTUS decisions

Kavanaugh turns out to be not worth the effort the country put into "defending" him, Roberts has always been a nutjob (wherever the money is, he is), and those aren't even the 2 worst ones . . . a change in this system of "justice" is well worth a second, third and even a fourth look-see.  Certainly what we have now is not going to function for much longer.  People are tired of being scammed by these weak-willed idjuts.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/14/the-supreme-courts-ruling-on-vaccine-mandates-is-frighteningly-weak/

Just because they passed law school does not mean they're smart.  It means they can be smart-asses and get away with it.  We'll hafta see how much longer that line of bull lasts, as more cats keep getting out of the bag.


A government which robs Peter to
pay Paul can always depend on
the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw
     Thread Starter
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum