COVID Vaccine Mandate: Under Fire and SCOTUS May Have the Final Say-So

 

“I should have gotten the vaccine” (Last words)

(Father of 5 dies in Las Vegas of COVID)

From TIME – this “timely” article: re Federal vaccine mandate at the USSC for ruling with this headline – key part follows:

“The Enormous Stakes of Biden's Vaccine Mandates at the Supreme Court”

Key Part:

Why the federal government has less power than states regarding vaccine mandates: Private companies, universities, states, and local governments have all issued vaccine mandates over the past year. While many of these mandates have been challenged in lower courts, judges for the most part have supported the authority of these institutions to require vaccination. Why is that – best example:

Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law who specializes in vaccine policy wherein she says: “Courts are going to allow states more freedom to regulate public health, because under our Constitution they don’t need to have that specific power to ac – that is states have whatever power is not expressly taken from them. But the federal government only has a power expressly given to it.”

This is where the Biden Administration has run into trouble. While many public health and legal scholars say that the Administration is on solid ground, its requirements have been challenged by business interests, religious groups, and Republican-led states arguing that the federal government has overreached by issuing policies that were not explicitly authorized by Congress.

Plus: The concept that federal agencies need Congressional approval to create significant regulations is known as the “major questions doctrine.” In previous Supreme Court decisions, justices have used this idea to limit agencies’ power when the agency takes an action of major “economic and political significance.”

But experts agree the doctrine is not very well defined. The Court has not explained what counts as “economic and political significance or how clear Congress’ instructions must be for a federal agency to be acting appropriately.” That then leaves lots of room for this Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority to interpret the doctrine as they see fit.

Finally this critical point from Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University, says he thinks the major questions doctrine is “bogus,” adding: “The courts have long permitted regulatory authorities to set standards that have far reaching political and economic consequences.”

Related article – the same topic here from USA TODAY.

My 2 Cents: There are many other stories just like the man pictured above - all regretted not getting the vaccination before their last breath.

So, I wonder why the USSC 1905 case of Jacobson v. MA is not cited when the smallpox pandemic was hitting hard just like now with this pandemic? They ruled 7-2 back then that the mandate was necessary for “public health and was reasonable” – so, why not now?

Maybe the two pandemics are not the same but to me a layman – I don’t think so. Maybe they do match – I mean we now have nearly 840,000 CoVID deaths and most of the ICU’s are filled with anti-vaxxers – all the while needy patients have no space or place to go for their valid treatment. That to me seems reasonable enough to allow the mandate to survive and help country beat this horrible virus right now.

Thanks for stopping by.