Supreme Court blocks OSHA vaccine mandate for private companies

[Artymoon]

Well done.

Supreme Court blocks Biden Covid vaccine mandate for businesses, allows health-care worker rule

The Supreme Court ruled against the Biden administration's rule for OSHA, saying it did not have the power to require vaccination for millions of Americans.

www.cnbc.com

Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said during arguments that he thinks it’s hard to argue that the 1970 law governing OSHA “gives free reign to the agencies to enact such broad regulation.”

 

[Fletch]

They got it right. Good for them.

 

[gbg3]

Yes, it went as many expected, a split decision on the two different issues.
Really good news about the OSHA 100+ employee ruling!!!!!

 

[Razoo]

Corporations or any employer should not be held responsible for insuring employees are vaccinated or wear masks under a government mandate.

Kind of a "show up at your own risk" policy.

However when employers run out of employees due to pandemic COVID 19 situations at that point the corporations should consider setting forth their own mandates when employees cannot be located to
clock in......maybe the corporations could file bankruptcy.

 

[noonereal]

They got it right. Good for them.

Have you read the law?

This was a clear cut as clear as could be and still the court ruled politically/ideologically.

Democracy is dead. Trumpsim killed it.

The great experiment is over.

 

[noonereal]

Yes, it went as many expected, a split decision on the two different issues.
Really good news about the OSHA 100+ employee ruling!!!!!

Not to those that love America and the rule of law.

 

[Roadvirus]

Well done.

Supreme Court blocks Biden Covid vaccine mandate for businesses, allows health-care worker rule

The Supreme Court ruled against the Biden administration's rule for OSHA, saying it did not have the power to require vaccination for millions of Americans.

www.cnbc.com

Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said during arguments that he thinks it’s hard to argue that the 1970 law governing OSHA “gives free reign to the agencies to enact such broad regulation.”

Good deal!

 

[Common Sense 1]

Have you read the law?

This was a clear cut as clear as could be and still the court ruled politically/ideologically.

Democracy is dead. Trumpsim killed it.

The great experiment is over.

Oh my...... the end of a great experiment!
So damn silly. The court ruled correctly.
Biden screwed up again!

 

[noonereal]

Oh my...... the end of a great experiment!
So damn silly. The court ruled correctly.
Biden screwed up again!

A 2nd grader could read the law and know this was a political/ideological decision.

You never read the law. Did you ever read much of anything?

 

[Roadvirus]

Not to those that love America and the rule of law.

What rule of law? Biden overstepped his boundaries.

 

[Lloyd Christmas]

Exactly what I expected from Conservative hacks, who were bought and paid for and put into the court by the businesses they do nothing but protect.

And then the moron right has the nerve to blame Biden for his handling of pandemic when it is them that are the ones keeping it going.

 

[vesper]

A good day for protecting the employment of a lot of people in the private sector.

 

[noonereal]

What rule of law? Biden overstepped his boundaries.

Read the damned statue passed by Congress.

This is blatant court activism, just as Trump wanted.

This ruling had nothing to do with law.

 

[Acadia]

Yes, it went as many expected, a split decision on the two different issues.
Really good news about the OSHA 100+ employee ruling!!!!!

And we now remove any doubt about how diversity hires don't belong on the Supreme Court.

 

[NatMorton]

I believe this decision doesn't strike it down, but it's heading that way. This decision reimplemented the stay based on the court's perceived likelihood of the law later being found unconstitutional.

 

[NatMorton]

Read the damned statue passed by Congress.

This is blatant court activism, just as Trump wanted.

This ruling had nothing to do with law.

This is not activism. It's a reasonable interpretation of the legislative intent behind the concept of "grave danger." That is the standard required for OSHA to act in this way.

 

[noonereal]

This is not activism. It's a reasonable interpretation of the legislative intent behind the concept of "grave danger." That is the standard required for OSHA to act in this way.

You have no ****in clue what the statute says. This is activism.

I am familiar with no other decision as brazen. This ruling is treasonous.

 

[NatMorton]

You have no ****in clue what the statute says. This is activism.

I am familiar with no other decision as brazen. This ruling is treasonous.

Cool your jets and show some maturity.

Emphasis added

Emergency Temporary Standards

Under certain limited conditions, OSHA is authorized to set emergency temporary standards that take effect immediately and are in effect until superseded by a permanent standard. OSHA must determine that workers are in grave danger due to exposure to toxic substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful or to new hazards and that an emergency standard is needed to protect them. Then, OSHA publishes the emergency temporary standard in the Federal Register, where it also serves as a proposed permanent standard. It is then subject to the usual procedure for adopting a permanent standard except that a final ruling should be made within six months. The validity of an emergency temporary standard may be challenged in an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals.

Source: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standards-development

 

[Common Sense 1]

You have no ****in clue what the statute says. This is activism.

I am familiar with no other decision as brazen. This ruling is treasonous.

It's over just relax...... Maybe time for a adult beverage?

 

[Common Sense 1]

Cool your jets and show some maturity.

Emphasis added


Source: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standards-development

Nice post!! Thanks

 

[NWRatCon]

What rule of law? Biden overstepped his boundaries.

You don't have a ****ing clue what the law says, how the government operates, or the implications of the decision, only that "your side" won. "How eager they are to bring on their own destruction." Stupidity will have its day in the sun.

 

[NatMorton]

You don't have a ****ing clue what the law says, how the government operates, or the implications of the decision, only that "your side" won. "How eager they are to bring on their own destruction." Stupidity will have its day in the sun.

Roadvirus is right and you are wrong. Biden has overstepped his boundaries with his vaccine mandate, just like he did trying to extend the eviction moratorium.

Call it a good day for the rule of law.

 

[CLAX1911]

Corporations or any employer should not be held responsible for insuring employees are vaccinated or wear masks under a government mandate.

Kind of a "show up at your own risk" policy.

However when employers run out of employees due to pandemic COVID 19 situations at that point the corporations should consider setting forth their own mandates when employees cannot be located to
clock in......maybe the corporations could file bankruptcy.

Insurance isn't concerned. When the government declares something a pandemic treatment of it is covered by the federal government. So in home reality they're loving this and they couldn't care less.

Companies don't have much to worry about because they typically don't employ 70-year-olds are greater so the effect of the pandemic on their staff is probably minimal at best.

 

[Michael Cole]

Insurance isn't concerned. When the government declares something a pandemic treatment of it is covered by the federal government. So in home reality they're loving this and they couldn't care less.

Companies don't have much to worry about because they typically don't employ 70-year-olds are greater so the effect of the pandemic on their staff is probably minimal at best.

Just make shit up. You are so wrong.

A 20 year old got sent home Tuesday at my company because his brother tested positive. Five day quarantine.

Don't let reality get in the way of your befuddled imagination, though.

 

[CLAX1911]

Just make shit up. You are so wrong.

Just barking out catchphrases means nothing.

A 20 year old got sent home Tuesday at my company because his brother tested positive. Five day quarantine.

I remember getting sent home from a job once because I was sick back in 2004. And several times after that do you think this just started last year? I remember when I was working for an onshore company and four people were out that was in 2009.

So that sort of thing happened before covid I know that might be hard to believe.

Don't let reality get in the way of your befuddled imagination, though.

Reality that when people get sick they go home? Why do you think this just started?

Don't think it through just squawk that I'm wrong and pretend like you made an argument.