I listened to every Supreme Court oral argument one year. I learned a lot. Quite often the public has no idea what the issues being argued before the court are really about. They have their opinion but it often has no bearing on the reasons a case has come before the court. It's reasonable to be disappointed in a decision but it's also worth while to fine out more about whey things went the way they did. I'm for people listening to a year of arguments but it's often pretty dull work. I think the less power the Feds have to mandate and regulate peoples lives the better but I'm not against that power devolving down to the states. I've lost customers to the vaccine mandate debate, I'm for the mandate and I don't mind telling you that you are an anti-social jackass if you are against it (on a state and local level). My city has fared pretty well during the pandemic with it's mask mandates. I've got a long list of shit that I think would be better regulated on a state level that is interfered with by the feds. I'd like to see these things decided on a local level and I think people in Arkansas would have very different ideals of what to do but would be happier if they could do the same. Almost all that stuff has a costs and benefits that would be weighed differently by communities with diverse values. Two dangers constantly threaten our world, order and disorder.
I dunno, man. Let's talk about this. Supreme Court ruled in 1905 in Jacobson V. Massachusetts that states' health departments absolutely have the right to vax your ass. However, the majority opinion issued basically says you can't do this through OSHA: Which, if you look at the OSH Act, does not cover "workplace hazards regulated by another federal agency". So from a legal precedent standpoint it's pretty clear: if you want vaccines, you gotta come at it through the health department, not OSHA. Which means you gotta come at it through HHS, which means "people who breathe" not "people who work for a large employer." This is why "people who work indirectly for the HHS" was upheld. Letting OSHA decide what vaccines you get would be problematic. It gives them the legal clearance to mandate any hazard, not just work-related hazards. It gives them the legal clearance to address your habits outside of work, not just at work. The Biden administration went at this knowing it would be shut down, knowing the libruls would lose their minds, and knowing they lacked the juice to mandate vaccines for the whole goddamn country at every level. To me, this is trial lawyers screaming about McDonald's hot coffee.“Although Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational dangers, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly,” the court wrote in an unsigned opinion.
Yeah, in this case I actually agree with the reasoning behind this decision from the Supreme Court. The precedence is not there to allow OSHA to have the ability to mandate workplace vaccines, nor is this a strong legal argument IMO to change course on that precedence.
I mean, this happens already in essence anyway from what I understand. If your habits outside of work endanger others while you are at work we already police that. From my point of view showing up to work at the lumber yard or dock or office without a vaccine in your bloodstream is functionally the functionally same as showing up with an intoxicant in it. And we also have mandated vaccines for students all the way up into college. Of course there's no way any of this could be dealt with in a nuanced manner that acknowledges that we are in a once in a century health crisis that needs to be handled as such. We are committed to the longest slowest costliest most lethal path forward. I don't know why I bother engaging on any health related topics anymore. The open and cheerful mercenary nature we approach it with makes me too disheartened.It gives them the legal clearance to mandate any hazard, not just work-related hazards. It gives them the legal clearance to address your habits outside of work, not just at work.
How much interaction have you had with OSHA? I have found them to be phenomenally toothless. Who is "we" in this instance? Is it OSHA? Can you confirm that it is OSHA? Right... but this isn't the Court of OB or else all those professing religion of any kind would have long since been strung up by their dicks and flogged with razor wire. Still not OSHA. There is! State of emergency exists, emergency powers act in force, totally coulda had HHS mandate vaccines. Woulda been a different fight. Supreme Court still might have set a bad precedent. Would have been, uhm, "interesting." Might not have been heartening. So they took a flyer at "maybe they'll let OSHA do it, but prolly not." Again, who is this "we?" You vomited forth one word. I'm the one who drew you out into (semi) thoughtful discussion. I would say your engagement per se has been perfunctory at best. The worst thing about Fundies is they never stop being Fundies. They just reverse direction.I mean, this happens already in essence anyway from what I understand.
If your habits outside of work endanger others while you are at work we already police that.
From my point of view showing up to work at the lumber yard or dock or office without a vaccine in your bloodstream is functionally the functionally same as showing up with an intoxicant in it.
And we also have mandated vaccines for students all the way up into college.
Of course there's no way any of this could be dealt with in a nuanced manner that acknowledges that we are in a once in a century health crisis that needs to be handled as such.
We are committed to the longest slowest costliest most lethal path forward.
I don't know why I bother engaging on any health related topics anymore.
The open and cheerful mercenary nature we approach it with makes me too disheartened.