Biden to announce vaccination mandate for all federal employees and contractors today

[fskimospy]

ACA was passed by Congress, totally different

District judges made the same claims of exceeding power.

 

[weblooker2021]

District judges made the same claims of exceeding power.

Biden mandate through OSHA is currently blocked by appeal court. This is not going to go anywhere either.

 

[K1052]

All of our legal experts here on executive power, were saying how president had all of this power. I am just reminding this same experts that might not be the case.

He does and SCOTUS is rather likely to eventually agree. Something isn't illegal just because you personally don't like it.

 

[weblooker2021]

He does and SCOTUS is rather likely to eventually agree. Something isn't illegal just because you personally don't like it.

I am sure you or one of our other experts will post it here as soon that happens.

 

[K1052]

I am sure you or one of our other experts will post it here as soon that happens.

The court has denied emergency relief each time it's been asked to grant it, even in the Maine case which was about not having a religious exemption. All indications are they think mandates are pretty legit.

 

[weblooker2021]

The court has denied emergency relief each time it's been asked to grant it, even in the Maine case which was about not having a religious exemption. All indications are they think mandates are pretty legit.

It's state vs federal issue. All the denial of relief that happened were as result of state issue order. We are not talking about state issue order here but instead we are talking about federal issue order.

 

[Zorba]

Every single judge that has ruled against the mandates is a Trump appointee. Considering how many of them were completely unqualified, and how they were all selected for ideological and party loyalty I am not going to much stock in their opinions.

The government has a shit ton of rules for federal contractors, including random drug testing policies, I seriously doubt these don't end up standing even with our jacked up supreme court.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Every single judge that has ruled against the mandates is a Trump appointee. Considering how many of them were completely unqualified, and how they were all selected for ideological and party loyalty I am not going to much stock in their opinions.

The government has a shit ton of rules for federal contractors, including random drug testing policies, I seriously doubt these don't end up standing even with our jacked up supreme court.

That's why non of the rulings have been based on law or the constitution by these jokers.

 

[Zorba]

Of all the good things that get filibustered in the Senate, why the hell did Dems let this come up for a vote? Was the whole point to get republicans on record as being against a mandate? Doesn't seem like that is worth the narrative now being pushed. Of course, some Trump judges will now point to it and say "see congress is against this" even though congress directly voting to not fund Trump's wall was completely ignored when he took money from other approved places to pay for it.

U.S. Senate passes Republican bill to overturn Biden vaccine mandate

The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved a Republican measure that would overturn President Joe Biden's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test mandate for private businesses, with two Democrats joining Republicans to back the initiative.

www.reuters.com

 

[weblooker2021]

That's why non of the rulings have been based on law or the constitution by these jokers.

So you are more qualified compare to judges to make the decision base on the current law and the constitution ?

 

[NWRMidnight]

Of all the good things that get filibustered in the Senate, why the hell did Dems let this come up for a vote? Was the whole point to get republicans on record as being against a mandate? Doesn't seem like that is worth the narrative now being pushed. Of course, some Trump judges will now point to it and say "see congress is against this" even though congress directly voting to not fund Trump's wall was completely ignored when he took money from other approved places to pay for it.

U.S. Senate passes Republican bill to overturn Biden vaccine mandate

The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved a Republican measure that would overturn President Joe Biden's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test mandate for private businesses, with two Democrats joining Republicans to back the initiative.

www.reuters.com

It passed 52 to 48, 2 democrats voted for it. It doesn't mean anything, as it won't make it thru the house, and Biden will veto it. It's sad that not only do we not have enough adults in this country to do the responsible thing, we have just as many non adults in the Senate/Congress.

 

[NWRMidnight]

So you are more qualified compare to judges to make the decision base on the current law and the constitution ?

You don't have to be qualified to see what's going on. I mean do you have to be a certified plumber to know you have a leaky faucet? Same thing here.

Go read the rulings.. please show me where any of them are based on law. Lets take the latest where the Georgia Judge stopped the Federal Contractors mandate country wide.. It has NOTHING To do with law, but was 100% in protecting companies and the burden of having to fire those that chose not to get vaccinated, that has nothing to do with the laws, or the constitution. If that really is a thing, every damn law on the books can be ruled unlawful, as they all put a burden on someone. Lets take the 6th circuit appeals (not sure if it has officially been ruled on, as I haven't been following it lately) but the last I heard, they where saying that they don't believe that congress intended to give OSHA such powers decades ago. Their job is NOT to interpret what Congress meant to do. Their job is to read the law that Congress passed, interpret the constitution, and current laws and apply them to the law or authorization congress passed as written. The 5th circuit said "they might have over stepped their authority".. guess what they might not have either.. They really don't know. They aren't interpretating anything, they are looking for an excuse to stop it by any means, and not ruling on constitutional law.. The opinions so far have not been based on the constitution or current laws.. Hell they don't even use set precedence.

 

[weblooker2021]

You don't have to be qualified to see what's going on. I mean do you have to be a certified plumber to know you have a leaky faucet? Same thing here.

Go read the rulings.. please show me where any of them are based on law. Lets take the latest where the Georgia Judge stopped the Federal Contractors mandate country wide.. It has NOTHING To do with law, but was 100% in protecting companies and the burden of having to fire those that chose not to get vaccinated, that has nothing to do with the laws, or the constitution. Lets take the 6th circuit appeals (not sure if it has officially been ruled on, as I haven't been following it lately) but the last I heard, they where saying that they don't believe that congress intended to give OSHA such powers decades ago. Their job is NOT to interpret what Congress meant to do. Their job is to read the law that Congress passed, interpret the constitution, and current laws and apply them to that new law or authorization they passed. They did not and are not doing that. The 5th circuit said "they might have over stepped their authority".. guess what they might not have either.. They really don't know. They aren't interpretating anything, they are looking for an excuse and not ruling on constitutional law.. The opinions so far have not been based on the constitution or current laws.. Hell they don't even use set precedence.

It's the court job to decide if congress intended to give such power to OSHA or any other Government organization. Courts been doing for a long time. Congress can easily fix this issue, pass an actual law mandating everyone get vaccinated and that will be the end of the conversation.

 

[fskimospy]

It's the court job to decide if congress intended to give such power to OSHA or any other Government organization. Courts been doing for a long time. Congress can easily fix this issue, pass an actual law mandating everyone get vaccinated and that will be the end of the conversation.

lol - no it would not. If you don't think the exact same district judges would then rule that law unconstitutional I don't know where you've been the last 10 years.

As you get higher up in the judiciary the crazy calms down somewhat, but remember back with the ACA you had judges ruling that Congress had created an unconstitutional burden that invalidated the entire act by forcing people to pay $0.

 

[NWRMidnight]

It's the court job to decide if congress intended to give such power to OSHA or any other Government organization. Courts been doing for a long time. Congress can easily fix this issue, pass an actual law mandating everyone get vaccinated and that will be the end of the conversation.

No, it is not the courts job to decide what congress intended. The courts (judges) job is to interpret the constitution and rule bases on the constitutionality of a law as written and passed on that language. IF the written law is to broad or vague, they can rule as such, but they do not have the authority to "rewrite" the law to mean something other than what the language says. It's Congress's job to write and pass the laws. It's the courts job to determine the constitutionality of the law and it's written language (as it's written). They do not get to change that language. They are not supposed to rule based on "this is what we think they meant". They can strike it down, or strike down portions of the written law (language), which means that congress will have to either draft new law with different language and pass it, or amend what the courts left standing of the law and remove/change the language the courts deemed unconstitutional, so it survives constitutional scrutiny.

This is basic Civics tough in high school. If you don't understand how the branches of government work (checks and balances), at least the basics, you sure as hell shouldn't be arguing about it.

 

[Zorba]

It passed 52 to 48, 2 democrats voted for it. It doesn't mean anything, as it won't make it thru the house, and Biden will veto it. It's sad that not only do we not have enough adults in this country to do the responsible thing, we have just as many non adults in the Senate/Congress.

Yeah. I want to know why the filibuster didn't apply to it. Is it really what @fskimospy says, the filibuster doesn't affect anything the republicans want, but everything the dems want.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Yeah. I want to know why the filibuster didn't apply to it. Is it really what @fskimospy says, the filibuster doesn't affect anything the republicans want, but everything the dems want.

I don't follow, or really understand what you are questioning.

Member's of either party have the choice to filibuster. it's not something that happens automatically. If a Senator or multiple Senators decides to filibuster, all it takes is 60 votes to end it. Considering the democrats already knew that it was going to pass because at least 2 democrats had already indicated they where going to vote for it, it would have been a filibuster not only against the republican's, but also their own party because of those two democrats, which would have been a big negative against the democrats who are in majority rule right now. That would not have been a very good look going into this next years elections. Or at least that is how I have see it.

 

[Sunburn74]

It passed 52 to 48, 2 democrats voted for it. It doesn't mean anything, as it won't make it thru the house, and Biden will veto it. It's sad that not only do we not have enough adults in this country to do the responsible thing, we have just as many non adults in the Senate/Congress.

Honestly we need to just kick manchin out of the party already.

 

[Zorba]

I don't follow, or really understand what you are questioning.

Member's of either party have the choice to filibuster. it's not something that happens automatically. If a Senator or multiple Senators decides to filibuster, all it takes is 60 votes to end it. Considering the democrats already knew that it was going to pass because at least 2 democrats had already indicated they where going to vote for it, it would have been a filibuster not only against the republican's, but also their own party because of those two democrats, which would have been a big negative against the democrats who are in majority rule right now. That would not have been a very good look going into this next years elections. Or at least that is how I have see it.

All it takes is someone saying "I'll filibuster" then it needs 60 votes to move forward. There would've never been another vote because there wouldn't have been 60 votes. But the article said that they couldn't filibuster this measure for some reason.

 

[NWRMidnight]

All it takes is someone saying "I'll filibuster" then it needs 60 votes to move forward. There would've never been another vote because there wouldn't have been 60 votes. But the article said that they couldn't filibuster this measure for some reason.

I looked it up, and it appears that the only party that gets to filibuster is the party NOT in power. That is why the democrats couldn't filibuster, and since the republican's are the ones who put it forward, they wouldn't filibuster their own agenda.

With that said, ANY senator in the minority party can filibuster, and as I already said, it takes a vote of 60 to end a filibuster, or end the floor discussion. That's why we have such a problem in this country with nothing getting done, and legislation not being passed. Because of the filibuster. It needs to go.

 

[Zorba]

I looked it up, and it appears that the only party that gets to filibuster is the party NOT in power. That is why the democrats couldn't filibuster, and since the republican's are the ones who put it forward, they wouldn't filibuster their own agenda.

With that said, ANY senator in the minority party can filibuster, and as I already said, it takes a vote of 60 to end a filibuster, or end the floor discussion. That's why we have such a problem in this country with nothing getting done, and legislation not being passed. Because of the filibuster. It needs to go.

Thanks for looking it up. The Filibuster is such a stupid process and needs to be scrapped.

 

[weblooker2021]

I looked it up, and it appears that the only party that gets to filibuster is the party NOT in power. That is why the democrats couldn't filibuster, and since the republican's are the ones who put it forward, they wouldn't filibuster their own agenda.

With that said, ANY senator in the minority party can filibuster, and as I already said, it takes a vote of 60 to end a filibuster, or end the floor discussion. That's why we have such a problem in this country with nothing getting done, and legislation not being passed. Because of the filibuster. It needs to go.

Are you sure you want filibuster to go? If there was no fillbuster, Republicans would been able to pass many bills that Democrats would absolutely hate same as when Democrats in power and Republican would hate them as well. What filbuster does is it give minority party power and that is good.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Are you sure you want filibuster to go? If there was no fillbuster, Republicans would been able to pass many bills that Democrats would absolutely hate same as when Democrats in power and Republican would hate them as well. What filbuster does is it give minority party power and that is good.

The filibuster was never part of the constitution, or a part of the founding father's vision. It's become the main reason nothing gets done legislation wise, and it's preventing us from moving forward as a nation. There is a reason a party is in the minority, the citizens don't want them in power, and they should not have the power to block the will of the citizens. That all the filibuster is, is a tool used to circumvent the will of the people. What you are afraid of is if the filibuster is removed, your party wouldn't be able to manipulate voting laws, and minority rule. Which is exactly what's been happening for decades.

Of course, if your party actually made policies for the good of the nation, it's citizens, and not for their party and power, things would be different.

 

[weblooker2021]

The filibuster was never part of the constitution, or a part of the founding father's vision. It's become the main reason nothing gets done legislation wise, and it's preventing us from moving forward as a nation. There is a reason a party is in the minority, the citizens don't want them in power, and they should not have the power to block the will of the citizens. That all the filibuster is, is a tool used to circumvent the will of the people. What you are afraid of is if the filibuster is removed, your party wouldn't be able to manipulate voting laws, and minority rule. Which is exactly what's been happening for decades.

Of course, if your party actually made policies for the good of the nation, it's citizens, and not for their party and power, things would be different.

So you would been okay with Republicans repealing ACA the first chances they had?

 

[NWRMidnight]

So you would been okay with Republicans repealing ACA the first chances they had?

hahaha.. That's a lamb argument. they've tried and tried and tried since, and failed and failed and failed.. all the way to the SCOTUS.. regardless it doesn't change what I said. They where not the party in power when the ACA was vote in. Trump even said that was the first thing they where going to do when he became President.. The Republican's had control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency, and still couldn't repeal the ACA.. And it wasn't because the filibuster.. They failed thru reconciliation, which they used to remove the filibuster from the table. They didn't succeed in repealing it with just a majority vote even when they had the majority. Guess what that demonstrates.. That we do not need the filibuster, and it's just worthless tool to obstruct legislation.

Thank you for showing us just how fucking stupid you are.