The Supreme Court today began hearing oral arguments for two major vaccine mandate cases: the illegal and unconstitutional OSHA mandate, and the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) vaccine mandate on healthcare workers.
This just means that the lawyers for each side get to present their cases to the Supreme Court Justices, and the Justices get to ask them questions.
As far as I know, it was not a televised event, but you could listen to the audio in YouTube livestreams. This one I was able to find is about 2 hours long and it doesn’t appear to include everything, but you can hear quite a bit of what was said on the matter:
What I heard was pretty much expected out of the liberals. They do not tend to argue about the practical feasibility and reality of things, they argue in the abstract, and in ideals.
Justice Breyer, one of three libs on the court, at around the 1:00 mark of the video above, exemplified this nonsensical and soundbite-driven manner of arguing when he said the following:
BREYER: “Are you still asking us to issue a stay, and stop this from taking effect? Are you asking us to issue a stay today, or tomorrow, or Sunday, or Monday or Tuesday? The reason I ask that, and we have some discretions, but there are three quarters of a million NEW CASES yesterday. New cases. Nearly three quarters. That’s ten times as many as when OSHA put this ruling. The Hospitals are today, yesterday, full–almost to the point of a maximum as they’ve ever been during this disease? Okay?
It’s difficult to convey how sanctimonious he was in writing, you really have to listen to it yourself.
But while his statement was heavy on moral outrage and indignation, it was as you can probably tell, light on facts.
Where is the evidence the hospitals are, as he says, “full”? It appears he just made that up.
What percentage of these 750,000 😱😱😱 NEW CASES 😱😱😱 were symptomatic?
Does it even matter to him? Or are 😱😱😱 NEW CASES 😱😱😱 the only thing that matters to him, since it’s the one metric he can abuse to make this seem like a dire and urgent situation.
Because he certainly can’t use deaths:
When listening to Breyer speak, my main takeaway was that he sounded more like a CNN anchor than a Supreme Court Justice. Now certainly, his voice itself sounds like what you’d expect out of a SCOTUS Justice, and that’s probably why he has so many people fooled. He looks and sounds the part. But the actual things he was saying–pure narrative.
And this is how these liberals work: it’s all narrative, and anything that distracts from the narrative is ignored or suppressed.
“Sir, are you really coming before this high court today demanding a stay of the OSHA vaccine mandate–I mean RULE–when Our Democracy™ has just recorded SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND NEW CASES IN ONE DAY?”
It’s A., missing the point, and B., loaded with false assumptions.
The question is not whether or not we should be concerned that there 750,000 new cases yesterday. That sucks and I wish there weren’t that many 😱😱😱 NEW CASES 😱😱😱.
The question is whether OSHA has the power to impose a vaccine mandate on 100 million people without Congress even passing a law to do so.
The question is also about whether that vaccine™ is even effective at preventing 😱😱😱 NEW CASES 😱😱😱, and the data shows it’s not.
In the liberals’ view, it’s as simple as this: Covid is bad and scary, therefore the government should have unlimited power.
But they don’t like to say that second part out loud, so all they do is just repeat over and over again COVID IS BAD AND SCARY!!!!! 😱😱😱
To Justice Breyer, the fact that there were SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND NEW CASES 😱😱😱 yesterday means it’s self evident that the OSHA vax mandate is necessary and legal.
What’s funny to me is that liberals were the ones who taught me that this is not a valid or persuasive way to argue.
It’s true. I learned this from liberals.
During the 2000s and early 2010s, when the War on Terror was in full swing, and there was a major debate over whether or not it was right to torture suspected terrorists, the conservatives would simply say TERRORISTS BAD!!! 9-11!!!! ‘MERICA!!!!
And the liberals were the ones who were asking, “Are these ‘enhanced interrogation’ methods actually legal? Are they morally acceptable?”
The question wasn’t whether or not Terrorists Are Bad, or whether 9-11 was a terrible tragedy. The question was, is this stuff legal?
We do not simply suspend the law because of terrorists, or a virus. It does not and should not work that way.
Hell, we’re already pretty much at the point of living under Permanent Crisis, which justifies Permanent Emergency Powers. That’s been the goal ever since 9-11, honestly. Our government goes from one crisis to the next, with each new crisis used as justification to seize new, expanded powers.
They saw after 9-11 how easy it was to start two wars, and pass the PATRIOT ACT which enabled mass surveillance of Americans. Then after the Financial Crisis of 2008, they used it as an excuse to start printing trillions of dollars and bail out the big banks. Covid-2019 has been the latest government excuse to carry out a massive power grab, and transfer billions and billions of dollars to the ultra-wealthy.
Americans live paycheck to paycheck, and our government governs from crisis to crisis. Anytime a crisis hits, boom: a flurry of new and massive bills are instantly passed by Congress, and nobody bats an eye, because CRISIS.
That’s what this Supreme Court Case is ultimately about, really, although I doubt the Supreme Court will address the bigger picture here.
Justice Breyer was not addressing the question of whether it was legal, or right, for the government to decree–without even passing a law–that Americans cannot have jobs unless they are vaccinated. He was simply reiterating the point that Covid-2019 is bad and scary.
Breyer wasn’t the only SCOTUS Justice who beclowned himself during today’s oral arguments. In fact, compared to Justice Sotomayor, Breyer looked like a straight-up genius. A round-up of some of her greatest hits from today:
A quick google search easily disproves the first two points. All you have to do is scroll up and look at the chart I included above.
And as for the 100k children she claims are hospitalized currently–not even close to true:
She’s either incredibly misinformed or she’s straight up lying.
As for the last point about OSHA having federal police power, this is demonstrably false. All you have to do is google “police power.” This is what the Wikipedia page has to say:
In United States constitutional law, police power is the capacity of the states to regulate behavior and enforce order within their territory for the betterment of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of their inhabitants. Police power is defined in each jurisdiction by the legislative body, which determines the public purposes that need to be served by legislation. Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the powers not delegated to the Federal Government are reserved to the states or to the people. This implies that the Federal Government does not possess all possible powers, because most of these are reserved to the State governments, and others are reserved to the people.
The Constitution never delegated “police power” to the Federal Government, therefore it’s a power reserved for the states.
Sotomayor wasn’t done:
Gee, I don’t know. Maybe because humans are humans, and machines are machines? That’s just my opinion, though.
A few more lowlights:
The takeaway here is that at least 3 of the 9 spots on the Supreme Court are filled by utter morons.
However, we already knew these 3 Justices would be voting to support the Biden mandate no matter what.
The good news is that it wasn’t the 6 other Justices making all these incredibly stupid and demonstrably false statements.
We know we have Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch on the right side.
The question is, how do Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett vote?
From what I’ve seen of Barrett’s comments today, she’s on the right side. Roberts, who knows. The guy is no longer reliable. He’s basically a liberal at this point. I’m going to assume he’s a lost cause here.
And so it will probably come down to Kavanaugh. I didn’t see anything about him today, so I have no idea how he’s leaning here.
Let’s hope Kavanaugh comes through. I have a feeling he’ll be the deciding vote on this enormously consequential question.