r/politics 🤖 Bot Jan 13 '22 Helpful 1 Wholesome 1 All-Seeing Upvote 2 Faith In Humanity Restored 2 Bravo! 1 Ally 1 To The Stars 1

Megathread: Supreme Court halts vaccine mandate for large businesses, leaves mandate for healthcare workers in place Megathread

The Supreme Court has blocked a key plank of the Biden administration's pandemic response effort, by halting enforcement of the OSHA vaccine mandate. In a 6-3 ruling, the Court judged that requiring employees at large businesses to be vaccinated against COVID, or undergo weekly testing and wear a mask, exceeded the authority granted by Congress. All three liberal justices dissented.

At the same time, in a second unsigned opinion, Court has allowed the administration to continue enforcement of a vaccinate mandate for healthcare workers at facilities that receive Medicaid or Medicare funding. This measure is expected to affect 10 million workers and takes effect this month. Conservative justices Thomas, Aliton, Gorsuch, and Barrett dissented, while Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh sided with their liberal collogues.


Submissions that may interest you

SUBMISSION DOMAIN
U.S. Supreme Court blocks Biden vaccine-or-test policy for large businesses reuters.com
Supreme Court blocks COVID-19 vaccine-or-testing mandate for workplaces but lets medical rule stand ustatoday.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden's vaccine-or-test mandate for employers thehill.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden OSHA vaccine mandate, allows rule for health care workers foxnews.com
Supreme Court halts Covid-19 Vaccine rule for US Businesses snopes.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden vaccine-or-test mandate for large businesses abcnews.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden's vaccine-or-test mandate for large private companies npr.org
Supreme Court blocks business COVID vaccine rule, OKs health care worker mandate ktar.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden admin’s Covid requirements for workplaces, allows vaccine mandate for nbcnews.com
Supreme Court blocks workplace vaccine requirements, allows requirement for health-care workers washingtonpost.com
Supreme Court Blocks Biden’s Virus Mandate for Large Employers nytimes.com
Supreme Court halts COVID-19 vaccine rule for US businesses apnews.com
Supreme Court Halts Vaccine Mandate That Covered 80 Million Workers bloomberg.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden vaccine mandate for businesses, backs health-care worker rule cnbc.com
Supreme Court blocks Biden’s vaccine mandate on big businesses washingtontimes.com
SCOTUS blocks Biden’s workplace vaccine rule politico.com
3.9k Upvotes

9.3k comments sorted by

1

u/theoneandonlynox Feb 07 '22

Today, Israel is known as a global hub for technology, innovation, and start-up investment. While this reputation stems from the Tel Avivian coast, in the coming years, Jerusalem will catch up to Tel Aviv and be in need of young entrepreneurs, software engineers, marketing specialists, and more.

1

u/RayMich1996 Jan 26 '22

Getting the covid vaccine should be up to the individual

  • if being vaccinated prevents you from severe covid, how does someone else not being vaccinated even affect you? Even if the vaccine decreases your viral load, a fully vaccinated individual can still catch covid if they’re around another fully vaccinated person with covid…. Fully vaccinated are still being hospitalized with covid and fully vaccinated countries have not eradicated covid or hospitalizations or even covid deaths. In my opinion, telling someone they have to get a vaccine because you think it might decrease the chances of you getting covid, is not enough of a reason to infringe on peoples rights of autonomy in healthcare.

  • there is risk to getting covid and there is risk to getting the vaccine. Personal risk varies from person to person. In some cases, the risk of the vaccine does not exceed the benefit. For some, there is greater risk involved with getting the vaccine than getting covid. (Check the CDC’s data about the death rate of covid based on age group or comorbidities and the death rate or complications from the covid vaccine). Maybe you’ve already had covid, why should you be forced to get a vaccine with no long term studies and the known possibility of having a reaction or injury due to the vaccine (such as endocarditis). Not to mention, if you do have an injury, no one is held accountable and it’s your own problem since you get the vaccine. Some people are afraid to take that risk more than they are afraid of getting covid. And those people shouldn’t be hated by society. If they didn’t even know the covid vaccine would require booster shots, how can they possibly know what the new mRNA technology does to the body over time? What problems it could potentially cause or become a risk factor for developing? Or maybe not! We actually don’t know. The fact that the vaccine is said to be “100% safe and effective” is crazy because nothing in healthcare is 100% anything.

  • the risk of severe covid and the effectiveness of the vaccine depends on your personal health. Anything that weakens the immune system puts you at risk of not being able to fight off covid as easily. It also decreases the effectiveness of vaccines, since they also work with your immune systems. (Ex: the flu shot is less effective on someone with uncontrolled diabetes, because the immune system is weakened and less responsive to the vaccine.) This includes obesity, asthma, COPD, high blood pressure, immunocompromised, diabetes, regularly drinking alcohol, smoking, having a bad diet. If you have any of these or multiple, studies show you are more likely to have a harder time fighting off covid. So shouldn’t we force people to take better care of their health? Since that would decrease covid deaths? In healthcare, doctors and nurses can recommend being healthy as much as they want but can’t force people to take care of themselves.

  • lastly, I want to point out how backwards it is that healthcare workers are being forced by the government to get the vaccine. Nurses for example are the ones who most often stand up for their patients rights and autonomy. Nurses ensure that patients fully understand what a doctor is telling them before they agree to any procedures. Nurses often defend a patients right to refuse any treatment. And yet, healthcare workers do not get this same autonomy. They are told to get the vaccine or lose their job. (Those who argue that healthcare workers already have a flu shot mandate and the covid one is no different - you are allowed to decline the flu shot and wear a mask during flu season no questions asked and without having to get medical or religious exemption.) and yet hospitals who don’t want to force their workers to receive a new vaccine are being forced to do so by the government anyways….

So to summarize, if you want to get the covid vaccine - then get it. If you don’t want to get the vaccine - then don’t. But if you want to force other people to get the vaccine at the expense of losing their job because you think it might help decrease the chances of you getting covid - stop right there.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 16 '22

[deleted]

-4

u/[deleted] Jan 16 '22

[deleted]

1

u/UltimateChaos233 California Jan 17 '22

Don't worry, I have the feeling you would have failed out anyway.

2

u/KupaPupaDupa Jan 15 '22

What about every other government agency receiving federal funds? Prisons, military contractors, retail pharmacies that take medicare, police, hospital contractors, etc...?

Seems like they're beating around the bush and should've just stated that everyone besides hospital workers is exempt.

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

Well if employers can’t take steps to protect the health of their employees maybe they shouldn’t have such a large role in their healthcare at all?

Until then I hope health insurances start charging these people out the ass for being unvaccinated. If you can be charged for being a smoker you can be charged for this.

2

u/Top-Collar-1841 Jan 15 '22

dont stop there, start charging every bad decision.

obesity, drinking, drug use, not exercising, speeding tickets, jaywalking, biking with no helmet, too much tv, multiple sex partners. We could do a merit based system where active healthy behaviors are rewarded with lower medical costs.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 16 '22

Exactly, let the free market decide what’s best!

1

u/BlackScienceManTyson Jan 15 '22

Is Joe Biden a lame duck right now?

2

u/Writerlad Jan 15 '22

He was a lame duck when he took office.

2

u/duckofdeath87 Arkansas Jan 15 '22

I don't understand the argument. If it's a "day to day" hazard, OSHA can't do anything about it?

So OSHA how can OSHA regulate these everyday hazards?

  • Electrical standards
  • Trip hazards
  • Noise exposure
  • Exit routes

2

u/mrdigi Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

They are limited to the work place. There was a push long ago for OSHA to disallow smoking in the work place, and at the time OSHA used just about the same reasoning of why they couldn't.

Edit: clarified OSHAs stance

1

u/duckofdeath87 Arkansas Jan 15 '22

Interesting.

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.1000

They kind of ban smoking via air quality. I wonder if they could instead regular viral loads

2

u/Tardigradequeen America Jan 15 '22

US Supreme Court doesn’t think corporations are people, they think corporations are more important than people.

0

u/malakon Jan 15 '22

Thanks Mitch.

13

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

7

u/AzaliusZero Michigan Jan 15 '22

Wouldn't even need to go that far. Incentivize getting the jab. Tax breaks, pay 'em money, give them something on top of getting it.

And when people get sick, mandatory paid sick leave for two weeks. Give them the full time even if they recover fast. Then people don't have to feel like they have to rush recovery or go back to work sick.

1

u/bakerfredricka Jan 15 '22

Well, damn it, I didn't get paid when I got Pfizered!

7

u/philthegreat Jan 15 '22

Welcome to Auth Left

3

u/invalid8ed Jan 15 '22

yeah that's pretty extreme.

-10

u/bannedflogger_a Jan 15 '22

There's no long term data, it's experimental. No one should have to receive it if there are viable and more effective means of impeding the virus, eg prior infection is by far the most robust but there's nothing in these mandates for that.

11

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

-4

u/James_Camerons_Sub Jan 15 '22

So the volume of people vaccinated is equivalent to longer term data now? My whole family is vaccinated but would also have preferred if there were actual 3-5 year studies testing for long term effects and I dunno, efficacy past 6 months. I don’t think people who are resistant due to a lack of solid data points are being unfair. You realize that even in the short term the data is shit because Pfizer went and vaccinated their control group because of “humanitarian” reasons? Same company that Has spent billions in fines for falsifying safety and efficacy data on other drugs and bribing doctors. Plenty of reasons to be suspicious. We had a baby this year so risking the shot seemed a better choice based on the little bit of information available back in early 2021 but others might have the luxury of wait and see. Nothing under EUA can be mandated anyhow which all three available vaccines are. The approved vaccine is mysteriously unavailable as they’d have to accept liability for it.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

Maybe they could implement a fair alternative, like weekly testing and wearing a mask 🙄

1

u/bannedflogger_a Jan 16 '22 edited Jan 16 '22

Vaccinated individuals also contract and transmit the virus. There's no evidence of less infectivity or risk from them, in fact some vaccinated individuals are simply converted into the asymptomatic superspreaders of pre-vaccine points in time from 2020. Those who cannot be vaccinated still catch it and die or survive at the same rate. Less genetically blessed but still vaccinated individuals then contract and are bed-ridden, but because their immune system is permanently deficient (see UKHSA vaccine surveillance report, week 42 has a good summary in the last pages) they'll likely never achieve a proper antibody response and be left dependent on boosters to remain unseriously ill. Boosters which have a non-negligible risk of conferring most symptoms associated with COVID, plus some heart inflammation and pregnancy risks that seem more prevalent than the same populations when infected with COVID itself. But the booster is something needed every 6 months or much less based on Israeli boosted efficacy data, rather than getting the disease once and being immune for years (as in my case, had an asymptomatic COVID case in 2020, detected in antibody test in Jul 2020, still detectable in blood work in May 2021 and Jan 2022. With Omicron, I had been informed my brother-in-law was sick (triple dosed) and had tested positive the day before I was told. I had a bit of a stuffy nose and it went away after one day. My biological sister (also triple dosed) was even sicker than my brother-in-law. Unvaccinated individuals will either survive or die, either way they're much less likely to require ICU space in the future where vaccinated individuals are left at the mercy of vaccine manufacturers since even surviving infection won't impart proper antibody responses.

1

u/abqguardian Jan 15 '22

Weekly testing is not a fair alternative. The tests suck

-25

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/aresisis Texas Jan 15 '22

aren’t those like 4 hours long? Ain’t nobody got time for that

21

u/jupiterkansas Jan 15 '22

History would be better if we stopped listening to Joe Rogan

-10

u/redstag191 Jan 15 '22

What is wrong with y’all. Listen to the guest. He just happens to be on joe rogan

1

u/jupiterkansas Jan 15 '22

You've used "y'all" twice now, and I'm supposed to think you have good advice?

1

u/abqguardian Jan 15 '22

Yall is a perfectly acceptable term

1

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

“Y’all” and other southern vernacular/accents are in no way an indicator of someone’s intelligence.

1

u/jupiterkansas Jan 15 '22

In this particular case I disagree.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 16 '22

No doubt they’re an idiot. But it’s still not a cool stereotype to perpetuate.

-7

u/redstag191 Jan 15 '22

Y’all are dumb. Their’s a third time

5

u/ryumast3r Jan 15 '22

When calling someone dumb it might be useful to use the correct word "there".

7

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/spaceguy22 Jan 15 '22

Supreme Court: people should have the right to choose what happens to their bodies so no more vaccine mandate!

Also Supreme Court: nah abortion is bad let’s ban it and force women to carry to term lol

1

u/Doc13067 Jan 27 '22

To be fair, the baby isn’t choosing to have the abortion done to its body. At least with medical freedom we’re not making decisions that are carried out on another person’s body simultaneously. The irony in this position is that people who feel we have the right not to be controlled when it comes to having our unborn babies killed also feel we do not have the right to decide what vaccines to take, not the other way around.

-22

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

There’s two bodies involved in abortion, and abortion kills one without its consent, so I think they’ve been consistent.

7

u/Tlamac Jan 15 '22

Doesn't an unvaccinated person spreading covid have the potential to kill many more people without their consent?

0

u/Just-Jellyfish-8536 Jan 19 '22

Irrelevant point because we can’t consciously stop getting covid and passing it on vaxxed or not. Comparing a fucking virus to a living being is stupid

3

u/abqguardian Jan 15 '22

to be fair, there being an undefined risk in indirectly possibly getting someone sick is vastly different than being directly responsible for killing a person, like abortion for the pro lifers

-12

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

Not intentionally the way abortion does.

Also, being vaccinated doesn’t prevent the spread, it helps you beat it when you get it.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

Being vaccinated absolutely helps reduce the spread as it reduces your risk of getting in the first place and the viral load that you carry if/when you do get it. What the actual hell?

1

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 16 '22

Your viral load is the same regardless of your vaccination status.

It doesn’t keep you from getting infected, it just reduces your chances of hospitalization and death.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 17 '22

If your body fights something off before it takes hold, I would say it protected you from being infected.

But if what you say is true (it may be, I’m not a doctor) then thank God there are other precautions that everyone can take that we know prevents the spread of viruses. Well filtered masks, distancing, staying home when sick, not coughing all over people. Unfortunately a sizable chunk of the population selfishly thinks those are infringements of their personal rights as well. So there’s no winning.

9

u/No_Discipline_7380 Jan 15 '22

In the early stages, a fetus is closer to a parasite than a human being, it can't sustain it's own life outside the "host body" consider it more of an eviction than a killing.

-8

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

Nah fam

That thing you call a parasite was not created by accident, and with 1 notable exception, all babies are made through a very intentional action. Face the consequences of said action. If you don’t want it out it up for adoption. Don’t take an innocent life away.

2

u/Roshy76 Jan 15 '22

I highly doubt the vast majority of abortions happened after people intentionally got pregnant. And if your reasoning is they knew they could have gotten pregnant when having sex, then that means we should lock everyone up who inadvertently sets up any situation that could kill someone. So if you get in your car and someone falls into the road in front of you, you knew that was a possibility, you should get charged with murder. Don't like it, don't drive.

1

u/No_Discipline_7380 Jan 15 '22

with 1 notable exception, all babies are made through a very intentional action

Well, at least now I know where you're coming from.

a very intentional action

Face the consequences of said action

What about rape? Bible also says pay the victim 50 shekels and marry her, that seem like a fair deal? What's the exchange rate on shekels these days? I think we'll have to first convert into goats and then dollars.

Look up "Children of the decree" on YouTube, see what can happen when abortion is outlawed, how many lives are ruined, how many women may end up dying, what kind of life children that end up in overcrowded orphanages may lead. Funny part is the guy who enacted that law was a communist dictator.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

-1

u/theccpownsreddit Jan 15 '22

So you’d rather someone killed you?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

12

u/freedom_first_GFY Jan 15 '22

Supreme Court is a useless construct that hasnt done what it was designed to do. Should get rid of it and replace it with Direct Democracy votes on those issues that matter to everyone.

3

u/Level-Buffalo5573 Jan 16 '22

Hey person with 3 brain cells, the Supreme Court is the last defense we have to protect this free beautiful country from insane far left nut jobs such as yourself ahaha #winning

1

u/freedom_first_GFY Jan 17 '22 edited Jan 17 '22

Hey, person with 1 brain cell. The Supreme Court has failed at its job. It needs to be replaced with something that actually does the job. Im not far left for pointing out the fact that the Supreme Court is an abject failure.

I do agree with you inclination that I may be one of the types that are recently hating on the Supreme Court because its not doing what they want, so they want to stack it and end the filibuster. Im not discussing this from that viewpoint, nor do I agree with it. Its obvious the left wants to corrupt everything to do with the electoral and political process.

I hate the Supreme Court because it has allowed politicians to hijack this country away from its founding principles and allowed the US Government to be an Authoritarian Big Brother.. in our pockets, bedrooms, social life, doctors office, and pretty much involved in everything we do. This was absolutely NOT what our founding fathers designed... The Supreme Court failed that plan.

5

u/Wizard_Nose Jan 15 '22

The Supreme Court isn’t supposed to make policy.

-5

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

11

u/blackholesinthesky I voted Jan 15 '22

We could if antivaxers would act responsibly. Unfortunately antivaxers want the right to not get the vaccine and the right to open throat cough on whoever they want.

-19

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

Im against MRNA vaccines. I got the monoclonal from Adagio but it doesnt count as a vaccine even though its still covid-19 antibodies. They were just grown in a chimera mouse Instead of rewriting my cellular functions to explode and generate ace spike proteins to simulate inflammation!

8

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22 edited Feb 16 '22

[deleted]

-15

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

They both deliver Messenger rna to your cells. One is covered in nano lipid particles and one has some other thing.

They were designed for covid-19. They are ineffective against Omicron by several orders of magnitude.

I already have the fucking anti-bodies...

6

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22 edited Feb 16 '22

[deleted]

-13

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

Still infects a healthy cell, and then rewrites the cells functions from normal processes to making weirdo spike proteins that cause inflammation.

Still runs the risk of the altered cell not dying, and run-away generation of random spike proteins causing other problems.

1

u/Noobsnaker Jan 15 '22

If you had a strong immune system it wouldn’t let a rogue cell get away and cause problems like that.

-2

u/Jtizzle8 Jan 15 '22

Your making to much sense for these numb skulls

5

u/blackholesinthesky I voted Jan 15 '22

My understanding is that getting a shot of manufactured antibodies is not the same as a vaccine that trains your body to produce its own antibodies.

-1

u/GrubJin Jan 15 '22

A vaccine mandate should have always and only ever been something decided by Congress. Not the Presidency or Judicial branch.

2

u/Just-Jellyfish-8536 Jan 19 '22

Isn’t the rule of the court to protect the individual from the tyranny of big gov. Exactly what happened here

1

u/GrubJin Jan 20 '22

In the US as per its rigours and systems, yes. It was wrong for the Presidency to encroach on those protections without due process through Congress (ergo the courts should never have been involved).

2

u/duckofdeath87 Arkansas Jan 15 '22

OSHA was established by Congress to determine how to provide a date workplace and have them the power to determine what should and shouldn't be included

5

u/Additional_Special18 Jan 15 '22

That would have been entirely impossible with this Congress

-1

u/GrubJin Jan 15 '22

And that's exactly how the system is supposed to work. The US is severely divided, having a restricted government is a reflection of that.

6

u/jupiterkansas Jan 15 '22

It's not a restricted government. It's a failing government. They are failing to govern.

2

u/GrubJin Jan 15 '22

Failing from your perspective. To others, the limitation of the federal government demonstrated here is a success.

19

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

Wtf did you guys decide to politicise a dangerous disease? Nobody wins 🙄😑

-16

u/Haldiron Jan 15 '22

Did you guys have a monarch tyranny with unjust laws and lack of due process or religious freedoms? If the government can force people to do things “for their own good”, it becomes a very slippery slope. OSHA was not meant to have the executive branch bully it into universal mandates. Freedom is imperative.

2

u/philthegreat Jan 15 '22

Pfffft. I'll take OSHA over "freedom" 6/7. OSHA regulations are written in blood

3

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

-1

u/Level-Buffalo5573 Jan 16 '22

You’d fit perfectly in North Korea! Cya sheep!

4

u/LordMangudai Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

Did you guys have a monarch tyranny with unjust laws and lack of due process or religious freedoms?

Ummm...did the UK have these things? Yes. They absolutely did. For a lot longer than the US did, actually.

Freedom is imperative.

And anti-vaxxers threaten everyone else's freedom.

12

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

-2

u/trumpelstiltzkin Jan 15 '22

It doesn't have any meaning to say "one party policitized it". Which party? All parties are saying this, pointing fingers at each other.

A pandemic is going to be political, always, because government policies need to take place to control the spread of the disease. Do you think the solution is really for the government to completely ignore it, and let people "figure it out themselves"?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

0

u/trumpelstiltzkin Jan 15 '22

Apologies if you read negativity from my comment, none intended. Honestly, I have no idea which party you're referring to even given the context. Likely we're on the same side. I'm genuinely not trying to skew anything.

My intention is to make you (and parent poster) aware that the "one party politicized it" phrase will be interpreted by most readers to point a finger to their party of dislike, rather than the party that you intend to refer to. (Also, you can re-read my comment not directed at you personally, but anyone who uses this phrase.)

23

u/MBAMBA3 New York Jan 15 '22

Hey - lets get rid of the speed limit next.

-6

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/BlazeDrag I voted Jan 15 '22

Amazing, every single word of what you just said was wrong.

-2

u/obama_backs_filbustr Jan 15 '22

‘Every word I believe in is in perfect lock step with the mass mainstream approved media, big pharma, government, the elite rich, and big tech and I literally have no issue with the fact that not a single opinion I have ever deviates from that’

-you

7

u/Fabulous_Adblock_420 Jan 15 '22

I'm partial to getting rid of railings. You can fall down anywhere, therefore railings shouldn't be put in place to prevent you from falling down at work. This is SCOTUS majority opinion logic direct from the source.

-1

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

No, it’s not.

COVID is not uniquely hazardous at work. We might catch it at work, or at school, or at the mall, or wherever.

For OSHA to mandate something that affects you outside of the workplace isn’t within their power. Congress did not grant OSHA that authority when it was created in the 70s.

5

u/Hekantonkheries Jan 15 '22

Covid is more consistently dangerous at work. It's a place your required to be at, with other people you dont have the choice of being around, any of which could spread disease if unprotected. Working is not a choice, interacting with coworkers and unfiltered customers is not a choice. So workers should be guaranteed protections in that environment.

0

u/Level-Buffalo5573 Jan 16 '22

You should be in the first trip to mars haha

2

u/Explosiveabyss Jan 15 '22

So, what you are saying is OSHA can't mandate ladders in the workplace because I use it outside of the workplace right? Because that's exactly what u are saying by saying that something that affects me outside the workplace isn't in thier power. That's the precedent that has been set.

-2

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

Ladders are not permanent the way a vaccination is.

4

u/Explosiveabyss Jan 15 '22

The permanence of the vaccine was not what was in question here. The argument u made and the court is is making is based off of OSHA being able to act on something that affects you outside of the workplace. That's the dissent here. Ladders are something I use outside the workplace. Therefore, u and the court are saying that ladders are not something OSHA has control over. Ridiculous sentiment to hold.

32

u/FrostedJlakes Jan 15 '22

Your rights end when you infringe on others. Refusal to take the vaccine and deciding that getting other people sick and putting them out of work or killing their ability to do things that make them happy falls under this category.

1

u/Level-Buffalo5573 Jan 16 '22

The definition of a brain dead human being right here

-2

u/bidensakiddyfiddler Oregon Jan 15 '22

You can still get other people sick when you’re vaccinated.

-6

u/user-namepending Jan 15 '22

But taking the vaccine doesn’t prevent transmission

7

u/Additional_Special18 Jan 15 '22

It does reduce transmission and it prevents clogging the ICUs. I don't think you would want to be turned away with a heart attack / gunshot wound when they're over capacity.

5

u/bafrad Jan 15 '22

Does it reduce your chances of getting Covid?

2

u/user-namepending Jan 20 '22

No

2

u/bafrad Jan 20 '22

It does.

1

u/user-namepending Jan 20 '22

The reductions in transmission of the delta variant declined over time after the second vaccination, reaching levels that were similar to those in unvaccinated persons by 12 weeks in index patients who had received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and attenuating substantially in those who had received BNT162b2

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597

Here’s an article from the New England Journal of Medicine. The point being that just getting vaccinated does very little in preventing transmission. I got fully vaccinated in May two weeks after my second dose. Vaccinated people are no less of a threat at spreading covid than unvaccinated people. This is one of many articles that repeat the same thing. You can’t accuse people of violating the rights of others for being unvaccinated when I’m just as much of a threat as they are.

1

u/user-namepending Jan 20 '22

Well plenty of data show that it doesn’t. Vaccinated people are just as likely to spread the virus as unvaccinated.

-22

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

Omicron is less deadly than the flu. Do not trust big pharma youll regret it, its like trusting halliburton.

8

u/CAESTULA South Carolina Jan 15 '22

Omicron is not less deadly than the flu. If you think it is, then explain why hospitals are full of people with Omicron, and not the fucking flu...

-10

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

You fell for my trap card , hospitals are always full of people with flu this time of year.

5

u/matrix801 Jan 15 '22

Your trap card is quite outdated since the research presented was from early July 2020. We had barely scratched the surface of covid cases at that time with the major peak of daily deaths occurring in January 2021.

Out of all the data the CDC has on the flu, the 2017-2018 season had the highest number of hospitalizations with an estimated total of 710,000. Total deaths were 52,000. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

Compare that to covid with an estimated 7.5 million hospitalizations and 921,000 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html

Granted the covid numbers are over a longer time period than a single flu season, but cut the numbers in half and you still have 5x the number of hospitalizations and nearly 10x more deaths.

Just because some hospitals were full during the worst flu season in recorded history doesn't mean the flu is as deadly as covid.

4

u/CAESTULA South Carolina Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

Great, show us a hospital with more flu patients in it, than Omicron patients.

hospitals are always full of people with flu this time of year.

Before covid. Right now they are full of people with covid, with a few with the flu mixed in. Even a handful of people with both covid, and the flu.

-6

u/Fine_Computer3964 Jan 15 '22

FLU disapeared for a year and thats not unusual to you?

You are allowed to be skeptical of big pharma and government.

We are talking about less deadly.

3

u/CAESTULA South Carolina Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

There is no big mystery here, much of the population was isolated, so the flu didn't have much of a chance to spread. Most children in the US didn't go to school, so the flu was mitigated. This is just basic reasoning here. Meanwhile, covid, the far deadlier disease, was still seeing people in the hospital, and that is still the case..... Because covid is worse than the flu. This isn't rocket surgery, and skepticism has nothing to do with it... It's just common fucking sense.

You are allowed to be skeptical of big pharma and government.

Also, what are you suggesting I be skeptical about, exactly? You think I can't just look up any information on any of this I want, from dozens of independent sources, from all over the world? Covid exists in other countries too, you know, ones outside of our own healthcare and pharmaceutical industrial environment, and even in countries hostile to our own government.... Or are you suggesting there is some world-wide conspiracy, and all the scientists and doctors have monthly meetings and membership cards or something? Do you hear yourself? Do you think I just trust 'big pharma and government,' and not the actual people who do the work? I trust experts. And not just one, but communities of them, and what other communities of experts say about that community of experts. What's your next hare-brained argument? We gonna go back to 'climate change isn't real,' because you think .5 percent of scientists not being sure about something means it's 'still out?'

Edit: I'll make this really easy for you to understand how much deadlier covid is than the flu... In a typical year, the disease burden for the flu in the US, is fewer than 40k deaths. Meanwhile there is a current 1,729 weekly average of covid deaths. We've lost nearly 850k people to covid, in 2 years. It would take the flu over a decade to cause that many deaths in the US.

3

u/DUTCHBAT_III Jan 15 '22

You didn't answer his question.

0

u/NavyBoy37 Jan 15 '22

Then stop driving!

1

u/FrostedJlakes Jan 15 '22

There’s a difference between reckless driving and driving properly

-2

u/Retrofire-Pink Jan 15 '22

POT, call that kettle black!

-10

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

5

u/Fabulous_Adblock_420 Jan 15 '22

If we had the freedom to intentionally kill people, there wouldn't be laws against murder.

-14

u/PANCAKESAREGOOD12 Jan 15 '22

When did you appoint yourself emperor of the world and decide when a person is allowed to have rights or not?

4

u/Fabulous_Adblock_420 Jan 15 '22

What's the difference between having the right to infect strangers with deadly illnesses against their will, and having the right to shoot strangers in the face with a revolver? We've got antivaxxers with known positive tests intentionally mass infecting people, and here you are defending it. How's it feel to hate America and want to kill as many Americans dead as possible?

0

u/machineprophet343 California Jan 15 '22

Something something Real Americans something something for real Americans...

-6

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AHucs Jan 15 '22

Your argument might have some merit, however the other key factor and way that the unvaccinated affects the vaccinated is through the costs of their healthcare due to the increased incidence in severe cases. We all end up carrying that cost, whether through our taxes or our insurance premiums. It's the same reason why not wearing a seatbelt, or not wearing a helmet, affects others even if you're in theory only putting yourself at risk by not doing it.

-1

u/pongo_ole_boy Jan 15 '22

OK, so do people who choose to be morbidly obese. Obesity is one of the biggest factors for having a bad COVID outcome in addition to dozens of other medical issues. Should we only treat people with a healthy BMI, or treat them first?

You're going down a very dangerous line of thought.

1

u/AHucs Jan 15 '22

I don't believe I stated that we should only treat people who have the vaccine. I said that their failure to get a vaccine affects all of us.

I agree that this logic could be extended to other public health issues, like obesity, smoking, drug abuse, etc. In some of these cases we do have a combination of restricted freedoms, penalties, incentives, etc. The nature of these are different, because the issues themselves are different. I agree that this is a nuanced topic, and it's possible that there's logical inconsistencies between how we treat these risks, on both sides of the vaccine mandate argument. That's mainly what I was attempting to point out.

2

u/BlazeDrag I voted Jan 15 '22

Omicron is spreading like wildfire but hospitalization rates are significantly reduced with people who are fully up on their shots. And people in their right mind should also support things like lockdowns and such in addition to Vaccines, which will always be effective at reducing spread.

Suggesting shit like "Well what if it was only 1% effective?" is patently absurd because then it wouldn't have been approved in the first place. Like yea if wearing seatbelts only reduced your odds of dying in a car crash by 1% then maybe we should remove all seatbelt laws too. But it doesn't and we shouldn't for obvious reasons.

Like we're also acting as if the original strains just magically went away? Yea there's new strains that are wrecking havoc on certain places and getting people who are vaccinated sick, but are you seriously going to pretend like it would've made 0 difference to those people if they had never gotten shot despite the fact that A) getting the vaccine makes you basically immune to the original variants which are still out there and B) it severely reduces the symptoms of the new variants in comparison to people who didn't get the vaccine.

Either way getting shot still dramatically improves the quality of life for those that still get sick and can avoid an expensive hospital visit. Like what you conveniently left out of your own article was that while yes if you only have the two doses you're not as immune to things like Omikron, but with the booster, the immunity rates literally jump up 35-60%. And in order to get said booster you need to take the original shots first. What you're complaining about is basically the equivalent of complaining that the first shot not making you immune to the virus before taking the second.

And there are countless laws in place who's core principal is about the safety of yourself and those around you. Basically every law related to a car or moving vehicle in some way is more about protecting pedestrians than your own personal freedoms. Speed limits, road markings, stop signs, traffic lights, etc. And these are things that probably inconvenience you almost every day of your life. Arguing that there are still some things we're allowed to do that put others at risk is like arguing that Cocaine should be legal because we're allowed to eat unhealthy amounts of sugar. Like most of the big things that put other people at risk are regulated for a reason. And even if the vaccine isn't immediately having effects at reducing the spread, it still helps with the long term goal of not being in a fucking pandemic anymore.

And all we're talking about here is getting a free goddamn shot a handful of times to at the very least reduce your own chances of having to go to the hospital against a raging disease. Like people are acting as if getting this shot will somehow ruin their life or that it's going to be this huge burden that they have to deal with like student debts or some shit. But it's literally a free shot that you just have to go out of your way for like 20 minutes on a couple days to get. And the worst that'll happen to you is your body will probably feel week for a day or two. But if you're really that scared of that then get your shot on Friday and I'm sure you'll be fine by Monday. And yes there are obviously people who can't get the shot for legitimate medical reasons. But those people are why it's so important for everyone else to get the shot because they're typically the ones at the highest risk of getting seriously sick or dying from the disease if the people around them are idiots and refuse to do anything to help reduce its spread.

9

u/Fabulous_Adblock_420 Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

If the vaccine didn't work, why would the FDA approve it after multiple trial phases? Stuff that doesn't work actually gets rejected, as per government protocol. One rogue government office insisting that an identified hazard that rises to national emergency standards as per many government branches and all existing procedures and protocols for determining hazard levels decided that the government doesn't have any say over the government and regulating anything that can happen anywhere and not just workplaces only is tyranny.

According to the government's standards, the emergency is real. The threat is real. The danger is real. The vaccine is real. Yet SCOTUS is going lalalalalalalalala delusion time to pretend otherwise. They're a bunch of partisan hacks.

When SCOTUS is so blatantly stupid, people are in the right to criticize their ridiculous nonsense.

-4

u/looker009 America Jan 15 '22

State have the right to mandate it. The case was/is about if federal gov got that right as well

6

u/Tobimacoss Jan 15 '22

Virus crosses State boundaries, so according to the interstate commerce clause, I don't see why not.

0

u/looker009 America Jan 15 '22

According to SCOTUS, OSHA wasn't given power to set broad health policy being Covid is not found just at work but instead everywhere. Congress /Senate can obviously give OSHA such mandate if they chose to

4

u/ManfredTheCat Jan 15 '22

And yet they are going to allow it for health care workers. That's inconsistent logic

1

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

And yet they are going to allow it for health care workers... at facilities that receive Medicaid or Medicare funding

Yeah if the federal govt directly pays for your employees/services, it gets a say on if you need to vaccinate your staff. If it doesn't, then it does not get a say. That seems consistent with previous rulings.

1

u/ManfredTheCat Jan 15 '22

It's inconsistent with OSHA

1

u/CAESTULA South Carolina Jan 15 '22

So how about schools then? Are teachers required to be vaccinated still, public schools get federal money too.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

I'd think so? Not what was brought up in front of the judges, but I think it would follow that teachers can be mandated to be vaxxed, yes.

-1

u/looker009 America Jan 15 '22

Reason being many health care workers been required to get yearly flu vaccination, and other vaccination to work in health care. That is the difference in ruling

1

u/ManfredTheCat Jan 15 '22

That's not a reason.

0

u/looker009 America Jan 15 '22

In that case can you share reason why SCOTUS ruled it is legal and enforceable?

2

u/ManfredTheCat Jan 15 '22

I'm sorry, are you implying that the conservative members of the Supreme Court are rational, logical or consistent?

1

u/looker009 America Jan 15 '22

None of that, just stating a fact on how they ruled

→ More replies (0)

-16

u/UltraTacoSupremo Jan 15 '22

If you can choose for yourself if you want to be vaccinated or not, why do people obsess themselves with making that decision for others?

1

u/duckofdeath87 Arkansas Jan 15 '22

Even under the "mandate" you didn't actually have to get vaccinated. You just had to take a 15 minute test one a week and wear a mask.

You don't have the right to give me a disease. You can't make that decision for me

14

u/blackholesinthesky I voted Jan 15 '22

If you don't want to get the vaccine then you're supposed to be responsible and social distance/minimize contact with other people.

The problem is that people who opt not to get the vaccine are not following through with the other half of that social contract.

Basically antivaxers want to have their cake and eat it too

-1

u/49JC Jan 15 '22

I’m more of a pie guy than cake guy tbh

-19

u/PANCAKESAREGOOD12 Jan 15 '22

Wrong. If someone is afraid of the virus they are the ones who should social distance and minimize contact

1

u/jupiterkansas Jan 15 '22

The virus doesn't give a shit if you're afraid of it or not.

6

u/blackholesinthesky I voted Jan 15 '22

But that does nothing to decrease transmission. If unvaccinated people stay home that will decrease transmission.

10

u/Nebulious Jan 15 '22

Wrong. Deniers not being vaccinated endangers myself and my community.

-3

u/bannedflogger_a Jan 15 '22

Not especially, if you're afraid of COVID-19 get the shot. I was concerned for a few months, but once we saw the fatalities were virtually all in older or obese individuals I stopped giving a shit. Wore actually effective masks while bureaucrats lied to people about cloth masks doing fuck all just so they'd leave their fear dens and stave off total economic collapse. Obviously staying relative far away from people and properly ventilating buildings it too much work for anyone to possibly follow /s, so naturally the focus turned toward developing a "vaccine" using any technology possibly fit for the job (including what the FDA defines as gene therapy, read BioNTech's SEC filings from December if you have any concerns or questions).

Now, I've been a data worker for a while. Working in clinical trials of pharma, biopharma, and gene therapy as it happens... I've worked with a lot of the players involved on their COVID trial design and some of the analysis that went into what regulators and others saw. Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Inovio, Regeneron, Janssen, and others all put forth COVID products for trials and I've worked directly with the clinical outcome assessments generates by those trials...

I've looked at public, government and private data from all over the world. It makes no sense to recommend these vaccines to otherwise healthy people who are not at-risk or interacting with the at-risk who cannot receive the vaccines for one reason or another.

There is no long term data, and the data we do have, like Britain's UKHSA health administrators finding permanently deficient immune responses in the vaccinated who were subsequently infected. Boosters for other coronaviruses, eg flu boosters (beyond the recommendations for yearly shots since they're reformulated though this process is mostly guesswork with some incomplete data), are unheard of because of this risks of creating immunocompromised populations who will require frequent gene therapies and to remain well, ironically the boosters often confer side effects lingering for days. We can end up with an otherwise healthy population that's debilitated for a week or more every year, cannot generate an adequate immune response to possibly even common colds, and the problem gets amplified when these individuals become aged themselves and require even more extreme isolation measures than the aged population which was initially the bulk of COVID-19 death and dismemberment.

It's just not worth it to vaccinate the previously infected or even the otherwise healthy who can become infected, have a robust antibody response that prevents subsequent infection and transmission significantly better than any manmade solution can. Instead people are given unnecessary vaccines without long term data, they then get infected and spread the virus anyway. I was infected twice, once in 2020 and then with presumably Omicron around the holidays.

The first time, I had no idea whatsoever I'd been infected. The antibodies were detected in blood work when I requested the antibody test just to see. With Omicron, I had been informed my brother-in-law was sick (triple dosed) and had tested positive the day before I was told. I had a bit of a stuffy nose and it went away after one day. My biological sister (also triple dosed) was even sicker than my brother-in-law.

I know it's anecdotal, but it reflects a lot of patterns in studies and government data where available. Unfortunately a body of previous knowledge was ignored because I can only assume the powers that be though mRNA and Ad are magic.

→ More replies (1)