The Vaccine Mandate: The Supreme Court Considers a Trip To “Major-Questions-Land”

Below is my column in the Hill on the vaccine mandate cases before the Supreme Court. Businesses and groups are still waiting to see if the Supreme Court will issue an injunction in the OSHA case. The mandate goes into effect today. The issue is not what the decision should be on mandates but who gets to make that decision. That question takes some justices to a place that they would prefer not to go …”Major-question-land.”

Here is the column:

“Major-question-land,” the term used by Louisiana solicitor general Elizabeth Murrill during Friday’s oral arguments over the Biden vaccine mandates, has an almost Disneyesque sound to it. However, unlike Yesterland or Tomorrowland, major-question-land clearly holds no attraction for the Biden administration or the court’s liberal justices.

The defenders of the mandates worked mightily to avoid the fact that it’s the first-ever national vaccine mandate and was decided without the approval of Congress.  Chief Justice John Roberts, a vital vote needed by the administration, noted that this administration was relying on language passed roughly 50 years ago — closer to the Spanish Flu than the novel coronavirus — and stated ominously, “This is something the federal government has never done before.” That sounds not just like a question but a major one.

The major-questions doctrine maintains that courts should not defer to agency statutory interpretations when the underlying questions concern “vast economic or political significance.”

The controversy over the mandates shows the wisdom of the doctrine demanding that Congress not only take action but responsibility, too, for such major decisions.

With increasing confusion over changing CDC guidelines and the risk profile associated with the Omicron variant, congressional action could bring both greater legitimacy and clarity to questions swirling around mandates.

Instead, the Supreme Court is grappling with an executive move that was openly discussed not only as an avoidance of Congress but a circumvention of constitutional limitations.

It was not a good sign for the administration that the most referenced individual during oral argument was Biden’s chief of staff, Ron Klain, who tweeted that the mandates were “workarounds” of the Constitution. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Neil Gorsuch, and others referred to Klain’s admission as the administration’s lawyers tried to argue that the executive had the constitutional authority to implement a national mandate.

The liberal justices took the “time is of the essence” argument to an almost apocalyptic degree: Justice Stephen Breyer kept mentioning that every second they wait, more people are getting COVID, and he incorrectly stated there were “750 million new cases yesterday.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated as a fact that “Omicron is as deadly as Delta and causes as much serious disease in the unvaccinated as Delta did.” That is not true. Omicron appears to be far more virulent, but less lethal than Delta. Sotomayor also claimed that “we have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.” That is also untrue. For patients, up to 17 years old, the seven-day average for hospitalizations was 797.

Justice Elena Kagan also raised eyebrows by claiming that “the best way” to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is “for people to get vaccinated,” and the “second best way” is to “wear masks.” Both claims were immediately challenged. While the vaccine can moderate or lessen the symptoms, states like Massachusetts are reporting that 95 percent of new cases involve the Omicron variant and that vaccinated people are contracting the variant in large numbers. Moreover, while long denied as “disinformation,” medical experts are now admitting that widely-used cloth masks are largely ineffective as protection. Even CNN’s experts now call the cloth masks “little more than facial decorations.”

The questionable claims by the justices were ironic in a case where they were arguing for sweeping deference to support sweeping agency mandates.

Putting aside the factual claims supporting the mandates, there remains the even more dubious constitutional claims. Of the two rules at issue, the OSHA rule has the greatest reach and likely the greatest chance of being struck down. The conservative justices seemed more willing to recognize the government’s inherent authority to issue a mandate for health care workers. However, virtually no health care facilities challenged the rule, and the impact of the rule is not especially great given the industry-wide practice of requiring vaccinations. The OSHA rule attracted the most skepticism from all six conservative justices.

The OSHA rule was issued after months of President Biden claiming the authority to impose a national mandate and then admitting that he did not likely have such authority.

The OSHA rule was clearly “Plan B.”

Notably, while OSHA had discussed whether it could — or should — issue an “Infectious Diseases Regulatory Framework” covering airborne infectious diseases — long before the advent of COVID — it never did so. When the White House was looking for a workaround of the Constitution, OSHA suddenly found what it now claims to be clear authority.

It is not clear — from either a historical or a statutory perspective.

OSHA used an “emergency temporary standard” (ETS) that applies to a “grave danger” when such action is “necessary to protect employees from such danger.” An ETS is generally used to protect employees “from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful, or from new hazards.” It can only be used in emergencies when “necessary to protect employees from such danger.”

The emergency need for the ETS seems as much political as health-based. After waiting for over a year, OSHA suddenly declared the need to promulgate an ETS without going through the required “notice and comment” process.

When President Trump sought to skip such notice and comment steps, it was challenged by Democrats as abusive.

If the Biden administration loses on the OSHA case, it would constitute a major political and legal blow. The administration has racked up an impressive list of losses in federal court — but this one could be particularly costly.

Various justices like Neil Gorsuch have long criticized the “Chevron Doctrine,” the basis for courts deferring to federal agencies in their interpretations and policies. The liberal justices continually returned to such deference in their comments on Friday. This case could offer a perfect vehicle to curtail that doctrine and reduce that deference in future cases. That would impact policies across the legal landscape — from environmental laws to work-safety regulations to banking rules.

At a time when liberals are demanding more unilateral action from Biden due to congressional opposition to his agenda, such a ruling could curtail the ability of federal agencies to circumvent Congress.

This is also a major question.

That’s why neither the administration nor the liberal justices want to visit “major-question-land.” For those who want unilateral presidential power, that is not the “Happiest Place on Earth.” It is, however, the most democratic.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

106 thoughts on “The Vaccine Mandate: The Supreme Court Considers a Trip To “Major-Questions-Land””

  1. Okay legal eagles, here is a question that I have been unable to answer about the Medicare mandate opinion. I am puzzled about the posture of the case and why did the Supreme Court not complete the analysis required for a stay of the injunctions. Justice Thomas laid out that standard in the dissent, but simply concluded without more that the standard wasn’t met. This is what he wrote: “To obtain a stay, the Government must show that there is (1) a reasonable probability that we would grant certiorari; (2) a fair prospect that we would reverse the judgments below; and (3) a likelihood that irreparable harm will result from denying a stay. Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U. S. 183, 190 (2010) (per curiam). Because there is no real dispute that this case merits our review, our decision turns primarily on whether the Government can make a “strong showing” that it is likely to succeed on the merits. Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 426 (2009). In my view, the Government has not made such a showing here.”

    The majority doesn’t even address this standard or the factors required. It simply determined that CMS had been granted the power by Congress to mandate vaccines on healthcare workers who work in facilities that accept Medicare or Medicaid federal money and simply deferred to the “experts” of the agency. That’s it. No analysis of any of these factors required and no mention of changed circumstances presented by Omicron which would likely shift the balance of harms to rightfully deny the stay and keep the district court injunctions in place. Was this as far as they could go? Was it only one issue: whether the agency had the power and nothing else? They don’t say. I don’t see any grant of certiorary that would so limit them.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a240_d18e.pdf

  2. Jonathan Turley, unless and until people shut up about “my body, my choice” on the abortion issue, it is hypocritical to defend that argument on abortion and yet have it being judged as invalid regarding not wanting vaccines. Just my thoughts.

  3. I meant to send this video out a couple of days ago. It tells us things that have been hidden.

    “Project Veritas has obtained startling never-before-seen documents regarding the origins of COVID-19, Gain-of-Function research, vaccines, potential treatments which have been suppressed, and the government’s effort to conceal all of this.
    The documents in question stem from a report at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, better known as DARPA, which were hidden in a top-secret shared drive.”

  4. “she asked someone else”

    Keep blaming other people ATS. She asked the generic anonymous, and that was you. You use many different icons and names, most of them short-lived.

    Green anonymous was one and disappeared because you couldn’t blame someone else.

    Gray Anonymous is most frequent, and there you use gray anonymous pretend friends to pat you on your back and bolster your ego.

    Yellow Anonymous came and went and returned under Sammy and a rare Molly G and Edison.

    You have been other anonymous persons, but who can remember all of them. I am sure you will lay low using mainly your gray anonymous, some deleted based on address and some not.

    You don’t do well on an identifiable anonymous because you can’t deny your lies. Green anonymous was the most honest anonymous you had, but honesty is difficult for you, so you gave up on that icon.

    1. If vaccinated: Can you still GET COVID? (yes or no)! If vaccinated: Can you still SPREAD COVID? (yes or no)! Please define “vaccinated”, and be very specific… like HOW MANY boosters does it take / will it take to be “fully vaccinated” in the future? Please post PROOF that there are no other SAFE AND EFFECTIVE treatments (such as Ivermectin, HCQ) (i.e. Peer reviewed studies that have not been retracted due to falsification such as the FAKE Lancet Report). I’ll wait.

      1. Bobby, your questions are couched in pre-quantitative (“all or nothing”) terms. We expect a 5-year-old to only be able to think this way. Adults in this country are expected to be more sophisticated and numerical — most are, but many revert to childish talk when it comes to Covid and risk mitigation. Here are some adult questioning styles to model:
        1. What benefits were claimed and validated for the FDA-approved vaccines? (In the several months following vaccination, you have a 95% chance (if infected at the symptomatic level) of avoiding hospitalization and death.)
        2. What is going on with the 5% of vaccinated who get sick enough for hospitalization? (Their immune systems were not in the best of shape to begin with, and it’s the immune system that has to defeat the virus — vaccination only prepares the healthy immune system to respond quicker to infection.)
        3. Why are boosters now becoming part of staying vaccinated? (The protective duration — unknown at the time of EUA — is less than hoped for, and the virus keeps mutating away from the original vaccine design (alpha). Boosters up the level of protection in the following months, but not claiming any specific duration. Variant-boosters are a possibility for the future.
        4). What does mask wearing do to reduce the spread? (As a person speaks, an invisible cloud of micro-droplets shoots out about 6-10 feet in still air — these droplets carry the virus spores to the next host thru inhaling and landing on the eye surface. A simple cotton mask traps 80-90% of this cloud. Wearing glasses protects the uninfected’s eye’s to some degree. Masking is mostly about the infected preventing their spores from spreading to infect others. To filter the incoming air you breathe, you need multiple layers of stoppage with tight-fitting N95.)
        5. What are my chances of getting Long Covid? (Zero if you avoid getting infected. About 1:20 if you do. These odds argue strongly for not getting infected.
        6). Does anyone know where the CV-19 pandemic is headed next? No. Expect more surprises.

        1. “A simple cotton mask traps 80-90% of this cloud.”

          According to the scientists and mechanical engineers I’ve read, a cotton mask is pure theater. Covid is an *aerosol* transmission.

    2. Jmunk1:

      I would add a few things.

      – mortality rate is calculated based on the estimated size of the population, rather than those who get ill. As vaccination rates go up, there is a smaller population of unvaccinated. This means that it takes fewer cases to create a larger increase in mortality rate.

      I think the case fatality rate is what many people are concerned with. That’s basically the risk of dying if you have the disease. A mortality rate of Ebola in America, for example, would be vanishingly small, but that would be because the only people exposed would have had to travel to endemic areas of Africa. The case fatality rate for Ebola would be high.

      Case fatality rate between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, and how it varies among strains, needs to be discussed more. The public is well aware that comorbidities like obesity and over 65 years of age increase the risk of Covid, but they do not know the case fatality rate for the healthy, other than the general idea that Omicron is far less severe than previous variants, but infects children more often.

      What also undermines the entire discussion is when data is reported incorrectly, at times indicating it was deliberate. After 2 years of complaints that anyone who died from any cause, who tested positive for Covid, was being reported as a Covid death, including car accidents, public health officials are finally admitting that it’s true. This had been dismissed as a conspiracy theory for years. Happened to be completely true. This makes the public lose trust. That’s not the public’s fault; it’s the fault of those who were dishonest. Creating a financial incentive for hospitals to inflate Covid rates had a predictable result.

      Instead of blaming the public for not having trust, the reasons for the lack of trust should be respectfully addressed by government officials and leaders. Instead, vaccination rate has become a measure of social credit.

  5. If Court Rules Against Mandates..

    And Covid Persists..

    The Court Becomes Even ‘Less’ Credible

    One third of this court was appointed by a twice impeached president who never won the Popular Vote and later led an insurrection. So whether this court realizes it or not, their standing with at least half the American public is shaky at best.

    Therefore if the court rules that no federal agency can mandate vaccines or face masks, that decision could boomerang back to the court if Covid lingers and becomes a major drag on the economy. Half the American public will view the court as only a branch of Republican Party and not a real Supreme Court in any genuine sense.

    1. “[I]f the court rules that no federal agency can mandate vaccines . . .”

      The argument for the mandate was:

      The unvaccinated are contracting Covid and spreading it to others. Therefore, in the name of protecting those others, government must compel the unvaccinated to get a vaccine.

      As has been well-documented, the *vaccinated* can contract Covid and spread it to others.

      So now, what is the argument for the mandate?

    2. If Court Rules Against Mandates..

      And Covid Persists..

      The Court Becomes Even ‘Less’ Credible

      That’s not the question before the court, is it?
      But….YOU think the Supreme Court of the United States would be well with in its article three powers to manage the federal governments response to the pandemic in the United States.

      Most fith graders are smarter than that.

    3. So whether this court realizes it or not, their standing with at least half the American public is shaky at best.

      Since 90% of the population could not identify four of the nine justices, a considerably smaller portion would have no idea which President appointed which Justice.

      What the public does know, is the wise Latina claims 100,000 kids are hospitalized with Covid, the the smaller number of 3,500 being correct.
      So some of their reputations are tainted, but not for the reasons you think

    4. The Court Becomes Even ‘Less’ Credible

      Less credible than Biden? The man that railed against President Trump for his abysmal performance handling covid. (despite implementing every single recommendation of Fauci and Birx) But Biden, with the benefit of vaccines has killed more covid patients. So someone has a credibility problem, but not the court.

  6. “Justice Stephen Breyer kept mentioning that every second they wait, more people are getting COVID, and he incorrectly stated there were “750 million new cases yesterday.””

    Yes, and elsewhere Breyer said “750 thousand.” Everyone sometimes misspeaks. Turley’s columns — including this one — are full of typos, so he should understand.

    He criticizes “the age of rage” while feeding it.

  7. I’m in favor of diaper mandates for those wearing face masks. If you’re wearing a mask then you’re dressing up as a baby.

  8. 75% of all covid deaths were of persons with at least four (4) comorbitities.

    That’s per the CDC

    207500 deaths over 31 months. 80K per year. Sounds alot like the flu.

    1. Iowan, what about the other 25%. ?? That’s a lot of people in a country of 330 million.

      ‘Sounds like the flu’? Give us a list of major nations that have classified Covid as just another ‘flu’.

      1. That’s a lot of people in a country of 330 million.

        ‘Sounds like the flu’?

        Dont doubt me. This is coming from the head of the CDC. You haven’t picked up on the subtle shift taking place in Dem World.
        It’s no longer “WE ARE GOING TO SHUT DOWN COVID” (Biden quote, thats why I screamed it in all CAPS)
        It is now “covids not that bad we can live with it, go live your life”

        But its 25% of ~800K 200,000/330,000,000 =.06%

    2. Hum, there’s 12 months a year, deaths started increasing March 2000, that’s about 21 months, total deaths: 839K, that’s about 40 thousand/month!

  9. For those who always want a scriptural parrallel, Trump was a Samson, he managed to pull down the the pillars of the Temple of Dagon, just killed himself doing so.
    The Supreme Court appointments were the most consequential actions that Trump took. Those appointments may allow us to survive a few decades more by virtue of the inability of the authoritarian left to reach for, but not grasp the unfettered, raw power, they seek.

  10. Professor Turley Writes:

    “Chief Justice John Roberts, a vital vote needed by the administration, noted that this administration was relying on language passed roughly 50 years ago — closer to the Spanish Flu than the novel coronavirus — and stated ominously, “This is something the federal government has never done before.” That sounds not just like a question but a major one”.
    …………………………………………………………………

    Here Professor Turley, along with Chief Justice Roberts, seems to imply regulatory language has a ‘Sell Date’. If the language hasn’t been used in 50 years, it has somehow expired!

    Readers would love to have Professor Turley explain how these Sell Dates are determined.

    1. Here Professor Turley, along with Chief Justice Roberts, seems to imply regulatory language has a ‘Sell Date’.

      You’ll have to peddle that swill elsewhere.
      Not listening,m after my betters have told me for the last 30 years the Constitution is outdated. Or, so you can understand, an expired sell date.

    2. Anonymous:

      “Sell date” does not apply. This is the first federal vaccine mandate. The language in question resembled descriptions of the Spanish Flu, which decimated young people.

      The objection is that this does not accurately describe Omicron, and thank God for that.

      Are you Green Anonymous with whom I’ve spoken before?

  11. Both Richard Nixon and Dick Cheney supported the “Unitary Executive Theory” for presidents. Not a fan of this foreign theory but if it was good enough for Bush and Trump – why not Biden?

    1. They were wrong then,,,,and Biden is wrong today. Dick Cheney’s spawn inherited that flaw….being wrong.

  12. Full disclosure: I’m vaccinated, but not boosted.

    Problems with the vaccine mandate:
    1. It was never voted on. Just bypassed Congress.
    2. Unconstitutional, as even Biden admitted.
    3. Biden simply circumvented the Constitution and Congress through OSHA, abusing the bureaucracy.
    4. The vaccine creates immunity against the original spike protein, which is now many variants ago. That’s like mandating the flu vaccine from 5 years ago.
    5. The nature of the replication of SARS-CoV2 creates genetic “mistakes”, which leads to variants. Natural selection chooses variants that can evade immunity. Variants that can’t get past the immune system simply can’t replicate. It’s evolution on fast forward. The virus doesn’t “care” what the source of that immunity is – vaccine-induced or naturally acquired from recovery. Stating that the variants are created due to the unvaccinated is incorrect.
    6. Vaccinated individuals can get and pass on Covid. It is not the unvaccinated causing the spread.
    7. The mandate gives no credit for naturally acquired immunity, which is shown to be superior to vaccine-induced in multiple studies.
    8. This vaccine has a high rate of side effects. I personally experienced tachycardia for 2 days. Yet people will not listen to sincere health concerns.
    9. How can you sign a consent form to receive this vaccine when you are compelled by the US government to get it? If you are forced to get a vaccine, you should be able to sue those who forced you if you suffer any adverse effects.
    10. Those who wanted the vaccine have already gotten in. Make it available rather than compel.
    11. The focus should be on therapeutics. The vaccine protected us from the severe effects of the earlier variants. It did its job. The flow chart now moves to therapeutics and other versions of the vaccine.
    12. Multiple Supreme Court justices have made false statements about the virus. How can they make an informed decision when they do not know the facts? Apparently, the media’s false information has easily reached SCOTUS.
    13. Covid is, unfortunately, not like Smallpox or Polio, which can be eradicated through vaccination. It replicates differently, which regularly creates new variants. The only way to have stopped Covid was to isolate patient zero and the first 100 people he infected, quarantining everyone they came into contact with. China prevented the world from stopping Covid by hiding the outbreak for months, lying about its origin, and allowing it to go global. They went so far as to arrest brave Chinese whistleblowers. We didn’t know it when Covid was first announced, but it was already too late to stop it. China owes the world a great and terrible debt. Many people are angry with the unvaccinated because they think Covid is like Smallpox, able to be eradicated through vaccination. This is incorrect. It creates new variants more rapidly than the flu.
    14. The vaccine prevented most infections in the vaccinated with the original Covid. It prevented serious illness in most vaccinated with earlier variants. The virus is evolving to evade that immunity. Already, the vaccinated get and spread Omicron. Eventually, the original vaccine will not provide a benefit at all, making the mandate nonsensical. It’s a risk without reward, especially for children.

    1. I am also twice vaccinated and recovered from COVID and boosted (I am required to have all shots).

      Getting to the real truth will take a generation or more. There is a lot of clutter mixed in and finally a few sane voices are emerging in this debate. The new variant is spreading like wildfire in our state despite the mandates and high vaccination rates.

      What one should look for are the deaths and hospitalizations not the number of cases. The intensity of the virus is changing and because symptoms are less, people will not stay home. The objective of a virus is to survive. In one sense, Omicron may be the best immunizer.

      We still live with the 1918 flu.

      1. I agree.

        There will probably emerge a variant that is more severe. Omicron affects the young. All it would take is a variant that creates more severity for there to be a very serious problem.

        Omicron would luckily grant immunity to its spike protein and additional binding sites. This might be a great advantage for immunity against future variants.

    2. Now that it has been acknowledged that the vaccines don’t stop the spread, the rest of the compulsory need for it, to “stop the spread” becomes a contradiction in it’s face value.

  13. “Major-questions-land” is the only correct and proper domain for the Supreme Court. Otherwise, they are just another committee with 9 opinions and the requisite number of rectums.

  14. Someone should mandate that Sotomayor stop eating so many calories…she’s a butter ball. Only salads with no dressing for her and no late night munchie-fests.

    1. She needs her CoVax shots because the obese are the main victims of Covid. W/O the CoVax shots, a lot more heavyweights would have kicked the can.

  15. Jonathan: As one who bragged about getting his entire family vaccinated against Covid it seems counterintuitive for you to side with the anti-mandate cabal of conservative Supremes who appear to want to strike down the Biden mandated vaccine requirement for private employers. Gorsuch has already signaled his vote by falsely comparing Covid to the flu falsely claiming more people die each year from the flu than Covid. Do you expect a politically fractured Congress to quickly address the issue? They will spend months debating while millions more Americans contract Covid and the Omicron variant. We are in a health emergency and every day Trump supporters (Fox News)and other anti-vaxers refuse the needle the number of cases increases exponentially. Hospitals around the country are filled to capacity with patients who selfishly refused to get vaccinated–depriving other patients of, in many cases, life saving medical care. Right now the US leads the world in Covid cases (51.4 million) with an average of 500,000 cases per day. Can we really wait for politicians to get around to dealing with this crisis?

    1. Is this a serious comment? To hell with the Constitution, this is an emergency! The politicians are too slow; so we must let the bureaucrats rule. You’ve got to be kidding.

    2. We are in a health emergency and every day Trump supporters (Fox News)and other anti-vaxers refuse the needle the number of cases increases exponentially. Hospitals around the country are filled to capacity with patients who selfishly refused to get vaccinated–depriving other patients of, in many cases, life saving medical care. — Dennis McIntyre

      An actual pandemic does not require an ad campaign.

      You’ve made factual assertions. Now prove them.

      And, no, corporate media “news” stories and programs prove nothing — mainstream media has proven itself a vehicle for promulgating false narratives. Unless you’re able to prove your assertions, all you’ve done is spread a narrative designed to force experimental “vaccines” upon those of us unwilling to become human guinea pigs.

    3. Please show numbers of millions of Americans dying FROM oMnicron varient? Not dying with it…..

    4. Unfortunately the vaccine doesn’t prevent disease nor does it prevent the spread of disease. Having more people vaccinated will not significantly decrease the number of cases. If the vaccine was actually as safe as they say it is it might not be unreasonable. As a physician I have followed the side effects of the vaccine and the number of lives lost or injured through vaccine does not justify giving it to people who are at low risk of death from the disease.

      1. “. . . most Omicron cases are among the vaccinated.”

        The issue is the percentage of the respective populations. Then to distinguish between the unvaccinated with natural immunity and those without.

        Did the CDC publish any of those stats? (I don’t feel like looking it up.)

    5. “Can we really wait for politicians to get around to dealing with this crisis?”

      How can one deal with this crisis if one remains ignorant of it, and what can be done about it? There is a vaccine that offers some protection but doesn’t prevent transmission of the disease. Yet you want to force people to get the vaccine. Why? Maybe you should be forced to read and study more so you know what you are talking about.

      Do we actually know how many people died of Covid? Not really. We know that sick people who are slowly dying from their diseases might see a quicker death if they get Covid. That is a good reason for them to get the vaccine voluntarily. Why should a five-year-old get the vaccine? You have no answer, but you draw a lot of foolish conclusions.

    6. “As one who bragged about getting his entire family vaccinated against Covid it seems counterintuitive for you to side with the anti-mandate cabal . . .”

      Apparently, you see no difference between a private citizen regarding something as good (e.g., a vaccine), and the government forcing that “good” on everyone.

      Are you channeling Stalin? The CCP?

    7. “We are in a health emergency and every day Trump supporters (Fox News)and other anti-vaxers refuse the needle the number of cases increases exponentially.” — False. (stop repeating Unity Joe’s false talking points!)

      “Hospitals around the country are filled to capacity with patients who selfishly refused to get vaccinated–depriving other patients of, in many cases, life saving medical care.” — False (stop repeating Unity Joe’s divisive lies!)

      “Right now the US leads the world in Covid cases (51.4 million) with an average of 500,000 cases per day.” — says who? No one can trust the CDCs corrupted data, they have been lying for 2 years now. About everything.

      “Can we really wait for politicians to get around to dealing with this crisis?” Yes. It is their job. Let the states handle it as Unity Joe said, “there is no federal solution” to shutting down this virus.

      1. Plus,
        1. These vaccines are not effective
        2. These vaccines are not safe
        3. These vaccines are not necessary
        4. Ineffective, unsafe, experimental vaccines cannot be government mandated. Period.

    8. I am not responsible for your health! If I were, I’d be willing to bet that I would put you on a diet, take away your drugs (legal and illegal) and make you get out and exercise more. Until the, I suggest you stay home, cowering in your corner until all danger has passed.

    9. Dennis:

      Someone can be for something, but against mandating it.

      I’m all for making vaccination available, and have had 2 Covid shots myself. I am against forcing people to get it against their will.

      In addition, naturally acquired immunity is superior to vaccine-induced. This is because the Covid vaccine only produces the spike protein. Naturally-acquired immunity recognizes something like 56 additional binding sites, because it is exposed to the entire virus.

      A vaccine mimics an actual infection in order to produce an immune response, while sparing the person from the risks of the disease.

      If someone already got Covid, and recovered, then their immunity is equal to or greater than that produced by the vaccine. Yet the Democrats are treating them like diseased pariahs who don’t wash their hands after they go to the bathroom. This is not scientifically supported.

      Vaccine mandates may be unconstitutional, and by not taking into account naturally-acquired immunity, they do not follow the science.

      “My body, my choice” only seems to apply when it’s a woman terminating someone else’s life nestled within her own. Otherwise, it’s my body, my government’s choice.

  16. I think you confused virulence for contagiousness. Omicron is more contagious but less virulent and almost without lethality.

Leave a Reply to iowan2 Cancel reply