- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Legal Rationale for Biden’s Mandate and Likely Problems
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:01 pm
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:01 pm
My wife works for a company with well over 100 employees and their leadership emailed them today to say they were monitoring things and wouldn’t be announcing or mandating anything in light of probable litigation. I suspect most employers will take this position.
Here is an article from Reason on some of the legal grounds Biden claims to have this authority. I think it’s an overreach and he doesn’t have the authority to mandate this, and this article lays out the analytical framework of how and why it will (hopefully) be struck down.
LINK
Here is an article from Reason on some of the legal grounds Biden claims to have this authority. I think it’s an overreach and he doesn’t have the authority to mandate this, and this article lays out the analytical framework of how and why it will (hopefully) be struck down.
LINK
15
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:05 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
think it’s an overreach and he doesn’t have the authority to mandate this, and this article lays out the analytical framework of how and why it will (hopefully) be struck down.
This is staying in place. Using logic, precedent, or legal analysis is nothing more than fruitless mental masturbation.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:07 pm to upgrayedd
I’m not sure it does if the challenge is drafted correctly:
quote:
And that's all aside from the big legal fact here: Courts have applied tougher scrutiny to OSHA's emergency decrees than to its garden-variety rules. That is why a recently updated Congressional Research Service report on OSHA's ETS authority as applied to COVID-19 notes that the agency "has rarely used this authority in the past—not since the courts struck down its ETS on asbestos in 1983." (It did issue an ETS for healthcare workers and COVID-19 in June.)
As attorney Michael Schearer points out, of the nine times OSHA used its emergency power until this summer, three went unchallenged, but of the six that went to court, only one instance was fully upheld. All the others were stayed or vacated, in one instance partially. In other words, the courts have by no means been pushovers for OSHA ETSs.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:07 pm to upgrayedd
You sense that it would survive the challenge at the SCOTUS level eventually? I don't get that sense myself, but that's pure gut feeling.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:13 pm to davyjones
quote:
You sense that it would survive the challenge at the SCOTUS level eventually? I don't get that sense myself, but that's pure gut feeling.
You mean the SCOTUS filled with establishment judges masquerading as "conservatives"?
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and ACB will do as they're told unless one of then can dissent as long as the others can make it appear as if they "made a noble stand".
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:14 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I think it’s an overreach and he doesn’t have the authority to mandate this, and this article lays out the analytical framework of how and why it will (hopefully) be struck down.
I’d like to think that but considering Biden himself said his eviction moratorium was not constitutional, then three of the justices went ahead and said it was, doesn’t give me a ton of hope. It really comes down to what those 9 assholes are feeling like that particular day and nothing more.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:18 pm to 615KeithStone
quote:
Typical LSU fan, talking bout dicks they wanna suck.
As can your mother
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:20 pm to rsbd
They knew it would be overruled and did it just to blow smoke and distract from Afghanistan and the election audits
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:23 pm to boosiebadazz
But does it matter if it takes a year to make it through the courts? The damage will be done at that point.
I’m hoping a judge puts an immediate block on this pending full court hearings.
I’m hoping a judge puts an immediate block on this pending full court hearings.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:25 pm to weagle99
quote:
I’m hoping a judge puts an immediate block on this pending full court hearings.
That’s contemplated within moving for an injunction or a TRO. One of the factors the court will look at is “likelihood of success on the merits”.
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:30 pm to boosiebadazz
Just don’t comply - don’t pay the fine - what are they going to do arrest you?
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:39 pm to rsbd
Well of course. I wouldn't be here if my mother wasn't attracted to my father. I feel like yours, is like some pre-arranged marriage. Did Daddy touch you too much?
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:40 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
You mean the SCOTUS filled with establishment judges masquerading as "conservatives"?
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and ACB will do as they're told unless one of then can dissent as long as the others can make it appear as if they "made a noble stand".
I'm not necessarily convinced of that, but nor do I think your take on it is completely out of line. They've issued a couple or few sizeable opinions that have drawn the ire of the left. I suppose we shall probably see...
Posted on 9/10/21 at 11:59 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
boosiebadazz
Posted on 9/11/21 at 12:34 am to boosiebadazz
Posted on 9/11/21 at 12:36 am to NashvilleTider
quote:
Just don’t comply - don’t pay the fine - what are they going to do arrest you?
Yes
Posted on 9/11/21 at 12:45 am to 0
Not a chance any of this would be enshrined in criminal law. Would be civil penalties, and perhaps enhanced penalties for second or subsequent violations.
Posted on 9/11/21 at 12:48 am to upgrayedd
quote:
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and ACB
It should never go unmentioned how much these assholes betrayed the country
Posted on 9/11/21 at 1:13 am to boosiebadazz
Based on the advertised cases in the US, less than 13% of the country has tested positive during the pandemic. Currently, less that .4% of the country has an active case. Does this sound like a safety hazard that OSHA needs to issue a blanket emergency order for?
My first witness I would call is the CDC. I would ask them if masks and social distancing works. If they do work, then OSHA doesn't need to mandate vaccines. If they don't work, then why are they recommending those measures?
My first witness I would call is the CDC. I would ask them if masks and social distancing works. If they do work, then OSHA doesn't need to mandate vaccines. If they don't work, then why are they recommending those measures?
Posted on 9/11/21 at 1:41 am to davyjones
quote:
You sense that it would survive the challenge at the SCOTUS level eventually? I don't get that sense myself, but that's pure gut feeling.
Me neither, unfortunately. The whole reason most of those robe wearing a-holes are in the position they are in is because they have been bought and paid for through blackmail or other means.
Their handlers will allow them to vote their conscience on the small stuff, but pull the bit on stuff like this.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News