I've said it before, but it bears repeating. We cannot treat Covid-19 as an individual issue. Each of our actions has consequences on our broader communities. As we've seen with Omicron, vaccines help (greatly) but are insufficient at completely insulating us from the choices of other individuals. Workers should be able to go to work, to earn a living for themselves and their families, with the knowledge that their employer has done everything possible to keep them safe.
To say that Covid-19 is not an occupational hazard is an outrageous logical contortion.
Agreed but what can the Biden administration do now to address the issue created by this judgment? They can’t get a law passed specifically to support such mandates , as Republicans will filibuster it in Senate.
I had naively thought that Republicans were unhappy with what they called legislating from the bench, but that's what the GOP majority on the court did today and can be expected to do in the future.
As our rights slip away, drip by drip by painful drip, there are times when key events speed up that process. Today was such a day. We don't have to look hard to see the promise of America die in front of our eyes.
Porter, you have mistaken Republicans with people that actually HAVE principles. Their trick is to use talking points from principle when really it is all about serving their own power interests. Charlie
You're right, of course. But that was a major Republican talking point in recent years, that Democrats legislated from the bench while 'conservatives' were 'originalists', as if Madison and the others wrote the Constitution expecting that nothing would ever really change, that human nature would hold to basic principles. And then there came Ronald Reagan, and Nixon and then Trump, but those who believed in successive GOP party lines probably still believe them today even though the GOP has proven them wrong over and over again.
Think about what "originalist" means. That was a world of slavery and 3/5 of a person prior to the Civil War. Think about that a minute and let it sink in. We're really talking about an ante-bellum SCOTUS - "Dred Scott" & all. What's more, I've been pointing that out for years. Others think it's just another political hustle. I'm inclined to agree with that view, to the extent that the implication being hustled is that what the Framers originally intended is the only proper way to interpret The Constitution - as if a "letter of the law" interpretation is somehow proper and they have the direct connection with the Founders' private thoughts after some 2 1/2 centuries dead! (Somehow, they miss the 9th Amendment - the spirit of the law. And somehow, people miss that the Framers included slavers, slave owners, rum runners, arms merchants, and other things nefarious. They >weren't< particularly virtuous as a whole, although a few were. Many were downright self-serving. And somehow, they seem to miss all the amendments outside the Bill of Rights. >None< of those amendments are "originalist." Horse-s##t!)
Their idea is that population will control itself naturally. "Let the excess population die by whatever means it will kill itself." I'm sure they wouldn't allow themselves to think that thought consciously, but look at the world around you to know that's what they ultimately believe in. Isn't that what "sink or swim" really means? How "Christian!"
Maybe so. However, business owners demand a cheap supply of labor. The birth rate in the USA has been below the “replacement rate” for quite a few years, resulting in a declining population of US citizens. The answer? Immigration, which the Republicans publicly disapprove of but privately like — because migrants from the south enable larger profits for Republican business owners. Yet another contradiction from the confused Reptilian Party.
That would potentially screw the UFW - another Republican objective. Modern plantations could "shelter" them for food and an overpopulated hovel - like in the "good old days" when "America" was "great" the first time!
DZK ; Well this fits in with looking at the public as 'human resources' and the anti choice denial of abortion rights. Keep producing 'excess' 'human resources' and we have people competing for jobs and willing to take anything, no matter how awful, for pay and working conditions. Also, they are less able to learn much because their noses are on the grindstone of oppression most of their days.
This is a travesty, workers will now have to work in environments with countless number of unvaccinated coworkers, risking their own health and safety and their families too. My son-in-law works in such a place, more than half of the employees are out from COVID, his bosses, boss just died from it and his boss is retiring in a few weeks. No one wears masks and they continue to spread the virus amongst themselves. Those vaccinated are now doing the jobs of the sick. This Supreme Court has proven itself to be a partisan corporate friendly entity that cares nothing about the people in our country. Time to expand the court and put term limits on justices. Enough!
With the Senate paralyzed, there is no chance of effectuating any Democratic (or democratic) agenda. Anyone with the resources to do it should establish residencies in red states. Until we have a supermajority in the Senate and can stop Republican filibusters, nothing is going to get done.
If we gain two seats in the Senate (the four seats where it is possible to flip are Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Florida), we might be able to do something about the filibuster. I’m a little scared of what they would do without the filibuster but I guess they’ll probably do it anyway if they get the seats.
I predict the Republicans will get rid of the filibuster forthwith when they have the power. They will then "go to town" and turn the US into the autocratic country they think want.
This country is spiraling backwards at an alarming rate. We seem hell bent on proving (to steal a bit from Aaron Sorkin’s Will McAvoy) that we’re not the greatest country on earth and if we can be, we have no desire to do what that would require. As a child of the sixties, looking to a future of progress, rationality, education and charity, I’m appalled at the country I’m leaving to my children and grandchildren.
I'm in agreement! I remember the years of thinking, and being told, that our generation was somehow "different!" In words and songs and more we patted ourselves on the back only to be part of the slide to this rot. I look at the former guys rallies and see "my generation" gleefully toasting authoritarianism.
The Supreme Court has shown they are ready, willing and able to hide behind "lack of authority" or "procedural' technicalities without truly deciding whether something is constitutional or not.
As you pointed out, OSHA was specifically created BY CONGRESS to provide a safe place to work.
That should include protection from contracting Covid while at work!!!
A place they must show up in order to earn a salary.
If we (as a nation) do not act soon on the augmentation of the Supreme Court, and put strong term limits on those so-called Justices, we will be on our final approach to democratic oblivion.
In addition to the broader implications for justice, an immediate implication will be more people quitting their jobs to find safer ones. Maybe there will be more union activity as a result of this ruling. Unions can make safety measures a top issue in their negotiations.
So tired of isolation, masks and boosters. I respect other peoples’ rights, but not when it steps on mine, not to mention the health of the whole planet. This is an exceptional situation. I didn’t want to take the vaccine but considered it the only real choice I had as well as my civic duty. For heaven’s sake people sacrifice their lives and bodies for this country. There should not be a need for a mandate. Let’s diddle around until the next variant comes along (sarcasm.)
I agree. The Supreme Court justices are, effectively, practicing medicine without a license. They have zero expertise in infectious diseases or epidemiology, yet they substitute their own opinions for those of experts. That is why I said awhile ago in this forum that maybe we need to simply ignore the Supreme Court, in order to protect the country from harm. Another weird idea I had: impeach the six right wing extremist justices, along with the relevant district judges and circuit judges, for practicing medicine without a license. They would not be convicted, of course, but it would send a message.
Yes, impeach anyone who is taking a salary from our government and not doing their jobs properly, by following the rule of law and our constitution. Especially those in league with the former guy.
I say down with the Supreme Court! They should not be paid, (except for the dissenters, who clearly understand the principles at stake here and the Constitution)!
And now the Supreme Court majority ignores science and other circumstantial facts. New rule: The Supreme Court must now change its name; it's far from supreme.
Too, this decision bolsters need for either term limits or expanded number of judges or both.
Unfortunately, Supreme Court reform is on a list for which we struggle to channel Sinema and Manchin who prioritize media attention and conflicts of financial interest respectively over effective policy-making and governing in pursuit of democracy.
Too bad the ineffective 'public servants' can't just be fired! Justly! This si all fallout from the former guy! More criminal intent made plainly visible.
In theory that firing is in the voting booth, but it's not as imminent, right? I would modify that the fallout is not all on the former guy. The distinction is important because the democracy isn't in jeopardy in this bottom of the ninth inning any more than that last batter up individually wins or loses the game. Both are subject to a full game - or in the case of democracy, decades - of moves that impact either winning or losing. Democracy started its crumble somewhere between Nixon and Newt with a commitment to turn politics and policy into a zero sum game with disregard for anything but unbridled capitalism. As Robert points out, it's ironic our corporations support the so-called far right, because authoritarians claim and seize successful ventures. That's so much to unpack, Laurie! We will maintain our individual vigilance and continue constructive action and unflinching conversations.
Right-wing thinking is often guided by a social Darwinism that holds that businesses and the individual people who populate them ought be left to sink or swim. Hence, not in favor of terminating unwanted pregnancies, but not in favor of social quality of life programs. I can’t see that today’s decision is an example of anything other than this sort of privileged, exclusionary thinking.
The unSupreme Ct continually contradicts itself not left and right, but right and farther right. Today's "judgment makes absolutely no sense. None at all.
I took a mandatory flu vaccine that I didn’t want for three years before I retired from a hospital. In that case my own immune system was more reliable and effective than the flu shot. I was no more likely to infect someone with the shot than without. I needed the job and I took it.
As a biologist, I am absolutely appalled by this decision. This proves this court becomes nothing more than a corporate rubber stamp when the conservative judges are in the majority. We must add more liberal justices to stop the democracy destroying rulings the conservative justices have put in place, most notably "Citizen's United."
I've said it before, but it bears repeating. We cannot treat Covid-19 as an individual issue. Each of our actions has consequences on our broader communities. As we've seen with Omicron, vaccines help (greatly) but are insufficient at completely insulating us from the choices of other individuals. Workers should be able to go to work, to earn a living for themselves and their families, with the knowledge that their employer has done everything possible to keep them safe.
To say that Covid-19 is not an occupational hazard is an outrageous logical contortion.
Agreed but what can the Biden administration do now to address the issue created by this judgment? They can’t get a law passed specifically to support such mandates , as Republicans will filibuster it in Senate.
I had naively thought that Republicans were unhappy with what they called legislating from the bench, but that's what the GOP majority on the court did today and can be expected to do in the future.
As our rights slip away, drip by drip by painful drip, there are times when key events speed up that process. Today was such a day. We don't have to look hard to see the promise of America die in front of our eyes.
Porter, you have mistaken Republicans with people that actually HAVE principles. Their trick is to use talking points from principle when really it is all about serving their own power interests. Charlie
You're right, of course. But that was a major Republican talking point in recent years, that Democrats legislated from the bench while 'conservatives' were 'originalists', as if Madison and the others wrote the Constitution expecting that nothing would ever really change, that human nature would hold to basic principles. And then there came Ronald Reagan, and Nixon and then Trump, but those who believed in successive GOP party lines probably still believe them today even though the GOP has proven them wrong over and over again.
Think about what "originalist" means. That was a world of slavery and 3/5 of a person prior to the Civil War. Think about that a minute and let it sink in. We're really talking about an ante-bellum SCOTUS - "Dred Scott" & all. What's more, I've been pointing that out for years. Others think it's just another political hustle. I'm inclined to agree with that view, to the extent that the implication being hustled is that what the Framers originally intended is the only proper way to interpret The Constitution - as if a "letter of the law" interpretation is somehow proper and they have the direct connection with the Founders' private thoughts after some 2 1/2 centuries dead! (Somehow, they miss the 9th Amendment - the spirit of the law. And somehow, people miss that the Framers included slavers, slave owners, rum runners, arms merchants, and other things nefarious. They >weren't< particularly virtuous as a whole, although a few were. Many were downright self-serving. And somehow, they seem to miss all the amendments outside the Bill of Rights. >None< of those amendments are "originalist." Horse-s##t!)
Their idea is that population will control itself naturally. "Let the excess population die by whatever means it will kill itself." I'm sure they wouldn't allow themselves to think that thought consciously, but look at the world around you to know that's what they ultimately believe in. Isn't that what "sink or swim" really means? How "Christian!"
Maybe so. However, business owners demand a cheap supply of labor. The birth rate in the USA has been below the “replacement rate” for quite a few years, resulting in a declining population of US citizens. The answer? Immigration, which the Republicans publicly disapprove of but privately like — because migrants from the south enable larger profits for Republican business owners. Yet another contradiction from the confused Reptilian Party.
That would potentially screw the UFW - another Republican objective. Modern plantations could "shelter" them for food and an overpopulated hovel - like in the "good old days" when "America" was "great" the first time!
DZK ; Well this fits in with looking at the public as 'human resources' and the anti choice denial of abortion rights. Keep producing 'excess' 'human resources' and we have people competing for jobs and willing to take anything, no matter how awful, for pay and working conditions. Also, they are less able to learn much because their noses are on the grindstone of oppression most of their days.
Exactly! Indeed, as a >disposable< resource. It's what they'd call a >docile< labor force. Good on you for figurin' that out!
Sadly, you seem to be correct.😟
This is a travesty, workers will now have to work in environments with countless number of unvaccinated coworkers, risking their own health and safety and their families too. My son-in-law works in such a place, more than half of the employees are out from COVID, his bosses, boss just died from it and his boss is retiring in a few weeks. No one wears masks and they continue to spread the virus amongst themselves. Those vaccinated are now doing the jobs of the sick. This Supreme Court has proven itself to be a partisan corporate friendly entity that cares nothing about the people in our country. Time to expand the court and put term limits on justices. Enough!
I'm sorry to hear this. Please stay safe, and your son-in-law too.
Absolutely! These SCOTUS reforms ought to be at the very top of Democrats' agenda.
With the Senate paralyzed, there is no chance of effectuating any Democratic (or democratic) agenda. Anyone with the resources to do it should establish residencies in red states. Until we have a supermajority in the Senate and can stop Republican filibusters, nothing is going to get done.
If we gain two seats in the Senate (the four seats where it is possible to flip are Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Florida), we might be able to do something about the filibuster. I’m a little scared of what they would do without the filibuster but I guess they’ll probably do it anyway if they get the seats.
I predict the Republicans will get rid of the filibuster forthwith when they have the power. They will then "go to town" and turn the US into the autocratic country they think want.
This country is spiraling backwards at an alarming rate. We seem hell bent on proving (to steal a bit from Aaron Sorkin’s Will McAvoy) that we’re not the greatest country on earth and if we can be, we have no desire to do what that would require. As a child of the sixties, looking to a future of progress, rationality, education and charity, I’m appalled at the country I’m leaving to my children and grandchildren.
I'm in agreement! I remember the years of thinking, and being told, that our generation was somehow "different!" In words and songs and more we patted ourselves on the back only to be part of the slide to this rot. I look at the former guys rallies and see "my generation" gleefully toasting authoritarianism.
"Won't get fooled again?" Ha. Fools we are.
Amen!!!
The Supreme Court has shown they are ready, willing and able to hide behind "lack of authority" or "procedural' technicalities without truly deciding whether something is constitutional or not.
As you pointed out, OSHA was specifically created BY CONGRESS to provide a safe place to work.
That should include protection from contracting Covid while at work!!!
A place they must show up in order to earn a salary.
Correct procedure trumps common-sense public-health measures. This is yet another indication of a society in decline.
If we (as a nation) do not act soon on the augmentation of the Supreme Court, and put strong term limits on those so-called Justices, we will be on our final approach to democratic oblivion.
I’m curious if this Supreme Court would rule seatbelts and traffic lights as unconstitutional?
Good question... my guess is yes.
Yes, the requirement for seat belts is obviously a case of overreach by regulators! Here we go, down the drain.
In addition to the broader implications for justice, an immediate implication will be more people quitting their jobs to find safer ones. Maybe there will be more union activity as a result of this ruling. Unions can make safety measures a top issue in their negotiations.
So tired of isolation, masks and boosters. I respect other peoples’ rights, but not when it steps on mine, not to mention the health of the whole planet. This is an exceptional situation. I didn’t want to take the vaccine but considered it the only real choice I had as well as my civic duty. For heaven’s sake people sacrifice their lives and bodies for this country. There should not be a need for a mandate. Let’s diddle around until the next variant comes along (sarcasm.)
I salute you for your personal sacrifice, Ms Allen.
Betty Allen ; And they will find a way to blame Biden!
I agree. The Supreme Court justices are, effectively, practicing medicine without a license. They have zero expertise in infectious diseases or epidemiology, yet they substitute their own opinions for those of experts. That is why I said awhile ago in this forum that maybe we need to simply ignore the Supreme Court, in order to protect the country from harm. Another weird idea I had: impeach the six right wing extremist justices, along with the relevant district judges and circuit judges, for practicing medicine without a license. They would not be convicted, of course, but it would send a message.
Thank you for your idea of impeachment. It makes legal sense.
Yes, impeach anyone who is taking a salary from our government and not doing their jobs properly, by following the rule of law and our constitution. Especially those in league with the former guy.
They are delighting those who installed them because they want to push back against Dr Fauci.
Justices???? How about Just Useless!!
How 'bout "Just Asses!"
Just ICES! As in frigid hearts? 💔🥶
Good one!
I say down with the Supreme Court! They should not be paid, (except for the dissenters, who clearly understand the principles at stake here and the Constitution)!
And Neil Gorsuch should be fined and/or removed for refusing to wear a mask!
And now the Supreme Court majority ignores science and other circumstantial facts. New rule: The Supreme Court must now change its name; it's far from supreme.
Too, this decision bolsters need for either term limits or expanded number of judges or both.
Unfortunately, Supreme Court reform is on a list for which we struggle to channel Sinema and Manchin who prioritize media attention and conflicts of financial interest respectively over effective policy-making and governing in pursuit of democracy.
Too bad the ineffective 'public servants' can't just be fired! Justly! This si all fallout from the former guy! More criminal intent made plainly visible.
In theory that firing is in the voting booth, but it's not as imminent, right? I would modify that the fallout is not all on the former guy. The distinction is important because the democracy isn't in jeopardy in this bottom of the ninth inning any more than that last batter up individually wins or loses the game. Both are subject to a full game - or in the case of democracy, decades - of moves that impact either winning or losing. Democracy started its crumble somewhere between Nixon and Newt with a commitment to turn politics and policy into a zero sum game with disregard for anything but unbridled capitalism. As Robert points out, it's ironic our corporations support the so-called far right, because authoritarians claim and seize successful ventures. That's so much to unpack, Laurie! We will maintain our individual vigilance and continue constructive action and unflinching conversations.
They don't support them, they own them!!!
Right-wing thinking is often guided by a social Darwinism that holds that businesses and the individual people who populate them ought be left to sink or swim. Hence, not in favor of terminating unwanted pregnancies, but not in favor of social quality of life programs. I can’t see that today’s decision is an example of anything other than this sort of privileged, exclusionary thinking.
The unSupreme Ct continually contradicts itself not left and right, but right and farther right. Today's "judgment makes absolutely no sense. None at all.
I took a mandatory flu vaccine that I didn’t want for three years before I retired from a hospital. In that case my own immune system was more reliable and effective than the flu shot. I was no more likely to infect someone with the shot than without. I needed the job and I took it.
Nothing right about them … we see yet again.
An awful decision - far beyond the knowledge of SC justices and any modicum of common sense!
EXACTLY!!! 😡😡😡
As a biologist, I am absolutely appalled by this decision. This proves this court becomes nothing more than a corporate rubber stamp when the conservative judges are in the majority. We must add more liberal justices to stop the democracy destroying rulings the conservative justices have put in place, most notably "Citizen's United."