It’s not like they’d get the COVID to us on time…probably steal it or lose it in the warehouse, so we’re safe.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
COVID-19
- Thread starter Treetop Flyer
- Start date
Or deliver yours to the neighbors down the street.
Really don't know about USPS. They are a "Federal Enterprise". Not actual government employees as I understand it. And I am sure you know the President can't order Congress to do anything. Separation of powers and all. Biden can't order masks in federal courts houses either.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
One thing that is dawning on me today is that COVID-19 has had a more lasting impact on day-to-day life in NYC (specifically, Manhattan) than the attacks on 9/11. The place is practically a ghost town right now compared to what it was. For the vast majority of inhabitants in NYC, life was back to normal within the month following 9/11.
Last edited:
Because the Constitution does not give the Executive Branch those powers over the Legislative Branch.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Could you point me to where it says that he has that power over commerce?
It's a game-changer across the country. The nudge that shifted the boulder on a one way trip.
Article 1 sec 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate commerce. Of course SCOTUS has decided many cases that have defined what "commerce " is. The president can exert power over commerce as long as Congress allows it.
Why the question? Where did I miss the President invoking regulation of the Commerce Clause as authority for certain actions/orders?
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
He didn't use the commerce clause as justification... he just did a thing:
Biden announces COVID-19 vaccine mandates that will affect 100 million Americans
The Department of Labor is developing an emergency rule requiring vaccinations at workplaces with 100 or more employees.
www.cbsnews.com
Basically Articles I and II. Commerce in the 21st century is nebulous. You have to look at the case law built up over centuries to really see the limits. Both Congress and the Executive Branch have broad power over interstate commerce. The Executive has the power to draft foreign treaties (i.e. trade laws, tariffs, etc) which the Senate must ratify.
Oh yeah, I heard that. DOL is in the Executive. He can command it to do anything. We live in a Regulation State. I haven't read the actual policy. I wouldn't be surprised if it is Constitutional. But I hope not.He didn't use the commerce clause as justification... he just did a thing:
Biden announces COVID-19 vaccine mandates that will affect 100 million Americans
The Department of Labor is developing an emergency rule requiring vaccinations at workplaces with 100 or more employees.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
I think that you missed that the question was rhetorical. There's nothing in Article 2 that lets the President unilaterally dictate that private businesses have to mandate vaccinations. Your highlight that treaties have to be ratified by the Senate is further evidence that the President isn't supposed to have this power. Hopefully this doesn't stand up to judicial review.
Different story if there's a bill passed by Congress (interstate commerce / elastic clauses), but I think that such a bill is very unlikely to gain any bipartisan support.
I'm all for vaccines, but I'm also for preserving the right way for the federal government to do business.
Concur
Slight thread jack (while he climbs onto a soap box). This vax order to private business highlights just one of the problems with our Regulation State. Too often Congress writes a broad law and then abdicates its authority AND responsibility by delegating everything to the executive branch by way of having administrations and agencies write regulations, enforce them and adjudicate them, largely outside of the federal judiciary but thorough Administrative Law Judges that are part of the Executive Branch and work for the administration that is charging the citizen with a violation of one of their own regulations. Violate an EPA regulation and you go before an Administrative Law Judge within the EPA.
The President knows he can not get Congress to write a law requiring companies over 100 employees to have their people vaccinated, so he is having DOL through OSHA regulation order it. This blurring of the independance of the three branches of government is not something the Founders ever anticipated. It clearly is not what the written Constitution says, just the opposite in fact. This is only permitted by case law in the form of SOTUS opinions over many years. But because the Supremes say it is permitted under their reading of the Constitution doesn't mean it is required. Congress can take back its authority, meaning citizens will actually have more say, or Presidents could simply not abuse the situation as it is. // end rant.
The President knows he can not get Congress to write a law requiring companies over 100 employees to have their people vaccinated, so he is having DOL through OSHA regulation order it. This blurring of the independance of the three branches of government is not something the Founders ever anticipated. It clearly is not what the written Constitution says, just the opposite in fact. This is only permitted by case law in the form of SOTUS opinions over many years. But because the Supremes say it is permitted under their reading of the Constitution doesn't mean it is required. Congress can take back its authority, meaning citizens will actually have more say, or Presidents could simply not abuse the situation as it is. // end rant.
An interesting article...
www.politico.com
The year was 1904, and when his politically charged legal challenge to the $5 fine for failing to get vaccinated made its way to the Supreme Court, the justices had a surprise for Rev. Jacobson. One man’s liberty, they declared in a 7-2 ruling handed down the following February, cannot deprive his neighbors of their own liberty — in this case by allowing the spread of disease. Jacobson, they ruled, must abide by the order of the Cambridge board of health or pay the penalty.
“There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good,” read the majority opinion. “On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.”
The Surprisingly Strong Supreme Court Precedent Supporting Vaccine Mandates
In 1905, the high court made a fateful ruling with eerie parallels to today: One person’s liberty can’t trump everyone else’s.
www.politico.com
The year was 1904, and when his politically charged legal challenge to the $5 fine for failing to get vaccinated made its way to the Supreme Court, the justices had a surprise for Rev. Jacobson. One man’s liberty, they declared in a 7-2 ruling handed down the following February, cannot deprive his neighbors of their own liberty — in this case by allowing the spread of disease. Jacobson, they ruled, must abide by the order of the Cambridge board of health or pay the penalty.
“There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good,” read the majority opinion. “On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.”