WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

180

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

There is No 'mandate' because there is NO law that allows it, over the personal rights of the American citizen. It is obvious that the SC can not read, because the Bill of Rights are Limitations on Gov. NOT 'rights' Given to Citizens.

[–] 0 pt

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/

The police power of a State embraces such reasonable regulations relating to matters completely within its territory, and not affecting the people of other States, established directly by legislative enactment, as will protect the public health and safety. While a local regulation, even if based on the acknowledged police power of a State, must always yield in case of conflict with the exercise by the General Government of any power it possesses under the Constitution, the mode or manner of exercising its police power is wholly within the discretion of the State so long as the Constitution of the United States is not contravened, or any right granted or secured thereby is not infringed, or not exercised in such an arbitrary and oppressive manner as to justify the interference of the courts to prevent wrong and oppression. The liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States does not import an absolute right in each person to be at all times, and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint, nor is it an element in such liberty that one person, or a minority of persons residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local government, should have power to dominate the majority when supported in their action by the authority of the State. It is within the police power of a State to enact a compulsory vaccination law, and it is for the legislature, and not for the courts, to determine

[–] 1 pt

Justices Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined in dissent

[–] 0 pt

Thanks, this was the first think I was looking for. I knew Roberts was compromised because of his child trafficking adoption. I figured ACB would be pro-vax as well since she was pro-lockdowns before she even got to SCOTUS. It's looking pretty hopeless these days.

How can injecting a drug that still experimental legal? How can the court possibly be within constitutional limits by allowing forced vaccination?

[–] 0 pt

As i read the decision. And the dissenting opinion.

This is only a denial of injunctive relief, which isnt a complete case killer.

It will likely be hearalded as pass to continue more of that restrictive behavior though.

[–] 0 pt

One of the elements for an injunction is a showing of likelihood of success on the merits.

[–] 0 pt

Oh it I get it. It is very likely not going to be heard by the USSC. It will instead be left to whatever lower court they can get to hear it if any.

[–] 0 pt

is an archive of the NYT article on the ruling.

[–] 0 pt

... for Maine. This is not about a federal mandate.