See the news coverage links further below.
Ignoramus Supreme Court Justices
The job of a Supreme Court Justice heretofore has been to hear evidence presented to the court (ideally listen and consider it), and then at least pretend to rule objectively. We were all largely content to accept that charade, and in spite of it the country has been well-served more than half the time, even if it takes 50-100 years to correct wrongs (eg slavery, universal suffrage, etc).
These justices are not asking questions, they are making political statements, having already decided to ignore the law and apply their own ideological viewpoint. This case vaporizes the last shred of credibility of the Supreme Court—just another political body makeing pretenses. They want the outcome they want, damn the Constitution and the law.
Justice Sotomayer’as COVID misinformation:
Even raging leftist fake-news CNN gagged on this turd sausage.
- “Omicron is just as deadly for the unvaccinated”
- “Omicron variant is so severe that we have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, many on ventilators”
- “Why is the human being not like a machine if it’s spewing a virus, blood-borne viruses?”
- “There's no requirement here. It's not a vaccine mandate. It's something totally different”.
Humans are not machines, COVID is not a blood-borne illness and a mandate hurts many people, and natural immunity is a thing, which Sotomayer is apparenetly totally ignorant of. Dumb-fuck award of the year.
- “We all know what the best policy is. By this point, two years later, we know that the best way to prevent spread is to get vaccinated. And to prevent dangerous illness and death, is for people to get vaccinated. That is by far the best”.
- “This is by far the greatest public health danger we've faced in more than a century”.
Non-factual bullshit from Kagan, with the pandemic of the vaccinated in full swing. And masks have NEVER been shown to prevent community spread.
- “hospitals are full almost to the point of maximum” = absolutely false.
- “750 million new cases yesterday or close to that” = WTF?
- “...more may quit when they discover they have to work together with unvaccinated others because that means they may get the disease”.
We have three people on the Supreme Court unfit to judge any case of any kind whatsoever: to be that clueless and uninformed and detached from reality, you have to be a dumb-fuck in the 10% dumbest most gullible part of the population. Yet these jackasses get to decide how you can live your life.
2022-01-10, by Jonathan Turley.
That led Justice Elena Sotomayor to make a claim about children with Covid that even the Washington Post called “absurdly high” and worthy of “four Pinocchios.”
The incident raised a sensitive issue for some of us who oppose the massive censorship programs on Twitter and other social media platforms. Justice Sotomayor was spreading “disinformation” on Covid-19, so could she be barred from Twitter? As you might expect the answer is no, but that is precisely the problem with the corporate censorship embraced by many today.
The controversial statement of Justice Sotomayor could not have come at a worse time. She and her two liberal colleagues were arguing against substantial judicial review of the mandate orders in favor of extreme deference for the agencies. They argued that there was no time to waste in light of the dire crisis facing the country.
However, all three justices made claims that were challenged in terms of their accuracy. Justice Stephen Breyer, for example, declared there were “750 million new cases yesterday, or close to that.” He added that “is a lot. I don’t mean to be facetious.” It was not facetious, it was false.
Yet, Sotomayor’s claims were the most alarming:
“Those numbers show that omicron is as deadly and causes as much serious disease in the unvaccinated as delta did. … We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition and many on ventilators.”
In an interview on Fox News, CDC chief Dr. Rochelle Walensky confirmed that there are actually fewer than 3,500 kids with the virus in hospitals.
...Clearly, Justice Sotomayor’s statement was false. As the Washington Post stated, it was “absurdly” false. However, overstating the risks of Covid-19 is not considered “harmful.” The social media companies target skeptics, not zealots.
WIND: I don’t support banning/canceling anyone, but given the recent behavior of Twitter, Sotomayer should absolutely be banned.
But why doesn’t Turley go after the elephant in the room—Justices presenting their own “facts”. What the hell is the point of a court that can make shit up to fit its own pre-conceived notions? And even if you think Sotomayer was “only” misinformed, that should chill your blood.
On Friday’s broadcast of the Fox Business Network’s “Evening Edit,” Fox News Medical Contributor and Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Professor Dr. Marty Makary stated that Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s argument that a vaccine mandate is the best policy to stop the pandemic is “medically inaccurate” because vaccinated people are getting infected and we have treatments that cut coronavirus deaths.
Makary said, “I understand Justice Kagan is well-intended. But what she said was wrong. It was medically inaccurate. She said more and more people are getting sick every day, and regarding the mandate, she says the key to stopping all of this — there is nothing else that will perform that function better than the vaccine mandate. Well, that’s not true anymore. Vaccinated people are getting Omicron just as the unvaccinated are. And we do have drugs that cut COVID deaths to zero. Now, if you want to mandate a parachute out of an airplane, okay. But when you’re jumping 5 feet into a swimming pool, that changes the dynamic. It changes the calculus. It renders mandates obsolete.”
WIND: what a nice way of saying the Injustice Sotomayer is a totally clueless dumb-fuck deciding how we can live our lives, on every important issue of the day.
2022-01-10, by Jonathan Turley.
The official court transcripts confirm that Gorsuch got his facts right. Mystal (who has a history of inflammatory writings) later admitted that Gorsuch said hundreds or thousands die from flu each year. However, he insisted that in all caps again that statement “IS ALSO WRONG.”
Thousands do die each year. Indeed, if anything, Gorsuch was being . . . well . . . too conservative. It is tens of thousands which only supports his argument that, despite such a large number of deaths, OSHA has not previously used this authority to mandate a flu vaccine for all workplaces with over 100 employees.
WIND: Gorsuch also did not specify USA or the world.
2022-01-10, by Jonathan Turley.
“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.
... 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...
WIND: the Constitution will be in tatters even with a mixed ruling.