from The Federalist (a US right-wing news website, wiki for anyone unfamiliar) 2015, written by the founder of the site, Ben Domenech: The Insane Vaccine Debate from that page's history on...
Exemplary
from The Federalist (a US right-wing news website, wiki for anyone unfamiliar)
2015, written by the founder of the site, Ben Domenech:
We've had mandatory vaccine policies in the U.S. since before the Emancipation Proclamation. Why are they controversial now?
Fundamentally, the protection against life-threatening plague is one of the original reasons government exists. We’ve had mandatory vaccines for schoolchildren in America since before the Emancipation Proclamation. The Supreme Court has upheld that practice as constitutional for over a century, and only the political fringes believe there ought to be a debate about such matters. This is one of the few areas where government necessarily exercises power.
from that page's history on archive.org, you can see that in the last few days there has been a very large spike in the number of requests to archive the page.
meanwhile, in 2021, filed in their "Wuhan Virus" section:
American politics in a nutshell is that 6 years ago, even the farthest of far-right media outlets such as the Federalist was like "yeah, vaccines, no big deal, you should get them"
Now that it's available, I've edited the link to the official White House page about the plan, it was previously this Wall Street Journal article (paywalled).
Now that it's available, I've edited the link to the official White House page about the plan, it was previously this Wall Street Journal article (paywalled).
There is at least some precedence for this, too. In a 7-2 decision in 1905, the court found that vaccine mandates did not violate the 4th amendment: The main difference here, as far as I can tell,...
Facts of the case
A Massachusetts law allowed cities to require residents to be vaccinated against smallpox. Cambridge adopted such an ordinance, with some exceptions. Jacobson refused to comply with the requirement and was fined five dollars. Question
Did the mandatory vaccination law violate Jacobson's Fourteenth Amendment right to liberty? Conclusion
The Court held that the law was a legitimate exercise of the state's police power to protect the public health and safety of its citizens. Local boards of health determined when mandatory vaccinations were needed, thus making the requirement neither unreasonable nor arbitrarily imposed.
The main difference here, as far as I can tell, is that this is a Federal policy and might fall under "arbitrarily imposed" if it can't properly account for edge cases. It's also not directly a vaccine mandate in the way the 1905 ordinance was. So it probably will end up at the Supreme Court, but I think it stands a good chance of being upheld. I am, like, totally not a lawyer though so I have no clue what I'm on about.
It's also not a 100% mandate. There's an explicit out: if you still don't want to be vaccinated, you can subject yourself to tests on a weekly basis. Tests have greatly advanced since the...
It's also not a 100% mandate. There's an explicit out: if you still don't want to be vaccinated, you can subject yourself to tests on a weekly basis. Tests have greatly advanced since the beginning; I did one recently that was self serve, took 10 seconds, and just involved me gently swirling a swab in my nose.
I did a rapid lateral flow test recently to attend a gig. It involved swabbing my tonsils & nose, placing the sample inside a liquid-filled beaker and then waiting 30 minutes for a result....
I did a rapid lateral flow test recently to attend a gig. It involved swabbing my tonsils & nose, placing the sample inside a liquid-filled beaker and then waiting 30 minutes for a result. Thankfully tested negative, because if I tested positive and had to take a PCR test to self-isolate, it would've ruined my 30th birthday.
The 1905 law also had a penalty of $5 (total) for noncompliance, and occurred in a very different era for constitutional law (I mean, none of the amendments had been incorporated to the states...
The 1905 law also had a penalty of $5 (total) for noncompliance, and occurred in a very different era for constitutional law (I mean, none of the amendments had been incorporated to the states yet). I think federal vaccine mandates for air travel and cruises are likely to be upheld, but a general vaccine-only mandate (at the state or federal level) is a bit more dubious IMO.
Edit: clarified vaccine-only mandate versus a vaccine or test mandate.
I was curious what that $5 would look like after inflation, but the data/calculators I could find quickly only really go back to 1913. Even so, a $5 fine in 1913 works out to $137.88, so I could...
I was curious what that $5 would look like after inflation, but the data/calculators I could find quickly only really go back to 1913. Even so, a $5 fine in 1913 works out to $137.88, so I could easily see a $150 fine being comparable today. I'd be shocked if that actually happened.
It’s possible, but I doubt it would happen. I don’t think a majority of those Republican justices have any ideological opposition to vaccines, while they do actually have a pretty expansive view...
It’s possible, but I doubt it would happen. I don’t think a majority of those Republican justices have any ideological opposition to vaccines, while they do actually have a pretty expansive view of presidential power (which was the issue under Trump).
If this goes through I suspect we'll see a few other segments of the population (or activities like air travel) get a vaccine mandate. Combined with vaccine availability for those < 12 years old...
If this goes through I suspect we'll see a few other segments of the population (or activities like air travel) get a vaccine mandate. Combined with vaccine availability for those < 12 years old we aren't looking too bad in the long run.
I cannot wait until < 12 can get the vaccine. My kids are 2 and it's basically impossible to get them to wear masks. They have a huge aversion to anything on their face or head, so they mostly...
I cannot wait until < 12 can get the vaccine. My kids are 2 and it's basically impossible to get them to wear masks. They have a huge aversion to anything on their face or head, so they mostly just stay at home. I really want to be able to safely take these kids out to experience the world.
From what I can tell the 5-11 range will have vaccine availability not before a month from now. Maybe a couple of months. After that they’re opening up the 6 months-4 year old window.
From what I can tell the 5-11 range will have vaccine availability not before a month from now. Maybe a couple of months. After that they’re opening up the 6 months-4 year old window.
All employers with 100 or more employees would have to require their workers to be vaccinated or undergo at least weekly Covid-19 testing under a new plan by President Biden to curb the spread of the pandemic, senior administration officials said.
The Labor Department in the coming weeks plans to issue an emergency temporary standard implementing the new requirement, which will cover 80 million private-sector workers, officials said. Businesses that don’t comply can face fines of up to $14,000 per violation, they said.
Even a nudge in the right direction tends to be valuable, and this is more of a strong shove. It's not perfect, and I don't doubt there will be a whole lot of people claiming spurious exemptions,...
Even a nudge in the right direction tends to be valuable, and this is more of a strong shove. It's not perfect, and I don't doubt there will be a whole lot of people claiming spurious exemptions, but I think there will be a whole lot more who take the path of least resistance and just get the damn vaccine.
A large majority of adults have already started the vaccine schedule in their own. I imagine coworkers that try to take these options as an out will get a ton of shit. Now they’re not just risking...
A large majority of adults have already started the vaccine schedule in their own. I imagine coworkers that try to take these options as an out will get a ton of shit. Now they’re not just risking everyone’s lives. They are lying, bending the rules, and risking everyone’s lives. That pressure will help reduce the number of claims.
I very much doubt it. I have a pretty insistent coworker who refuses to get vaccinated at the advice of his wife who is "in med school" (she's studying to be a naturopath) and despite all of us...
I very much doubt it. I have a pretty insistent coworker who refuses to get vaccinated at the advice of his wife who is "in med school" (she's studying to be a naturopath) and despite all of us being incredibly uncomfortable being around him, he persists. Thankfully we're WFH for now, but we do have occasional in-person working sessions together. I have 0 doubts he will now take the religious exemption.
My MIL is a nurse working in a private cliic administering COVID-19 vaccines to the elderly, and her boss (the doctor) told her that he advises both her and all his patients to hold off with the vaccine "because of all the side-effects".
My toddler is in daycare, and despite my state mandating that all childcare/school professional be vaccinated, he does have non-vaccinated personnel at his daycare center who have taken the religious exemption. They wouldn't even tell us if they are his direct teachers because "HIPA". This country is upside down when people who are obstinately and deliberately risking us all have more rights than us.
I imagine so. If there's religious exemptions there will definitely be medical ones. I expect a large chunk of the workforce is going to find Jesus now 🙄
I imagine so. If there's religious exemptions there will definitely be medical ones. I expect a large chunk of the workforce is going to find Jesus now 🙄
from The Federalist (a US right-wing news website, wiki for anyone unfamiliar)
2015, written by the founder of the site, Ben Domenech:
The Insane Vaccine Debate
from that page's history on archive.org, you can see that in the last few days there has been a very large spike in the number of requests to archive the page.
meanwhile, in 2021, filed in their "Wuhan Virus" section:
In Fascist Move, Biden Administration To Force Vaccine Mandates On Private Companies
American politics in a nutshell is that 6 years ago, even the farthest of far-right media outlets such as the Federalist was like "yeah, vaccines, no big deal, you should get them"
Now that it's available, I've edited the link to the official White House page about the plan, it was previously this Wall Street Journal article (paywalled).
This will almost certainly end up at the Supreme Court.
There is at least some precedence for this, too. In a 7-2 decision in 1905, the court found that vaccine mandates did not violate the 4th amendment:
The main difference here, as far as I can tell, is that this is a Federal policy and might fall under "arbitrarily imposed" if it can't properly account for edge cases. It's also not directly a vaccine mandate in the way the 1905 ordinance was. So it probably will end up at the Supreme Court, but I think it stands a good chance of being upheld. I am, like, totally not a lawyer though so I have no clue what I'm on about.
It's also not a 100% mandate. There's an explicit out: if you still don't want to be vaccinated, you can subject yourself to tests on a weekly basis. Tests have greatly advanced since the beginning; I did one recently that was self serve, took 10 seconds, and just involved me gently swirling a swab in my nose.
I did a rapid lateral flow test recently to attend a gig. It involved swabbing my tonsils & nose, placing the sample inside a liquid-filled beaker and then waiting 30 minutes for a result. Thankfully tested negative, because if I tested positive and had to take a PCR test to self-isolate, it would've ruined my 30th birthday.
The 1905 law also had a penalty of $5 (total) for noncompliance, and occurred in a very different era for constitutional law (I mean, none of the amendments had been incorporated to the states yet). I think federal vaccine mandates for air travel and cruises are likely to be upheld, but a general vaccine-only mandate (at the state or federal level) is a bit more dubious IMO.
Edit: clarified vaccine-only mandate versus a vaccine or test mandate.
I was curious what that $5 would look like after inflation, but the data/calculators I could find quickly only really go back to 1913. Even so, a $5 fine in 1913 works out to $137.88, so I could easily see a $150 fine being comparable today. I'd be shocked if that actually happened.
It's happening through OSHA. It's a workplace safety mechanism that's already in place. I don't see how it's dubious at all.
I clarified that by a general mandate, I mean a requirement that everyone gets vaccinated, no testing option.
It was also upheld in 1922 in with Zucht v. King, where (get this) the state of Texas was the one requiring vaccination. Oh how far we've
comefallen.With a 5-4 spread of Republican-favoured justices, I can see the SCOTUS overruling this.
It’s possible, but I doubt it would happen. I don’t think a majority of those Republican justices have any ideological opposition to vaccines, while they do actually have a pretty expansive view of presidential power (which was the issue under Trump).
If this goes through I suspect we'll see a few other segments of the population (or activities like air travel) get a vaccine mandate. Combined with vaccine availability for those < 12 years old we aren't looking too bad in the long run.
I cannot wait until < 12 can get the vaccine. My kids are 2 and it's basically impossible to get them to wear masks. They have a huge aversion to anything on their face or head, so they mostly just stay at home. I really want to be able to safely take these kids out to experience the world.
From what I can tell the 5-11 range will have vaccine availability not before a month from now. Maybe a couple of months. After that they’re opening up the 6 months-4 year old window.
Per the Washington Post:
What is even the point?
Even a nudge in the right direction tends to be valuable, and this is more of a strong shove. It's not perfect, and I don't doubt there will be a whole lot of people claiming spurious exemptions, but I think there will be a whole lot more who take the path of least resistance and just get the damn vaccine.
A large majority of adults have already started the vaccine schedule in their own. I imagine coworkers that try to take these options as an out will get a ton of shit. Now they’re not just risking everyone’s lives. They are lying, bending the rules, and risking everyone’s lives. That pressure will help reduce the number of claims.
I very much doubt it. I have a pretty insistent coworker who refuses to get vaccinated at the advice of his wife who is "in med school" (she's studying to be a naturopath) and despite all of us being incredibly uncomfortable being around him, he persists. Thankfully we're WFH for now, but we do have occasional in-person working sessions together. I have 0 doubts he will now take the religious exemption.
My MIL is a nurse working in a private cliic administering COVID-19 vaccines to the elderly, and her boss (the doctor) told her that he advises both her and all his patients to hold off with the vaccine "because of all the side-effects".
My toddler is in daycare, and despite my state mandating that all childcare/school professional be vaccinated, he does have non-vaccinated personnel at his daycare center who have taken the religious exemption. They wouldn't even tell us if they are his direct teachers because "HIPA". This country is upside down when people who are obstinately and deliberately risking us all have more rights than us.
I imagine so. If there's religious exemptions there will definitely be medical ones. I expect a large chunk of the workforce is going to find Jesus now 🙄