Yesterday the news was about the SCOTUS declining to take up the NY State mandate for healthcare workers that allows for no religious exemptions. Roberts, Brett, and Amy joined with the three liberals in deciding against taking the case. This result was typical of Roberts. The reasoning is that it’s better for complex and far reaching issues to be litigated thoroughly at lower levels of the federal judiciary before the SCOTUS takes them up. It’s not an unreasonable guideline in general—the lower courts are there for a purpose. OTOH, in some cases there can be fairly immediate and serious harm done while the public waits for judicial action. Thus, Gorsuch wrote regarding the NY mandate case:
“In this case, no one seriously disputes that, absent relief, the applicants will suffer an irreparable injury. Not only does New York threaten to have them fired and strip them of unemployment benefits. This Court has held that ‘[t]he loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.’”
The fact is, we’re living in times when an illegitimate regime is openly attempting to establish facts on the ground before the courts can act. In that environment, it seems to me that the usual judicial restraint needs to be reexamined. And if Roberts calls me, that’s exactly what I’ll tell him.
In the meantime, the judicial pushback at the lower levels gained some more momentum yesterday. A few weeks ago the health care worker mandate was enjoined by a US district court judge in the 8th Circuit. That ruling covered ten Red states that had filed suit against the mandate: Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Another district court judge. Today we learn that a three judge panel in the 8th Circuit—so, at the appellate level—ruled against DoJ. The stay of the mandate remains in place, and the victory at the appellate level is an important step forward:
My personal view is that Brett and Amy, and probably Roberts as well, will join the conservatives if these mandate cases ever end up before the SCOTUS. In the meantime, all progress is welcome. Moreover, with the passage of time, more and more data is coming out that militates strongly against any rational basis for the mandates.
You can read more here.
Lower courts are there for a reason; mostly to screen out the commoners. I'm appalled by our criminal justice system where most Americans will never be heard due to the expenses involved.
Mark, I echo Storms69's comments. Really appreciate all you do!
Some interesting notes about the 8th Circuit's decision. It was 2-1. The majority consisted of Bush the Elder & W nominees. The dissenter was an Obama nominee. Further proof that elections matter.
There are 11 health associations who appeared as amici parties supporting the Regime. They include the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Physicians, & American Lung Association. Further proof that politics has taken over medicine.
There's 1 amicus party supporting the States. It's Reliant Care Management Company. It operates 21 facilities in Missouri, mostly in rural areas. They specialize in dual diagnosis patients -- those who have medical and behavioral issues. Reliant care has 661 vaxed employees & 1,062 who are not vaxed. If the mandate goes through Reliant will close 11 of its facilities. There are few if any other facilities who can treat the patients. Now consider what a disaster this would be nationwide were the idiotic mandates be upheld.