By Karl Denninger, The Market Ticker
Project Veritas now has an on-the-record federal HHS employee blowing this whistle.
UAB Hospital in Alabama dropped their vaccine mandate after being threatened with a lawsuit. (They may attempt to play too-cute-by-half with the OSHA rules but if their original position was a loser, so is that one.)
Further, read this:
Don Williamson, president of the Alabama Hospital Association, said most hospitals in the state are not requiring vaccines for employees, WBRC reported. UAB was an exception.
Is that so?
OSHA “rules” are not federal law; they’re regulations and if issued illegally are void.
Law is made by Congress and confirmed (if signed) by the President, or if a veto is overruled. Until that happens it’s not law, it’s a bill and legally means nothing. Agencies can issue regulations but they must comport with the statutes — that is, the law that enables same. This is why the CDC’s mandate was tossed and, I remind you, the courts now have notice that under Biden’s administration being handed a “nice” defeat will be met with a middle finger so the odds of a second “nice” rebuke are now zero.
I predicted when this BS started that OSHA would fail in this regard for several reasons. Chief among them is that it is a major rule impacting millions. This is not an emergency situation at one company or even within a single industry; it is intended to blast the entire nation’s workforce at once with a mandate. This triggers a whole host of scrutiny requirements which are very unlikely to succeed and will be immediately challenged — along with filings asking for injunctions to bar enforcement until a ruling on the merits is made.
Said ruling will require hearings, trials, and ultimately likely go before the US Supreme Court. It will take months if not years to go through that process. I remind you that an injunction requires:
1. You are likely to win. OSHA has not issued a rule of this sort of scope in a very long time, and certainly not on an emergency basis. The entire premise of an “emergency” 18 months into this pandemic is a joke; Congress has had a year and a half to consider legislation and has not. That standing alone like dooms the rule. But there’s much more — in order to argue that “the vaccinated” must be protected in the workplace from “the unvaccinated” you have to admit the vaccines don’t work! If you put that admission into writing then you just ate your own tail; the circular logic of that is obvious to anyone. If you don’t then only consenting persons, who choose not to be vaccinated, are at risk. Then there is the CDC Director’s direct testimony before Congress, under oath, in September 2020 in which he said masks were more effective than vaccines — and he meant surgical masks too as that’s what he held up. When liberty interests are implicated the least-intrusive means to accomplish the goal must be chosen; the government cannot take the most intrusive, and potential permanent harm is certainly as intrusive as it gets. Having admitted there is a better alternative OSHA will lose on that basis. There’s much more — but you just need to demonstrate probability of a win.
2. Irreparable injury that cannot be compensated for with money. Losing a job or worse, permanently damaging your health qualifies. No problem there.
3. The threatened injury if the order goes into effect exceeds that if not. The status quo is what that’s measured against; this one is somewhat of a tougher call, but likely wins.
4. The injunction is not adverse to the public interest. 100 million Americans are the public interest. This is not a majority rule question; impacting a huge number of people certainly reaches this threshold.
The courts are not stupid. Partisan although claimed to not be, yes. Biased although designed to resist that, yes. Typically deferential to the Executive (and especially Congress), yes, even though by the Constitution they’re all co-equal. But stupid? No.
An injunction protects the status quo. In this case the various courts are very cognizant of the risks of allowing such a mandate through — whether with legal review or not. Those risks include a collapse of health care in whole or part, a collapse of supply lines and knock-on effects that could include disruption of basic and necessary commodities and services. That is a genie that, if it gets out of the bottle, may not be able to be put back in.It is one thing to allow Congress and the Executive to do this sort of thing (as was done with Obamacare); to allow just the Executive to do it is another thing entirely.
I’ll lay odds the injunction issues — and the reason you haven’t heard much from OSHA yet is because they know damn well they’re going to lose for the above reasons, and if they don’t a significant number of the nation’s hospitals may collapse. If you have a heart attack in that situation you will die. If any significant union or even just industry presence (e.g. Teamsters, truckers, etc.) strike in response the entire national economy could be destabilized within days or weeks.
There is no means to compel you to work. Further, the courts are explicitly forbidden, with very few exceptions (the FRA to be specific) to interfere in what is clearly a “strike”, whether coordinated or not. They can’t stop you from erecting the middle finger.
The entire clown world game of Biden and the jabs is about to blow up in their face.
That was my prediction originally and I stand by it.
I’ll add another prediction: The petulant 2-year-old in the White House will throw a temper tantrum.