See: 5 Important Quotes From Justice Thomas's Dissent in Biden v. Missouri (townhall.com)


5. "These cases are not about the efficacy or importance of COVID–19 vaccines. They are only about whether CMS has the statutory authority to force healthcare workers, by coercing their employers, to undergo a medical procedure they do not want and cannot undo. Because the Government has not made a strong showing that Congress gave CMS that broad authority, I would deny the stays pending appeal. I respectfully dissent."

The irrefutable fact is, a majority on the Court intentionally trampled upon the fundamental rights of healthcare workers.

The majority trampled upon the inalienable right of people being free to make their own medical decisions and choices. Apparently, the majority were willing to ignore what our Supreme Court has emphatically established regarding indirectly impinging upon the fundamental rights of mankind:

“The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty on its exercise is patently unconstitutional.” Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618

Additionally, a government act which “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution is presumptively unconstitutional.” See: Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980) Also see City of Mobile v. Bolden, 466 U.S. 55, 76, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980)

So where does this established law leave us regarding the mandate and the healthcare workers fundamental rights?

The fact is, under such circumstances the Court was required, at the very least, to apply “strict scrutiny” to the mandate:

(A) which must be narrowly tailored to achieve the government’s purpose,

(B) the purpose must be clearly defined and be based upon scientific and logical reasoning,

(C) and it must use the least restrictive means to achieve the government’s stated purpose.

The majority on the Court ignored the protection of applying strict scrutiny to the mandate so as to protect the healthcare workers’ fundamental rights, and make necessary accommodations for them, while at the same time working to thread the needle to “achieve the government’s stated purpose”.

We now see a majority on our Supreme Court is not only willing to ignore established law but are likewise willing to trample upon the fundamental rights of American citizens.

BTW the S.C. ruling, along with Thomas' dissent can be found HERE

JWK

Why have a written constitution approved by the people if those who it is designed to limit and control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?