Constitutional powers Presidential Drug Mandates question

[revelarts]

Constitutional powers Presidential Drug Mandates Question
I think it's an easy call to say that there's NOTHING in the constitution that grants a president the right to mandate drugs. via employers, via fines and threats or any other way.

But Concerning the supposed 'legality' of the Biden OSHA mandates.
Here's a question that came to mind.

If one started at George Washington, Which president would be able to claim "legal" (certainly not constitutional) authority to tell all Americans Biz to fire anyone who wasn't vaccinated with a specific drug. And Restrict the use of all other treatments?
George Washington and Jefferson would NOT have imagined they had that power or ever claimed it.
And the economy was still agrarian and small biz. there's NO way it would have flown. In principal or in practice.

Also should the NEW supposed legal power be Repealed or Blocked?


Frankly I'm just about done with hoping the U.S. will walk back any of the unconstitutional laws and powers.
the Constitution and the U.S. legal system was a great ideal to strive for.. wonderful experiment. It's dead now.
Most people have been feared into the supposed "safety" of all the gov't powers. The Left and Right love big brother to much to repeal any of it's powers. And can't imagine an America without them.

[fj1200]

Has he actually done it yet?

[SassyLady]

Has he actually done it yet?
So far he hasn't had to because companies are instituting the mandates before a law has been passed.

[fj1200]

So no he hasn't. That law would never pass and his EO would be challenged immediately. Or it was all a distraction from his Afg debacle.

[Juicer66]

-------------
Frankly I'm just about done with hoping the U.S. will walk back any of the unconstitutional laws and powers.
the Constitution and the U.S. legal system was a great ideal to strive for.. wonderful experiment. It's dead now.
Most people have been feared into the supposed "safety" of all the gov't powers. The Left and Right love big brother to much to repeal any of it's powers. And can't imagine an America without them.



Have you lost faith in , "Goodbye Maritime Law… Hello Nesara/Gesara! "Nesara/Gesara (https://marilynjwilliams.com/nesara-gesara-in-simple-words/) requires that all governments have to step down and re-elections have to take place within a 120 day period after the inception of it.


NESARA = National Economic Security and Recovery Act
GESARA = Global Economic Security and Recovery Act
If I understand correctly , this is the underlying basis of the future planned ' Resurrection' Act .With The Donald either at the helm or masterminding from behind the curtain .

In the US it means a move from Admiralty Law to New Republic Common Law .With appropriately amended Constitution


I am just a mesmerised messenger and will be a fascinated spectator if anything like this comes about . And within the next few weeks is the popular timing forecast by its

most strenuous advocates .

I read almost everything but only believe some of it and probably very little .Nevertheless there are those who believe that Mr T was careful to take the US out of Admiralty

Law before stepping down except specifically and only with the exception of Washington DC . Which if true makes the Sleepy Administration non American , illegal and arguably

non constitutional .

Just repeating .For further clarification ask someone like Steve Bannon presumably .

[Gunny]

So no he hasn't. That law would never pass and his EO would be challenged immediately. Or it was all a distraction from his Afg debacle.The Supreme Court ruled in 1905 (against a San Antonio man no less :)) that government can mandate vaccination. The precedent is there.

If Biden was to issue such a mandate, a challenge to the Supreme Court ruling would have to be made. Why do I feel like I'm preaching to the choir? You know the drill.

[Black Diamond]

The Supreme Court ruled in 1905 (against a San Antonio man no less :)) that government can mandate vaccination. The precedent is there.

If Biden was to issue such a mandate, a challenge to the Supreme Court ruling would have to be made. Why do I feel like I'm preaching to the choir? You know the drill.

Maybe his handlers have discouraged him from going through with it. Even so, he seems to have triggered these companies into mandating them and as a result will make a bad problem even worse.

[fj1200]

The Supreme Court ruled in 1905 (against a San Antonio man no less :)) that government can mandate vaccination. The precedent is there.

If Biden was to issue such a mandate, a challenge to the Supreme Court ruling would have to be made. Why do I feel like I'm preaching to the choir? You know the drill.

I'm not so sure. The 1905 case involved Massachussetts and involved a state or city; not Feds. The Feds can but only the military (obviously not tell you anything) and biden is going through OSHA. It'll be a stretch for that to make it to the states IMO.

[Gunny]

Maybe his handlers have discouraged him from going through with it. Even so, he seems to have triggered these companies into mandating them and as a result will make a bad problem even worse.

I agree. Even with a Supreme Court ruling to back him up, the people that don't want the vaccine for whatever reason are just bowing up. The corporations are making it worse. It's like everything else Biden has touched. He's achieved the exact opposite result desired.

Fact is, every state already has vaccination laws. Just because the virus is new doesn't mean the law has changed. You have to have a minimum of 2-3 here to start public school.

People can do what they want. The consequences of choice are there. What I've seeing mostly is people wanting choice without consequence.

[revelarts]

I agree. Even with a Supreme Court ruling to back him up, the people that don't want the vaccine for whatever reason are just bowing up. The corporations are making it worse. It's like everything else Biden has touched. He's achieved the exact opposite result desired.

Fact is, every state already has vaccination laws. Just because the virus is new doesn't mean the law has changed. You have to have a minimum of 2-3 here to start public school.

People can do what they want. The consequences of choice are there. What I've seeing mostly is people wanting choice without consequence.
Gunny,
but I'm still trying to figure out what consequences you think people deserve who simply want to control what medications they take.

The Amish take no vaccines what consequences do they rate?

do consequences = public shame and ridicule?
do consequences = no public shopping or biz activity?
do consequences = no access to public transportation?
do consequences = no public education... or public and private college or trade schools?
do consequences = no jobs?
do consequences = no hospital care?
do consequences = permanent home quarantine?
do consequences = internment camps?
do consequences = whatever the gov't and private sector arbitrarily determine?
A mix of the above?

I'm not sure you've ever made it clear what you think U.S. citizens consequences should be for their personal medical choices.
You've made it clear there should be or WILL BE some, I'm sincerely curious what exactly you think is they should be.

[Black Diamond]

13666

[Black Diamond]

13667