Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 221

Thread: Preserve, protect and defend

  1. #181
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Naill View Post
    ...what you do?
    Is that a sentence?
    Had you posted the same, I would have understood the intend and responded. Don’t bother, I understand you’re a stuffed shirt😉😉
    Didn't think you thought it was a sentence either.
    You would have been responding to your understanding of my comment.
    I'd rather know what you mean before responding.
    Of course you would, being the troll

  2. #182
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Of course the other alternative is that you don't know, or won't say, what you mean.

  3. #183
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    Of course the other alternative is that you don't know, or won't say, what you mean.
    It’s a simple question, what would you do?

  4. #184
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    We both know you haven't finished the question: "What would you do (about ________?)

    But I'll take your question as a free pass: I propose that Autocrat Joe, who claimed to graduate in the top half of his law school class when he was actually 76th out of 85, be questioned by someone with the skills of Trey Gowdy regarding the interplay of the presidential oath, the Constitutional separation of powers, and Biden's theory of ruling by edict.

  5. #185
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    It's not for lack of trying.


    "The Plaintiff States also argue that CMS’s rationale is flagrantly pretextual. The
    Government Defendants say it is not pretextual, but it is obvious that the mandate was enacted as
    a result of President Biden’s September 9, 2021, declaration of his intention to impose a national
    CMS Mandate.
    33 Both the CMS and OSHA vaccine mandates were published on the same day,
    November 5, 2021. However, the 46-page CMS Mandate does not even mention President
    Biden’s declaration of a national vaccine mandate. The presence of pretext is enough to render a
    rule arbitrary and capricious." [emphasis added]
    ***


    "If the separation of powers meant anything to the Constitutional framers, it meant that the
    three necessary ingredients to deprive a person of liberty or property – the power to make rules,
    to enforce them, and to judge their violations – could never fall into the same hands. If the Executive branch is allowed to usurp the power of the Legislative branch to
    make laws, two of the three powers conferred by the Constitution would be in the same hands.
    If human nature and history teach anything, it is that civil liberties face grave risks when
    governments proclaim indefinite states of emergency.
    During a pandemic such as this one, it is even more important to safeguard the separation
    of powers set forth in our Constitution to avoid erosion of our liberties." [citations deleted]

    Louisiana vs Becerra, et al, USDC Western District of Louisiana

    The first excerpt addresses the autocratic imposition of a mandate, while the second demonstrates that the attempt was made contrary to the Constitutional concept of separation of powers.

    Interestingly, Dr. Jay Bhattachary is cited in the decision as well.
    I appreciate the selection that you have posted here, but it is a plaintiff's claim, not a ruling, right? I am supposing that your point here is that you agree with the plaintiff's charges. Or is this a "decision"? Can you post a link to the "decision," if it is in fact a ruling from a judge? I can't find any reference online to a status beyond the suit being filed....

  6. #186
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    6,001
    Thanks
    2,403
    Thanked 2,281 Times in 1,306 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    A ruling.

    Finding that the Government Defendants do not have the authority to implement the CMS Mandate, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff States’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 2] and IMMEDIATELY ENJOINS and RESTRAINS the Government Defendants from implementing the CMS Mandate.
    PDF

    --edit--

    For TSherbs - note page 28 and the court's comments on Police Power/Tenth Amendment, from an impasse in a different thread.

    In the federal system, the federal government has limited powers. The States and the people retain the remainder.38 The States have broad authority to enact legislation for the public good (“police power”), but the federal government has no such authority, and can only exercise the powers granted to it, including the power to make all laws which may be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the enumerated powers. If the federal government would radically readjust the balance of state and national authority, those charged with the duty of legislating must be reasonably explicit about it. The Supreme Court will not be quick to assume Congress has meant to effect a significant change into the sensitive state and federal relations. Congress does not normally intrude upon the police power of States. Bond v. United States, 572 U.S. 844, 857-58 (2014).
    Last edited by dneal; December 2nd, 2021 at 05:18 PM.
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  7. #187
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Thanks dneal,
    This is the decision issuing a nationwide injunction against the mandate(except for the states already included in an earlier injunction).

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to kazoolaw For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (December 2nd, 2021)

  9. #188
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    In its decision regarding the DHS' appeal of an order requiring adherence to the "Remain in Mexico" policy the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals became blunt in its assessment of the government's arguments, calling them "as unlawful as it is illogical," guilty of unclean hands (a legal term of art), "arbitrary and capricious," "independently unlawful," and concludes with:

    "The Government’s position in this case has far-reaching implications
    for the separation of powers and the rule of law. The Government says it has
    unreviewable and unilateral discretion to create and to eliminate entire
    components of the federal bureaucracy that affect countless people, tax
    dollars, and sovereign States. The Government also says it has unreviewable
    and unilateral discretion to ignore statutory limits imposed by Congress and
    to remake entire titles of the United States Code to suit the preferences of
    the executive branch.
    And the Government says it can do all of this by typing
    up a new “memo” and posting it on the internet. If the Government were
    correct, it would supplant the rule of law with the rule of say-so. We hold the
    Government is wrong."

    https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinion...-10806-CV1.pdf
    at page 117.

    Sense a theme here?

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to kazoolaw For This Useful Post:

    dneal (December 15th, 2021)

  11. #189
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    In its decision regarding the DHS' appeal of an order requiring adherence to the "Remain in Mexico" policy the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals became blunt in its assessment of the government's arguments, calling them "as unlawful as it is illogical," guilty of unclean hands (a legal term of art), "arbitrary and capricious," "independently unlawful," and concludes with:

    "The Government’s position in this case has far-reaching implications
    for the separation of powers and the rule of law. The Government says it has
    unreviewable and unilateral discretion to create and to eliminate entire
    components of the federal bureaucracy that affect countless people, tax
    dollars, and sovereign States. The Government also says it has unreviewable
    and unilateral discretion to ignore statutory limits imposed by Congress and
    to remake entire titles of the United States Code to suit the preferences of
    the executive branch.
    And the Government says it can do all of this by typing
    up a new “memo” and posting it on the internet. If the Government were
    correct, it would supplant the rule of law with the rule of say-so. We hold the
    Government is wrong."

    https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinion...-10806-CV1.pdf
    at page 117.

    Sense a theme here?
    That is, indeed, a sharp criticism of the government's actions and "defense".

  12. #190
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted the injunction against the OSHA vaccine mandate.

  13. #191
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    I saw that. I guess the SC is next.

  14. #192
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend


    Yes, the applications have been filed.

  15. #193
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Texas Federal District Court enjoins mask mandate for Headstart Program:

    "Because the Court concludes that there is a substantial likelihood that the mandates do not fit within the Head Start Act’s authorizing text, that HHS failed to follow the APA in promulgating the mandates, and that the mandates are arbitrary and capricious, the Court preliminarily enjoins their enforcement in Texas."

    Case 5:21-cv-00300-H Document 42 Filed 12/31/21 Page 1 of 56 PageID 24553Case 5:21-cv-00300-H Document 42 Filed 12/31/21 Page 1 of 56 PageID 24553State of Texas et al v. Becerra, et alDoc. 42Dockets.Justia.com

    Though requested, the Court limited the injunction to Texas, and did not extend it to the entire US.


  16. The Following User Says Thank You to kazoolaw For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (January 3rd, 2022)

  17. #194
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Schools here vaccinate the students against influenza and wear masks. I hope they offer COVID-19 vaccines as well because it would be a convenience for all concerned. I think childhood schedule vaccines are required to attend classes.


    Grandson ran a fever over the weekend and tested negative for COVID-19.

  18. #195
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,742
    Thanks
    139
    Thanked 609 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    As someone once said, "If you want to be a part of the discussion, can you make at least one attempt toward the present discussion?"

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to kazoolaw For This Useful Post:

    dneal (January 3rd, 2022)

  20. #196
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,658
    Thanks
    2,027
    Thanked 2,189 Times in 1,419 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    Texas Federal District Court enjoins mask mandate for Headstart Program:

    "Because the Court concludes that there is a substantial likelihood that the mandates do not fit within the Head Start Act’s authorizing text, that HHS failed to follow the APA in promulgating the mandates, and that the mandates are arbitrary and capricious, the Court preliminarily enjoins their enforcement in Texas."

    Case 5:21-cv-00300-H Document 42 Filed 12/31/21 Page 1 of 56 PageID 24553Case 5:21-cv-00300-H Document 42 Filed 12/31/21 Page 1 of 56 PageID 24553State of Texas et al v. Becerra, et alDoc. 42Dockets.Justia.com

    Though requested, the Court limited the injunction to Texas, and did not extend it to the entire US.

    Is the ruling limited only to Head Start programs?

  21. #197
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Quote Originally Posted by kazoolaw View Post
    As someone once said, "If you want to be a part of the discussion, can you make at least one attempt toward the present discussion?"
    I figured it was relavent, but okay.

  22. #198
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    6,001
    Thanks
    2,403
    Thanked 2,281 Times in 1,306 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Chuck, it's still relevant. It just hasn't occurred to you the other ways it applies.
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

  23. #199
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,793
    Thanks
    642
    Thanked 898 Times in 690 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    I've thought about this ruling. If I could do anything to prevent children from getting sick, I would. If the law says I can't, then change the law. Choosing to do knowing for any reason is not reasonable.

  24. #200
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    6,001
    Thanks
    2,403
    Thanked 2,281 Times in 1,306 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Default Re: Preserve, protect and defend

    Maybe a place to start is with not mandating a vaccination that has high rates of myocarditis and pericarditis, for children that have almost no risk from what you’re vaccinating them against. Given that they have almost no risk from Covid, perhaps one might also think about their education and mental well being and the consequences of the nonsense school and mask policies.
    "A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •