We need to know if this ruling is only for “federally funded” hospitals, will this ruling now be used to keep the mandate on government workers? Any legal scholars out there?


This ruling establishes a judicial precedent which will make it nearly impossible for any such mandates to be enacted without legislative approval, on the federal or state level. Iow, you're gonna need an actual law.



That being said, this ruling certainly changes the political landscape in which all these things are happening. The momentum has shifted. Mandates are political losers, and I suspect that will translate into other areas, including litigation. We'll see how this plays out. This was a big win. I'm optimistic.

· · Web · 1 · 5 · 7

@jmc464 I sure hope this allows lawsuits against companies that jumped the gun and have already fired people or made employees get jabbed. I’m just not sure how this applies to employees of federal government. I feel like this does not help them and they may still be required to jab or test.


The Federal Govt as an employer is not immediately affected. But attempting to impose or maintain mandates will be an uphill legal and public relations fight. There's really no upside for the Feds on this. I think they'll eventually bail out.


Massive. And would result in endless litigation and labor disputes.

@jmc464 @ConnieinVA

Anyone asking who is going to pay the death benefits & medical costs for all those harmed by the jabs now that the evidence against the jabs is being exposed? Start looking at the obits & note how many are younger Americans. I have a friend whose an oncologist who wrote me earlier today that he's appalled at the ages of those dying in his area. He's never seen anything like it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Free Atlantis - Free Speech - Intelligent Conversation - Good People - Good Fun

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!