Well it is against the fourth Amendment regarding the state's right to know your medical status (protects the right of individuals from "unreasonable searches and seizures), Also more generally, Human Rights, and right to refuse medical treatment - a la Nuremberg.
So the military is protected because it was the state directly robbing them of their 4th amendment rights, but is there anything protecting people from the giant transnational corporations that did the same thing? It doesn't seem like anyone has found standing yet in that regard.
Well, that's reassuring. Do you have any links? I need to see how it works so I can start working on my own case. Everyone who's gone up against my former employer has lost so far.
Sorry, I haven't been around. What I am remembering is this. During the hayday of covid when people here were scrambling for help and wanted to use religious exemptions, I told them to look to the Constitution, since it's the "Supreme Law" of the land. I read it myself (just a regular joe, not a constitutional scholar) and I was able to identify a few different articles that I believed would relate to a situation like the mandated vaxxes. Later, I learned the VERY articles I had identified were used in a major case against a couple of big universities. The very same articles I found back then. I don't remember what the articles were now, but maybe, possibly, 4 8 and 9. I remember that two of them were quite spot on and one was more iffy but might work. Anyway, the two strongest were the ones used in the lawsuit against the universites and it was won! States do have rights, but their laws can not supersede the Constitution. That's why everyone needs to look there first when things such as this arise. Good luck.
No problem moving slow. You're pushing me in interesting directions.
I read the Constitution too and the Bill of Rights, but didn't see any protections against corporate transgressions. I wonder if universities may be more susceptible to the constitutional approach due to their special status. The word "sovereign" really pops outta this AI quote. "Universities have special status primarily as non-profit, tax-exempt entities, which enables them to dedicate revenues to their educational and research missions. Public universities also receive a special legal status of sovereign immunity, which protects them from lawsuits."
The bottom line is if someone is mandating something to you (which, by the way, mandates aren't always law, but many people don't know that. In some cases, they do function as law) but if somebody is mandating a medical intervention to you, whether it be a government (state, local, federal) or an employer, a university, your HOA, lol, they have no legal standing to do so according to the Constitution.
First of all, presumably, your employer is not a doctor and therefore has no business 'requiring' you to take a medicine, particularly an untested medicine. Same can be said about the others, government, etc. Secondly, corporations have nothing to do with this. We're talking CONSTITUTIONALLY guaranteed rights for the American citizens.
Remember, the constitution doesn't give you rights, but it does guarantee the rights that were bestowed on you by your Creator. Chief amongst those is the right to make decisions regarding your own body. I would even say this would be a 'right' that young men would have if drafted to war.
Corporations have no right to supersede the Constitution. They might try, and they might succeed if people don't fight for their rights. But as I said before (and you can probably do a search for this and find it. I don't remember the universities. I think it was one in Lousianna and maybe one in the midwest somewhere. That lawsuit was won against them in favor of the students and employees who didn't want to be forced to take an unproven / untested drug at the mandate of the colleges. That should stand as an example to governments, as well.
Crickets... sorry I got impatient, so I asked the google. I suppose it may be possible but it looks like a difficult path. I am not a lawyer though...
Has the COVID mandate ever been defeated on constitutional grounds in the private sector?
AI Overview
The most prominent COVID-19 mandate for the private sector was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022, but the decision was based on administrative overreach, not core constitutional grounds. The court found that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) exceeded its statutory authority, not that a vaccine mandate itself is inherently unconstitutional.
The OSHA mandate and the Supreme Court
The mandate: The Biden administration directed OSHA to issue an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) in November 2021. The ETS required private companies with 100 or more employees to mandate vaccination or weekly testing for all employees.
The legal challenge: Numerous lawsuits challenged the ETS, with opponents arguing it was an unconstitutional overreach of federal power.
The Supreme Court's ruling: In January 2022, the Supreme Court blocked the enforcement of the ETS. The majority opinion stated that Congress had not given OSHA the authority to regulate public health on such a broad scale, reserving this power for workplace-specific dangers.
The constitutional question: While opponents of the mandate raised constitutional arguments, the Supreme Court's decision was centered on the more narrow question of whether OSHA had the legal authority to issue the rule. The court did not hold that a vaccine mandate for private employees was a violation of constitutional rights like due process or religious freedom.
Constitutional challenges to employer mandates
Constitutional claims against private employers over vaccine mandates have generally failed in court. This is because the Constitution limits government actions, not those of private companies.
Private vs. public sector: The Bill of Rights applies to the government, so a private company's internal policies do not violate an employee's constitutional rights in the same way that a government-imposed rule might.
Employment-at-will: Legal scholars note that the "at-will" nature of most U.S. employment generally allows employers to set workplace rules, including vaccine policies, as long as they comply with anti-discrimination laws.
Religious and disability accommodations
Employees challenging mandates have been more successful with claims based on federal anti-discrimination law, rather than constitutional arguments.
Religious objections (Title VII): Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, private employers must provide reasonable accommodations for employees with sincerely held religious beliefs that conflict with a vaccine mandate, unless doing so would cause an "undue hardship" for the business.
Undue hardship: A key issue in these cases is the definition of "undue hardship." A 2023 Supreme Court decision in Groff v. DeJoy raised the standard for what constitutes undue hardship, though the effect on vaccine mandate cases is still developing.
Disability accommodations (ADA): Employers must also provide reasonable accommodations for employees with a disability that prevents them from being vaccinated, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
I sometimes wonder if the whole US corporation thing prevented the constitutional approach, hence the administrative overreach solution from the Supreme Court.
This is good news, but I was also told today that New Mexico had passed a new law mandating covid vaccines for everyone.
Their bitch governor needs to be removed posthaste.
Well it is against the fourth Amendment regarding the state's right to know your medical status (protects the right of individuals from "unreasonable searches and seizures), Also more generally, Human Rights, and right to refuse medical treatment - a la Nuremberg.
So, IMO vaccine mandates are null and void.
So the military is protected because it was the state directly robbing them of their 4th amendment rights, but is there anything protecting people from the giant transnational corporations that did the same thing? It doesn't seem like anyone has found standing yet in that regard.
No, there have been cases where it HAS been defeated on Constitutional grounds.
Well, that's reassuring. Do you have any links? I need to see how it works so I can start working on my own case. Everyone who's gone up against my former employer has lost so far.
Sorry, I haven't been around. What I am remembering is this. During the hayday of covid when people here were scrambling for help and wanted to use religious exemptions, I told them to look to the Constitution, since it's the "Supreme Law" of the land. I read it myself (just a regular joe, not a constitutional scholar) and I was able to identify a few different articles that I believed would relate to a situation like the mandated vaxxes. Later, I learned the VERY articles I had identified were used in a major case against a couple of big universities. The very same articles I found back then. I don't remember what the articles were now, but maybe, possibly, 4 8 and 9. I remember that two of them were quite spot on and one was more iffy but might work. Anyway, the two strongest were the ones used in the lawsuit against the universites and it was won! States do have rights, but their laws can not supersede the Constitution. That's why everyone needs to look there first when things such as this arise. Good luck.
No problem moving slow. You're pushing me in interesting directions.
I read the Constitution too and the Bill of Rights, but didn't see any protections against corporate transgressions. I wonder if universities may be more susceptible to the constitutional approach due to their special status. The word "sovereign" really pops outta this AI quote. "Universities have special status primarily as non-profit, tax-exempt entities, which enables them to dedicate revenues to their educational and research missions. Public universities also receive a special legal status of sovereign immunity, which protects them from lawsuits."
This document from the Association of American Universities contends they're "quasi=governmental entities".
The bottom line is if someone is mandating something to you (which, by the way, mandates aren't always law, but many people don't know that. In some cases, they do function as law) but if somebody is mandating a medical intervention to you, whether it be a government (state, local, federal) or an employer, a university, your HOA, lol, they have no legal standing to do so according to the Constitution.
First of all, presumably, your employer is not a doctor and therefore has no business 'requiring' you to take a medicine, particularly an untested medicine. Same can be said about the others, government, etc. Secondly, corporations have nothing to do with this. We're talking CONSTITUTIONALLY guaranteed rights for the American citizens.
Remember, the constitution doesn't give you rights, but it does guarantee the rights that were bestowed on you by your Creator. Chief amongst those is the right to make decisions regarding your own body. I would even say this would be a 'right' that young men would have if drafted to war.
Corporations have no right to supersede the Constitution. They might try, and they might succeed if people don't fight for their rights. But as I said before (and you can probably do a search for this and find it. I don't remember the universities. I think it was one in Lousianna and maybe one in the midwest somewhere. That lawsuit was won against them in favor of the students and employees who didn't want to be forced to take an unproven / untested drug at the mandate of the colleges. That should stand as an example to governments, as well.
Crickets... sorry I got impatient, so I asked the google. I suppose it may be possible but it looks like a difficult path. I am not a lawyer though...
Has the COVID mandate ever been defeated on constitutional grounds in the private sector?
AI Overview
The most prominent COVID-19 mandate for the private sector was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022, but the decision was based on administrative overreach, not core constitutional grounds. The court found that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) exceeded its statutory authority, not that a vaccine mandate itself is inherently unconstitutional.
The OSHA mandate and the Supreme Court
Constitutional challenges to employer mandates
Constitutional claims against private employers over vaccine mandates have generally failed in court. This is because the Constitution limits government actions, not those of private companies.
Religious and disability accommodations
Employees challenging mandates have been more successful with claims based on federal anti-discrimination law, rather than constitutional arguments.
Any such nonsense is easily defeated on Constitutional grounds.
Maybe not. See the AI summary above.
I sometimes wonder if the whole US corporation thing prevented the constitutional approach, hence the administrative overreach solution from the Supreme Court.
No, the Constitutional approach, if handled properly, will work.
They will have to offer backpay for the hardship these guys were subjected to, IMO.
Hoe about us who quit our jobs of 15 years and started a new company? ;) God is good.
Or were fired from them !