California Will Have The Strongest State Vaccine Verification System In The U.S.

[DentonandSasquatchShow]

Not to worry, Newsom will be history September 14th.

My prediction is Newsom and his cronies are worried. So they are ramping up the Covid rhetoric. Just before the recall election lockdowns will start again thus making us use mail in ballots. This way they decide who wins.

Just a hunch.

[bigbossman]

Cool rant. I said you win. Go away.

........

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Back in March... DFEH Issues Guidance to Employers Regarding Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policies

...Can employers require their employees to be vaccinated?

The short answer is yes, so long as the employer adheres to the requirements of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”).

The DFEH explains how to comply with the FEHA in the event an employer mandates an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine.

1. Mandatory Vaccination Policies and Practices Must Not Discriminate Against or Harass Employees Based on a Protected Characteristic...
2. Employers Must Reasonably Accommodate Employees With Disabilities...
3. Employers Must Reasonably Accommodate Employees With Sincerely-Held Religious Beliefs or Practices...
4. Employers Must Not Retaliate Against Employees for Engaging in Protected Activity...
5. If an Employee Resists Mandatory Vaccination Absent a Disability or Sincerely-Held Religious Belief or Practice, No Reasonable Accommodation Is Necessary...
6. The Type of Medical Information That Can Be Elicited From Employees Will Depend on Whether the Employer Is Administering the Mandatory Vaccination Program...
7. Employers May Require “Proof” of Vaccination if a Third Party Is Administering the Mandatory Vaccination Program...

The kicker, however, was found in the last paragraph of the piece...

The legal landscape continues to evolve quickly and there is a lack of clear-cut authority or bright line rules on implementation...

You will note in today's announcement, there is no legal authority cited that I can see. In fact, the media defense I quoted in the OP - "The policy doesn’t quite equal a mandate..." - might provide some insight as to why no legal authority is cited and be suggestive of what Newsom, et al. are hoping. Once again, the State Government is attempting to play the margins and I would expect (or, at least, I would HOPE for) legal challenges. Whether they will be 'successful' is something I wouldn't count on. But, perhaps, if enough of a stink is raised...

In essence and in so many words, Newsom has now indicated that it's no longer about individual choice. As such and given that New York City released a similar mandate, it may be time to get the Supreme Court to weigh in on the 100-year old precedent they are relying on. (Not to mention the 'at will' deflection that came with the Houston nurses decision.)

Take away choice from the People and allude to repercussions for non-compliance and you are venturing into 'murky' Constitutional waters, even if Roberts is willing to tie himself into Pretzel knots to sanction it. Again, it's why the media is attempting to portray this, not as a mandate, but as an 'encouragement' -

...Requiring — or in the case of the state, strongly encouraging — health workers to get vaccinated helps protect people who are immunocompromised or older because even if vaccinated, their bodies may not be able to build strong protection, Shafir said. It also helps protect children under 12 who cannot yet be vaccinated...

As I've said all along, Government (and Governors) will attempt to get away with whatever they can with the muscle they have. Clearly, someone at the State level feels they have the legal muscle to do this. It will be interesting to see if the Judiciary ultimately agrees. The question of the moment would be: "If you don't want it, how can you keep from being forced to get it without undue consequence?" (That would include being 'tracked' as an 'undesireable' for not being vaccinated.)

[Romeo_alpha01]

Well...time to find new employment and move sooner than expected.

[CessnaDriver]

Cool rant. I said you win. Go away.

[bigbossman]

Oooh....you're a hero for the cause.

Are you done?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

One of my major issues with Newsom's "strongest state vaccine verification system in the U.S." is that, as it currently exists, the system is reliant upon a QR code you can download to a mobile phone/device or via e-mail.

The problem is that while it is exceptionally popular to carry such a device and, as time goes by, increasingly necessary in some respects, there are many hold outs who, for a variety of legitimate reasons, don't even own such devices, let alone carry them.

If you are cynical and, perhaps, a bit paranoid, such leads to questions over whether this is a 'step' in the direction for a more 'convenient' method by which anyone who receives the vaccine is 'implanted' with such a code.

If you are a bit more realistic, there are Constitutional issues which come to the fore in terms of 'access' to Society, despite DOJ's opinion that...

Given that... CDC: The coronavirus could be 'just a few mutations' away from evading vaccines

It's something which should call into question the idea of Government mandates and tracking.

How many times is the Government going to be 'allowed' to mandate a new vaccine based on a given mutation? What is the criteria that will be used in determining 'undesireable' status? Does the fact that you refuse to carry a device capable of presenting a QR code qualify you as 'undesireable?' What if you physically cannot take the vaccine? Are we about to see a number of such tagged by the Government as 'undesireable' simply because their options are limited or unworkable? (Think in terms of what BYU: Hawaii just did to the one gal.)

[SanDiego619]

Newsom is done, he's a psychotic POS, that bastard is gonna get kicked to the curb!!

[bigmike82]

If you are cynical and, perhaps, a bit paranoid, such leads to questions over whether this is a 'step' in the direction for a more 'convenient' method by which anyone who receives the vaccine is 'implanted' with such a code.

I'm just going to point this out though, wrt to convenience.

Anyone whose worked for any corporate entity or any business above your mom and pop shop has likely need some sort of prox/rfid card right? For parking, getting into the door, clocking in, etc?

Yet virtually no one gets programmable rfid chips implanted to make this easier right? Very, very few people are going to be implanted with a code the government wants, if they aren't going to 'implant' a code that makes their daily lives easier.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I'm just going to point this out though, wrt to convenience.

Anyone whose worked for any corporate entity or any business above your mom and pop shop has likely need some sort of prox/rfid card right? For parking, getting into the door, clocking in, etc?

Yet virtually no one gets programmable rfid chips implanted to make this easier right? Very, very few people are going to be implanted with a code the government wants, if they aren't going to 'implant' a code that makes their daily lives easier.

There are a whole lot of presumptions/assumptions in what you just posted; not all of which hold water. As an example...

Everything You Need To Know Before Getting An RFID Implant

Thousands out of billions? Certainly that qualifies as "virtually no one" through 2019. However, such doesn't take into account the difference between convenience and necessity. As I just said in the other thread...

...Newsom's own press release hints at a broader audience...

...In addition to these new measures, the state continues its efforts to vaccinate Californians...

...The Department of Health Care Services is also working to increase the vaccination rates of Medi-Cal recipients including: engaging managed care plans in weekly calls, encouraging their outreach to patients, sharing weekly beneficiary vaccination data and disseminating a Quality Improvement Postcard with strategies and techniques to address vaccine hesitancy...

Let that sink in for a moment. Californians. Not just 'employees.' Then couple "increase the vaccination rates of Medi-Cal recipients" with the DOJ's "require individuals to be vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment, enrollment, participation, or some other benefit, service, relationship, or access." It's something we've already discussed in relation to airline travel, public transportation, etc. ...

Were employment, Government services, et al. made contingent on your vaccination status, when does it segue from being a convenience to becoming a necessity?

[bigmike82]

There are a whole lot of presumptions/assumptions in what you just posted; not all of which hold water. As an example...

Thousands out of billions?

Were employment, Government services, et al. made contingent on your vaccination status, when does it segue from being a convenience to becoming a necessity?

I've seen the stories about people getting implants...I've actually considered it, but it just wasn't worth it.

Thousands out of billions is ... .0001 percent.

You raise a valid point, but ... no one is requiring an 'implant' for the vax. There's not even a talk about it. It's just "here's a qr code" or "show your card". I mean ... how would the government even come close to enforcing something like this?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I've seen the stories about people getting implants...I've actually considered it, but it just wasn't worth it.

Thousands out of billions is ... .0001 percent.

You raise a valid point, but ... no one is requiring an 'implant' for the vax. There's not even a talk about it. It's just "here's a qr code" or "show your card". I mean ... how would the government even come close to enforcing something like this?

You keep ignoring the "for the moment" aspect of things.

No one is requiring it... yet. Just as a political matter, the timing isn't right at the moment and there is some resistance already, not just from Republicans, but among Democrats as well. But, there is talk about it. You only need to see it on this board to know it to be true in terms of conspiracy theories, Mark of the Beast, etc. Even Government is still trying to debunk the 'tracking' aspects the vaccines are accused of. How long before the politics and the technology dovetail propitiously? Who knows? But, things happen quite quickly these days.

We've discussed, ad nauseum, on this board how Government could (and does) enforce such things; e.g., making access to public services contingent upon them.

If the variants continue, if the current crop of vaccines are no longer effective against the variants, if not everyone carries a device capable of a QR code... a whole lot of "If's," it wouldn't take much to bring up 'requiring'... something else.

It would certainly be sold as a win-win in that it would 'solve the problem' of Voter ID's - right?

Don't think such a 'trade-off' is possible among politicians? Uh...

As I said, we don't need to go down a rabbit hole in terms of it's potential expansiveness or in terms of what it's 'restrictions' (or limitations) might be.

[sigfan91]

Can we argue in court that the vaccine mandate is unconstitutional due to its ineffectiveness? Why mandate something if it's useless? There's no purpose.

I can prove the vaccines are ineffective. Mask mandates are back, even for fully vaccinated people. If vaccines are effective, we wouldn't need masks, right?

[SanDiego619]

Can we argue in court that the vaccine mandate is unconstitutional due to its ineffectiveness? Why mandate something if it's useless? There's no purpose.

I can prove the vaccines are ineffective. Mask mandates are back, even for fully vaccinated people. If vaccines are effective, we wouldn't need masks, right?

How many millions of people got the fake vaccine and now are being told to wear masks? What a joke. I would hope that they learned their lesson, but there is a slim chance of that.

[user120312]

Coming soon at a CA border crossing? "Fruits, vegetables? Have you registered to cross the border?"
Apparently it's rolling out in Canada for inter-province travel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tmbWYSYD-M