Roberts, Kavanaugh, & Barrett Side With Liberals On Maine Vaccine Mandate

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett side with liberal justices, decline to block Maine's vaccine mandate for health workers with religious objections

In a ruling Friday, the Supreme Court declined to block Maine from requiring vaccine mandates for healthcare workers who object on religious grounds...

The court voted 6-3, with conservative Justices John Roberts and Trump-appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett siding with the liberal justices.

The majority did not give a reason for the decision, but conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, issued a long dissent...

Barrett said the shadow docket should not be used for such a case, and that the court should not make this decision "on a short fuse without benefit of full briefing and oral argument," implying she and Kavanaugh could vote differently if the case came before the court in a different way...

From the dissent...

In short, don't hope for any immediate relief based on requested exemptions; regardless of what you think your rights are. As has been stated, the question is how much 'damage' is going to be done before (or even if) the Courts come down on our side?

[SPUTTER]

Well...if we are going to disregard the laws, then let's disregard them. I'm ok with that, makes no difference to me.

[WingDings]

If we get a Republican into office, maybe Mitch can narrow the gap of the SC to a 5-4 liberal majority once Breyer retires.

Conservative Justices
Thomas
Alito
Gorsuch
(*New Appointment)

Liberal Justices
Kagan
Sotomayor
Kavanaugh
Barrett
Roberts

Was nice of him to give the left two of the three appointments during Trump’s term, but hopefully Mitch can buckle down and do something for the Republicans this next go-around.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I don't know that it has to do with 'disregard for the law' or being a 'liberal in disguise.'

My suspicion is that it has to do with a lack of willingness to confront the issue. Remember, the Roberts Court has claimed a position of being unwilling to be involved in public policy; despite the fact that, in many respects, it is an intrinsic and elemental part of their Constitutional role and the Court's rulings play a crucial role in the shaping of those policies/laws. (Which is why the 'political balance' has become an increasingly perverse series of machinations.) Public policy often and typically creates Constitutional questions and controversies. As SCOTUS notes on their website...

...As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution...

It has been emerging that both conservatives and liberals on the Court appear to desire an alteration of 'deference' on a variety of issues; primarily due to abuse by the lower courts. The problem is that such alteration does not and, truthfully, cannot happen on a whim; therefore, a substantive case (the 'right' case) is required. As the article notes, such was obliquely addressed in Barrett's text...

The problem is that if too much focus is placed on 'process,' delays are inevitable when it comes to relief for those impacted. Even more, clarity is forestalled for the general public. The result is confusion and the development of myriad 'standards,' something antithetical to the traditional and Constitutional role of the Court in mitigating and/or eliminating 'conflict' in the interpretation of law(s) among various jurisdictions.

Hopefully, SCOTUS comes around to dealing with the substance of government powers in an 'emergency' soon.

[The Tiger]

So frustrating

One of the problems relying on the court is that ultimately they are just people, elitist people.

Barrett’s concern about the process is really disappointing. This isn’t an issue than can wait to be addressed.

[ENTHUSIAST]

Barrett and Kavanaugh are Liberal shills they are NOT conservatives.

We will see no “justice” from these two frauds.

[Dan_Eastvale]

Because they despise Trump.

[ACfixer]

Because they despise Trump.

Which is astounding considering he's the reason they are there. TDS runs deep.

[Dan_Eastvale]

Which is astounding considering he's the reason they are there. TDS runs deep.

I know.. they're smirking thinking the joke's on that loser.

Wouldn't even consider election fraud!

[Wherryj]

Well, the SCoTUS doesn't want to get in the way of the long term plan: