Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Hermit-The-Prog

(36,631 posts)

34. I'm cynical...

Reply to CaliforniaPeggy (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 14, 2023, 07:27 PM

Nov 2023

My guess is that they didn't want to interfere with mega-donor corporations who want employees vaccinated. If they deny NJ, they would then be denying Koch industries the same power. The Roberts court loves rule by corporations. (Decisions run over 90% in favor of corporations vs individuals).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

DoBotherMe

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court Delivers Blow to Vaccine Skeptics [View all] spanone Nov 2023 OP

Well, how about that? CaliforniaPeggy Nov 2023 #1

Only if you put the spotlight on them maxrandb Nov 2023 #7

Agreed, but it is good to see they respond to public pressure. Martin68 Nov 2023 #14

and as usual mountain grammy Nov 2023 #21

"if you put the spotlight on them", they do what roaches do. Run away and hide, it's every insect for itself! jaxexpat Nov 2023 #22

$50 says that the dissenters includes Thomas... Moostache Nov 2023 #8

I'd rather have the $50 JoseBalow Nov 2023 #20

Yes, a refreshing change from the usual redqueen Nov 2023 #11

I'm cynical... Hermit-The-Prog Nov 2023 #34

Good point. ShazzieB Nov 2023 #35

Excellent! n/t RKP5637 Nov 2023 #2

Being nurses, they ought to know better. appleannie1 Nov 2023 #3

My daughter, an ICU physician assistant, says the same thing. Liberty Belle Nov 2023 #17

I would argue that individuals have no more religious freedom to refuse vaccines.... lastlib Nov 2023 #25

Kind of surprising with this court, but good news...nt Wounded Bear Nov 2023 #4

"... citing religious freedom"? Grins Nov 2023 #5

Agreed... Moostache Nov 2023 #10

I'm stunned! 50 Shades Of Blue Nov 2023 #6

Hey Robert Kennedy Jr... BlueIdaho Nov 2023 #9

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2023 #31

So you have religious freedom to not bake a cake or pay for birth control, but they can inject you at will bucolic_frolic Nov 2023 #12

You can choose not to patronize a bigoted bakery, but you have no choice on hospitals usually. Liberty Belle Nov 2023 #19

The opinion as dictated by the Pope may have some influence, ... JustABozoOnThisBus Nov 2023 #30

Good malaise Nov 2023 #13

Love how the anti vaxxers seem to think that only their rights should count. appleannie1 Nov 2023 #15

they are such hypocrites Skittles Nov 2023 #37

There was a time when the supremes would not allow 50 cal weapons to be sold to the public, LiberalArkie Nov 2023 #16

That's an interesting statement. When did SCOTUS not allow .50 calibre rifles and/or ammo? SYFROYH Nov 2023 #26

Next you could lose your right to beat heretics with clubs studded with rusty nails! struggle4progress Nov 2023 #18

Even the Trump Justices don't want crazy unvaxxed nurses treating them. nt SunSeeker Nov 2023 #23

Jacobson v Massachusetts Heftylefty Nov 2023 #24

Thanks, and welcome to DU! Informative post! keopeli Nov 2023 #29

Welcome to DU LetMyPeopleVote Nov 2023 #38

No one mandated that they HAD to be nurses. lapfog_1 Nov 2023 #27

Same with pharmacists drmeow Nov 2023 #32

Nurses who refuse to be vaccinated are a threat to both themselves and their patients. patphil Nov 2023 #28

Couldn't seem to delete this post. Martin68 Nov 2023 #33

Third Circuit had dismissed the appeal as moot: sl8 Nov 2023 #36

Great news, BUT bluestarone Nov 2023 #39