Multiple U.S. States Challenging Bidens Vaccine Mandate: Legal Grounds and Implications
Multiple U.S. States Challenging Biden's Vaccine Mandate: Legal Grounds and Implications
As President Joe Biden's administration continues to implement its vaccine mandate, over half of U.S. states are vowing to challenge this order. This article explores the legal basis for these challenges and their potential implications.
Legal Basis for Challenges
The biden vaccine mandate issued by the White House requires private businesses with over 100 employees to mandate their workers receive both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine or face fines of up to $14,000 per violation. However, several U.S. states are preparing to challenge this mandate, citing legal grounds.
Supporters of the mandate argue that it is within the scope of the government's power to protect public health. However, a significant number of states are taking a different stance, arguing that:
The 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts Supreme Court case establishes that states, not the federal government, have more authority in matters of public health. OSHA overstepped its constitutional boundaries in issuing this mandate. It violates the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution, as it aims to regulate activities that do not have a direct impact on interstate commerce.State Opposition to the Vaccine Mandate
As of now, 27 Republican governors or attorneys general have expressed their intention to fight the vaccine mandate. These states include:
Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia, and Wyoming.However, it is crucial to note that about 70 states have already enforced or implemented their own vaccine mandates, suggesting a mixed perspective among U.S. states.
Supreme Court's Ruling and Finality of the Matter
The challenge to Biden's vaccine mandate is bolstered by favor from the U.S. Supreme Court. In a recent decision, the Supreme Court ruled that OSHA’s vaccine mandate for individual employers is illegal. This ruling, coupled with the court's recent upholding of Biden’s previous executive actions, indicates that the matter is essentially resolved from a legal standpoint.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, in his dissenting opinion, further emphasized that the mandate is unconstitutional and an overreach of presidential authority. He stated, “The government cannot order an employer to force employees to get vaccinated against their will. We have held this about school vaccinations and state restrictions on abortion, and we should hold the same about vaccine mandates.”
Implications and Future Outlook
While the Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to pursue action against Biden's vaccine mandate, the practical implications remain complex. States will have to decide whether to further challenge this ruling in lower courts or find a way to comply with the law.
The ongoing drama surrounding the vaccine mandate reflects a broader divide in U.S. politics, where states and the federal government are at odds. This tension is likely to continue as states navigate the fine line between protecting public health and respecting individual rights.
Ultimately, the challenge to Biden's vaccine mandate serves as a testament to the complex legal debates surrounding public health measures, individual freedoms, and the balance of power between federal and state governments.