Judge Throws Out Federal Mask Mandate for Public Transportation

Because timing is everything of course...

www.huffpost.com

New Omicron Subvariants Take Hold As Biden Wants Americans To Learn To Live With COVID

The new BA.2.12.1 variant accounted for 19% of COVID cases in the U.S. last week, sharply increasing its spread from the week before.
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com
Click to expand...
www.cnn.com

New versions of Omicron variant make gains against BA.2 | CNN

Arguably the most successful version of the Omicron coronavirus variant to date has been BA.2 -- but it hasn't been resting on its laurels.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
Click to expand...
 
SuperMatt said:
According to legal experts quoted below, appeals court decisions have more weight than the decision of a single judge when it comes to precedent.


More info in the full article:

www.npr.org

The judge who tossed mask mandate misunderstood public health law, legal experts say

Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle's decision hinged on a definition of the word 'sanitation' that public health experts and legal scholars say missed the mark.
www.npr.org www.npr.org
Click to expand...

Appeals courts are only dispositive in the circuit that issued the opinion. District court opinions are only dispositive in that district. That is true. So in 99% of the country, the current ruling has the same dispositive effect, which is that it is persuasive but not dispositive.
 
They are officially appealing the ruling now.

They say the DoJ sought the advice of the CDC before proceeding.

I can see this two ways.

1. Most legal experts believe this ruling is poorly reasoned and would be quickly overturned. So this seems like a good idea.
2. The current Supreme Court is stacked with conservatives who have previously disregarded public health in favor of partisan ideology.

I hope #1 comes to pass; the ruling seems quite bad, and hopefully cooler heads will prevail and toss it out.
 
The Biden Administration does not have a good record in court. They have been smacked down several times for exceeding their authority, including once by SCOTUS 9-0. No partisan ideology there for sure.
 
Herdfan said:
The Biden Administration does not have a good record in court. They have been smacked down several times for exceeding their authority, including once by SCOTUS 9-0. No partisan ideology there for sure.
Click to expand...
I would argue that an appointed partisan hack with no medical background taking away the authority of trained professionals at the CDC is a travesty of justice. Still, the original ruling was legal, as is an appeal. IMO the Biden administration was right to get the buy off from the CDC before making the call.
 
Herdfan said:
The Biden Administration does not have a good record in court. They have been smacked down several times for exceeding their authority, including once by SCOTUS 9-0. No partisan ideology there for sure.
Click to expand...
It’s not a game. But many people seem to think it’s a sport… including some judges. You can see why the DoJ is reluctant to appeal even a ruling as nonsensical as this one.

When one tosses out nonsense like this, implying it’s some kind of contest, and ignores the law completely, they are part of the problem. Trump appealed to people that wanted judges who would “smack down” the liberals, regardless of the law.

With Ms. Mizelle, it looks like “mission accomplished” to me.

In the current environment, it is democracy that is being “smacked down” by extremist judges.
 
Thought I would share this from my buddy as he was leaving town yesterday.

Greenshot 2022-04-21 06.12.11.png
 
Interesting that a bunch of Bay Area transit authorities dropped their mask mandates today. Guess they were really itching for the federal mandate to be dropped.
 
TBL said:
Interesting that a bunch of Bay Area transit authorities dropped their mask mandates today. Guess they were really itching for the federal mandate to be dropped.
Click to expand...
It's hard not to understand their elation but it feels like we've all been given a false sense of hope by figures of authority when in reality it's really just a partisan Donald Trump appointee who made the call.
 
Eric said:
It's hard not to understand their elation but it feels like we've all been given a false sense of hope by figures of authority when in reality it's really just a partisan Donald Trump appointee who made the call.
Click to expand...
Thank you. It would have really meant something if the change was based on scientific data and an explanation was given. Instead, an inexperienced lawyer played games, trying to redefine the word “sanitation“ in an opinion that is worse than many undergraduate term papers.
 
SuperMatt said:
Thank you. It would have really meant something if the change was based on scientific data and an explanation was given. Instead, an inexperienced lawyer played games, trying to redefine the word “sanitation“ in an opinion that is worse than many undergraduate term papers.
Click to expand...
I figure you will disagree, but judges should not be considering scientific data or any other health related issues. Was the mandate legal? Yes or No!

Eric said:
It's hard not to understand their elation but it feels like we've all been given a false sense of hope by figures of authority when in reality it's really just a partisan Donald Trump appointee who made the call.
Click to expand...

How do you feel about the Trump appointee who just blocked Kentucky's abortion law? Not all judges are political hacks or rule in partisan ways.
 
Herdfan said:
I figure you will disagree, but judges should not be considering scientific data or any other health related issues. Was the mandate legal? Yes or No!
Click to expand...
The mandate is legal. Every other judge upheld it for the last 2 years. This judge is an extreme outlier. I posted a link to multiple legal experts pointing out her flawed ruling. If you have a counterargument from lawyers or legal experts, I’d like to read it. Otherwise, let’s go with: the CDC’s mandate is clearly within its authority.

Herdfan said:
How do you feel about the Trump appointee who just blocked Kentucky's abortion law? Not all judges are political hacks or rule in partisan ways.
Click to expand...
Roe v Wade is still the law of the land, as it has been for almost 50 years. And I agree that not all judges are political hacks. But the judge in the mask mandate case IS. There’s been copious amounts of evidence to that effect in this thread, and I haven’t seen any to the contrary.
 
SuperMatt said:
The mandate is legal. Every other judge upheld it for the last 2 years. This judge is an extreme outlier. I posted a link to multiple legal experts pointing out her flawed ruling. If you have a counterargument from lawyers or legal experts, I’d like to read it. Otherwise, let’s go with: the CDC’s mandate is clearly within its authority.
Click to expand...

It may be. But that is still a legal, and not medical question. So blaming the judge for ignoring the medical aspects misses the point.
 
Herdfan said:
It may be. But that is still a legal, and not medical question. So blaming the judge for ignoring the medical aspects misses the point.
Click to expand...
If you read my takedown(s) of the judge, the arguments are not about the her medical training or lack thereof.

Congress created an agency to be staffed by medical experts. This agency is meant to protect public health. Instead of allowing the agency to do its job, a single unqualified judge decided to throw away all precedent and block the agency’s mask mandate. Such blatant judicial activism is harmful, and renders Congress and the CDC impotent. The sooner this terrible ruling gets overturned, the better.

My response to @AG_PhamD said the same thing. This is not about whether he (or I) think mask mandates should be extended or ended. It’s about allowing the experts at the CDC to do their job: protecting America’s public health. Otherwise, why are we spending tax money on the CDC at all?
 
SuperMatt said:
Otherwise, why are we spending tax money on the CDC at all?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Medical experts are charlatans, we should take that money and fund the purchase of rocket launchers and attack helicopters for the police.
 
SuperMatt said:
If you read my takedown(s) of the judge, the arguments are not about the her medical training or lack thereof.

Congress created an agency to be staffed by medical experts. This agency is meant to protect public health. Instead of allowing the agency to do its job, a single unqualified judge decided to throw away all precedent and block the agency’s mask mandate. Such blatant judicial activism is harmful, and renders Congress and the CDC impotent. The sooner this terrible ruling gets overturned, the better.

My response to @AG_PhamD said the same thing. This is not about whether he (or I) think mask mandates should be extended or ended. It’s about allowing the experts at the CDC to do their job: protecting America’s public health. Otherwise, why are we spending tax money on the CDC at all?
Click to expand...

So the CDC should be able to do what they want, when they want, even if it runs counter to the law simply because of their stated purpose?
 

Similar threads

Yoused
judge throws out gun law, 10 people pay for it
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
JayMysteri0
JayMysteri0
Back
Top