Supreme Court hears arguments on Biden's workplace COVID vaccine requirements | full audio

The Supreme Court heard arguments Friday on President Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine requirements for health care workers and businesses with at least 100 workers.

#News #LiveNews #SupremeCourt

[emeraldgamerandreactions]

This a power grab disguise as them caring about the people

[MrChris]

if the court rules this is legal the whole system is broken and I lost my entire trust and faith in the American system.

[mandymancanify]

American people should be the one deciding this . This is our health and our lives! Most importantly OUR BODIES!

[frankissa]

We will not comply! Freedom is at stake here that’s what people are not seeing

[emmarose]

This is insane that it’s come to this point. Everyone knows you can still get covid and spread it with this therapy.

[Tony-czyx]

I didn't hear them mention once the irreparable harm that will be caused to the wallets of Americans if they are forced to pay for testing.

[butchp]

Breyer is contradicting himself!! He points to 750, 000 new cases, while not pointing out that over 70 percent are vaccinated. 96 percent of the NBA is vaccinated, yet they are forced to cancel games?

[tatoverde]

The manufactures and CDC, FDA had violated the 1986 act. They had stated that VAERS report system has errors. Under R. Reagan's 1986 act the manufactures as a statutory requirement are required to keep VAERS accurate. They all violated the law.

[ingwy]

Mass unemployment will be a catastrophe. Crimes will rise. Massive death.

[MontoyaBrandy]

Grave danger can also come from the vaccines!

[WannabeWoodsman]

Are we not gonna discuss the Nuremberg code?

[rees.williams]

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

[xhale]

it really seems like these justices take offense when anyone says anything about the governments level of authority

[Radhaugo]

They argue that this is about science and saving lives.
When you argue back that science backs natural immunity and it saves lives.
They tell you to shut up and get back in line.

[Alaninbroomfield]

The ignorance on display at the Supreme Court yesterday is mind-boggling.

[petersimpson]

If we don’t have the freedom to refuse an irreversible experimental medical procedure, what freedom do we actually have?

[clescell]

What is a "grave danger"? The risk of blood clots, myocarditis, etc. are less consequential, so it's ok? And yet the pharmaceutical companies can't be held liable for adverse reactions because they were authorized by the FDA under an "emergency" standard. They didn't undergo the rigorous evaluation necessary for a regular FDA approval. So... as the government, I can proclaim whatever I want as an emergency, and nobody will be held accountable for damages, and you, the governed, must comply. Makes sense to me....

[trupatriot]

How does OSHA get to say that remote workers pose a workplace threat?

[olsidema]

I don’t understand why these justices think they’re allowed to adjudicate based on their opinions? Look at the law and judge based on that alone. WTF are these evil people trying to do?

[px]

Not about the science, not about the facts. But about $$$ that’s all. 🤦🏻‍♀️