All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Jan. 7, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
36:29
Supreme Court Showdown: Are Vaccine Mandates Dead?
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Supreme Court Vaccine Mandate 00:15:08
Hey, everybody.
We're waiting to see what the Supreme Court says around the vaccine mandate.
We think that it's going to be some good news.
And so, listen to this episode.
It might impact you, your friends, your family about the OSHA mandate.
Email us your thoughts.
As always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
If you want to support our show, go to charliekirk.com/slash support.
That's charliekirk.com/slash support.
Thank you for all of you that so generously support our show.
If you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, where we play offense with a sense of urgency to win the American Culture War, start a high school chapter, start a college chapter today at tpusa.com.
That's tpusa.com.
We have the cutting-edge, unique analysis of the Supreme Court justices in their own words.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
Turning point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at AndrewandTodd.com.
Right now, as we are doing this show, the United States Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments around the Biden regime's OSHA mandate.
If you are at all impacted or a loved one is impacted by Biden's stroke of the patent saying that he is going to have OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Hazard Administration come in and mandate vaccines for any employers 100 or more, this show is going to really matter to you.
We are going to unpack the arguments themselves.
We have audio from the U.S. Supreme Court.
We're going to kind of read between the lines of how things are going.
And this is incredibly important.
We have so many listeners.
I think we have tens of thousands of listeners that are right now on the verge of being fired from their job because of this mandate.
I could read email after email after email of listeners, supporters, people that are saying, Charlie, please help me.
This listener right here, Charlie, in the light of Biden's announcement, OSHA taking effect, I was hoping you could help me.
I'm going to lose my job and my employer won't stand up for me.
Now, at Turning Point USA, we have well over 200 employees.
We're not going to comply.
It's not going to happen, regardless of how the Supreme Court rules.
It does look, though, slowly and surely, that the justices are peppering the Solicitor General of the United States, that they are cross-examining the arguments, and it seems as if a pattern is emerging of major legal, philosophical, and medical holes in the regime's attempt to try to mandate employers.
Now, I just want you to understand how unprecedented and how immoral this would be.
This is the way it works.
If I were to comply with our employees at Turning Point USA, I would have to meet with every single one of my employees and ask them about their intimate medical details.
And I could potentially have to fire them, let them go, if they don't take an experimental piece of medicine that the federal government requires.
First of all, that's just really creepy to tell an employer to sit down with their employees and say, oh, yeah, can I just see all the medicine that you're on?
No, in fact, many of our employees, by the way, we have a long list of people that want to work for us at Turning Point USA because they know we're going to hold the line.
They know we are not going to comply under any circumstances.
And by the way, here's the amazing thing.
We have vaccinated employees as well.
We have employees that have decided to get the shot.
Guess what?
Not my business.
I don't condemn them.
I don't mock them.
I don't question them.
It might be the right decision for them.
I don't know their medical history, nor should I.
The federal government disagrees.
The federal government, through the continuation of the IRA, the independent regulatory agencies, started under Woodrow Wilson, grew under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, perfected under Lyndon Baines Johnson, this German historicist fourth branch of government of blending all three branches into the maker of the laws, the interpreter of the laws, and the executor of the laws.
Now, this is an important point: that this mandate had zero legislative input.
In fact, it failed in the Senate.
Manchin and Tester, actually, I think just Tester, maybe Manchin.
I know John Tester, when it came up in the U.S. Senate, voted against the mandate.
So the representative of the actual people, the legislative branch, says, we don't like this mandate.
Still, the executive branch decided to sign a piece of paper to say that we are going to force private businesses that have 100 employees or more on how to conduct themselves and how to, we are going to police the inner workings of private entrepreneurs and businesses.
Now, the significance of this, if the Supreme Court rules correctly and says that we still have some semblance of private property in this country, that we still have some kind of glimmer of privacy and individual autonomy, then this would be a massive loss for the Biden regime.
I do have a theory that I'll share with you later this hour, and I'll tell you why.
I think Biden knows he's going to lose this in the courts.
I think Biden knows he's going to lose it, and he's using this as kind of an excuse to his base.
Look, I tried to do everything I possibly could.
But I don't want to get too excited yet.
Now, I am not a member of the U.S. Supreme Court.
I'm unconvinced by some of these arguments, but they're not talking to me.
We're going to go through some of these arguments.
By the way, these arguments are happening in real time.
This is live right now at the Supreme Court.
And what I mean by that is they're very technical, legal, and administrative arguments that are being made.
Now, Clarence Thomas, God bless him, Samuel Alito, God bless him, they've been going deeper.
They've been asking questions that are a lot more substantive about the actual vaccine itself.
And we'll get to that.
And then also, I want to kind of build out what will happen if you give people like Breyer power over the courts long term.
Because they're starting to foreshadow, they're starting to tilt their hand of precisely what they would do if they were ever to control Article III of the United States Constitution.
But what's really on trial here, what's really being questioned at the U.S. Supreme Court right now is, yes, the employment futures and with that, the financial futures of millions of Americans.
That's what's being debated at the Supreme Court.
One of the most consequential, by the way, let me just say this, one of the most consequential immediate employment questions in front of the Supreme Court of a lifetime.
That's how important this is.
If this mandate gets upheld, millions of people will lose their jobs unnecessarily, regardless of natural immunity, regardless of their ability to pursue early treatments.
Millions of people will lose their jobs.
If Biden is successful in front of the U.S. Supreme Court with this mandate right now, it will eliminate millions of jobs or people will resign in anticipation.
Let's go to Cut 83.
Harris Faulkner kind of sets the table on how the oral arguments are being heard on the mandates.
Cut 83.
Major action at the U.S. Supreme Court that could have big consequences on how much power President Biden should have.
The justices right now are hearing emergency oral arguments challenging Biden's sweeping COVID vaccine mandates.
And plaintiffs are arguing that states, not Washington, should have authority over the mandates and calling the federal crackdown unnecessary and counterproductive.
Now, I would go a step further, but again, I am not the ones arguing the case.
These people obviously know infinitely more than I will ever do on how to persuade a Supreme Court justice.
States should not even have the power to be able to mandate private companies what they do in their workplace.
But fine, get Biden off your back, then I can deal with Arizona.
And guess what?
Arizona's not going to mandate it anytime soon.
It's not going to happen.
So I get that carve out.
I do.
But I also worry about my fellow countrymen in the state of Washington, where Jay Insuli will happily make an even worse mandate.
He'll say, okay, if you have four employees, you have to do this.
However, if you do leave it to the states, there is a fair amount of freedom and protection of the movement between states, and there's a lot more connectivity to your elected officials.
We're going to go through these arguments one by one.
It's a really interesting window into how the Biden regime views themselves, views their role, what they're trying to create, what they're trying to do, and the legal pushback against that.
And then we're going to go to Justice Sotomayor, who might be one of the most disappointing people ever to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.
I just don't think she's very smart.
I don't, even though she's on the U.S. Supreme Court.
And I'm going to tell you how this is going to lay the groundwork for potential moves against other amendments to the U.S. Constitution via the Bill of Rights.
As many of you know, most of corporate America is going woke.
And that includes those companies who are investing your hard-earned retirement money.
Well, guess what?
I finally found a financial planning and investment firm that supports our values.
PAX Financial Group in San Antonio, Texas.
Here's the great news.
Now you don't have to live in Texas to work with them because San Antonio is a military city.
They have clients worldwide.
The thing that I like about PAX Financial Group is they have biblical responsible investments.
These investments screen out companies that promote abortion, pornography, alcohol, drugs, gambling, and are anti-family or anti-Christian.
Look, if you have $150,000 or more in your IRA, 401ks, or other investments, and you want to speak to my friends at PAX, visit paxfinancialgroup.com.
That's paxfinancialgroup.com.
Right now, they want to offer you a free e-book to learn about biblical responsible investing.
Grab this e-book right now at paxfinancialgroup.com.
Let's start investing in companies and make everyone's liberty a priority.
This beautiful document, the greatest political document ever written in the U.S. Constitution, is on trial right now.
The idea of natural rights given to you by God, not by government, is a unique American interpretation of human existence.
It was a profound step forward in something that both the Declaration articulates in its own way.
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands that have tied them to the nether, the separate equal station.
And it goes on to say the laws of nature and nature's God.
This idea that there's a hierarchy to existence, that human beings are made in the image of God, that government is created from the sovereign, the people.
This is why a republic is a completely different form of government than a democracy.
We talked about this yesterday.
So, right now, these debates are ongoing.
And let's just kind of go through the players for those of you that don't spend as much time mulling about the U.S. Supreme Court as we do here on this show.
We have Clarence Thomas.
He's on the A-team.
Clarence Thomas is the man.
For those of you that do not know about Clarence Thomas, I encourage you to spend some time reading his book, reading about him.
And I always love how BLM conveniently ignores Clarence Thomas, a man who grew up in absolute poverty, moved up to the Supreme Court, is a devout Catholic, and the media has done their best to try to smear and slander the honorable man of Clarence Thomas.
Next is Elito, Bush appointee, probably the best thing George W. Bush actually did in his presidency.
Bush also gave us Roberts, so you got to kind of balance that.
Alito is terrific.
Next, Gorsuch, Trump appointee, first one that Trump put forward to fill the late seat of the phenomenal, the exceptional, the whimsical Justice Antonin Scalia, who is just really special.
Gorsuch is terrific.
Now we get more to the questions.
Brett Kavanaugh, who, of course, we remember when Christine Balzé Ford went in front of the U.S. Senate and elevated her voice to make her sound younger than she actually was.
And Brett Kavanaugh survived.
Amy Coney Barrett, big question marks, I'll be honest.
We do not know.
Amy Coney Barrett has disappointed us in two rulings, but it's not enough for us to make a judgment on her judicial future.
So just right there, those five people, Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito, Thomas, should be enough to strike this down.
Then we get into the, let's say, vanilla middle of the man who actually has moved more to the left for what reason other than country club membership and book deals, I don't know.
John Roberts, who is the Chief Justice of the United States, appointed by George W. Bush, he actually has been asking some okay questions in this.
And then we have the Bolshevik commissars, the Maoists, the cultural revolutionists.
We have Sodomayor.
We have Breyer and Kagan.
And those three are reliably anti-constitutional.
Whatever you might be debating, whatever might be the issue, no matter what it is, it's a rubber stamp for the destruction of the republic from Sodomayor, Kagan, and Breyer.
So they're somewhat of a waste of time.
But later in the show, I do want to dive into some of the language they're using, the arguments they're using, because it's very important that you, as the audience, are made aware of how they interpret the Constitution, how they interpret the citizenry.
Very, very important.
Okay.
Let's go to this.
Let's go to this.
I think it actually sets the table rather nicely.
Chick-fil-A Resists OSHA Rules 00:03:04
Let's go to Cut 89.
Justice Clarence Thomas about the federal government's vaccine or test mandate asks, how effective are these vaccines?
He gets straight to the heart of the issue.
You see, instead of dancing around the administrative or legal argument, Clarence Thomas says, wait a second, what are we actually mandating here?
God bless him.
Play Cut 89.
There's been some suggestion, or at least it seems to be Implied that the vaccinations are efficacious in preventing some degree of infection to others.
Could you talk about that, particularly as I remember in the filings that the 18 to that the younger workers, the 20-year-olds who are unvaccinated are actually safer than the older workers who aren't vaccinated.
So there are obviously some differences.
So Clarence Thomas gets straight to the heart of the issue of what exactly why are we mandating this for younger workers or all workers.
And then there's some administrative arguments that started to pop up.
But based, and you have to realize when these justices are asking questions, when these justices are going back and forth, they're sometimes talking to each other.
They're not just talking to the solicitor generals or the people making the arguments.
On a daily basis, people are being inundated with ads for overpriced boxers with some sort of slick ad campaign, and some would say innuendos.
Personally speaking, I prefer to keep this topic very private, but I'm happy to tell you about a company that is a great product and shares our values.
I want to tell you about Under TAC, the only men's basic brand that is unapologetically Christian, pro-American, pro-military, very, very proud, pro-2A.
They put comfort and functionality first by integrating a quick release fly and secret pocket in extra-wide waistband for cash or tactical necessities.
They're also antibacterial, anti-pilling, and the moisture-wicking fabric is super soft and comfortable.
Under TAC is durable, fade-resistant, shrink-resistant, and ultra-lightweight.
Here's the best part: they're 30% less expensive than the competition.
Go to undertack.com.
That's undertakwithac.com right now as a special Christmas offer.
Get 20% off with the offer code Kirk20.
That's K-I-R-K number 20.
Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.
Get undertach.com.
That's undertech.com.
Promo code Kirk20 for 20% off.
Boy, we have more tape than we know what to do with, but it's really important, especially for those of you right now that are working for companies that are saying, hey, the OSHA mandate's coming forward.
For example, you might work for a worthless company like Chick-fil-A.
Chick-fil-A, which has incredibly overrated food, which is saying to their employees that if they don't get the vaccine mandate, then we're going to fire all the employees.
Risks to Unvaccinated Workers 00:10:24
We're going to fire you by early February.
I don't know if you guys know that.
That's Chick-fil-A's new position.
And we've bashed on Chick-fil-A plenty throughout the years.
And we'll continue to do so.
And that is in great contrast, by the way, to the wonderful In-N-Out Burger, where In-N-Out Burger has said we are not mandating vaccines for our employees.
We're not mandating vaccines for our customers.
We're not doing any of it.
Huge contrast.
God bless In-N-Out, and I hope God will improve Chick-fil-A.
Let's just put it that way.
Okay.
So, boy, there is just a menu of clips to get to here.
Let's go to this one.
Okay.
So, Justice Sotomayor is the only justice that's there not, is not, is not there in person.
Geez, she's not in person.
She's remote asking questions because she says she's a diabetic and she might, she's afraid of getting COVID.
Now, I don't know what number she's coming up with, but here's a good rule for life.
Arguments from authority need to be called out into question.
So being on the U.S. Supreme Court, one would think you're aware, you're wise, you're smart, and you are willing to look at things as they are.
Justice Sotomayor, in this back and forth, has just said 100,000 children are hospitalized with COVID and many are on ventilators.
Now, we twice this week have played the clip from Fauci that has said that's not true.
Okay, they come in with a broken leg or a broken hip.
I want you to listen.
These are people that interpret the law for you.
What's legal, what isn't.
Play cut 99, Justice Sotomayor.
Country today than we had a year ago in January.
We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators.
We have over 100,000 children, which we've never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.
So saying it's a different variant just underscores the fact that without Fauci even said that's total nonsense.
I just want you to understand that is a member of the U.S. Supreme Court saying 100,000 children are hospitalized with COVID.
The power she has at her disposal and the disinformation she is spreading.
It's extraordinary.
Justice Alito went back and forth with Elizabeth Prologer, the U.S. Solicitor General, speaks fluent Russian and worked on the Bob Mueller investigation, just an interesting wrinkle.
They went back and forth on how unvaccinated workers are a danger to vaccinated workers.
But I thought if it's a vaccine, then that shouldn't prevent them.
Let me ask you a question before I play this.
When I was a child, I received the polio vaccine.
I also received the measles vaccine.
I don't walk around in fear that if someone has polio, I'm going to get it.
Because it's largely accepted that those vaccines are effective.
It's largely accepted that those vaccines have effectively inoculated the population against the transmission.
So let me get this straight.
The U.S. Solicitor General.
I want you to listen very carefully.
These people are supposed to be smart.
She says, wait a second.
We need to vaccinate the unvaccinated workers because they might harm the vaccinated workers.
Wait, so we have to vaccinate the unvaccinated to protect the vaccinated?
But you're telling us the vaccine's going to protect the vaccinated?
Which one is it exactly?
Play cut 91.
Absolutely true.
And one of the risks that OSHA was guarding against here was the risk that unvaccinated workers pose to other workers because they are so much more likely to transmit this death disease.
To vaccinated workers?
Yes, the grave danger finding.
I'm very disclaimed that.
The grave danger finding is limited to unvaccinated workers.
That's not a concern for us, is it?
We can't sustain this on that ground that this is helpful to the vaccinated workers because the unvaccinated workers present a risk to them.
Oh, to be clear, they present a risk to other unvaccinated workers who also might be older, who might have other people who have balanced the risks differently, maybe very foolishly, but they want to balance the risks presented to their health in a different way.
And OSHA says, no, you can't do that.
And that applies when you're on the job and also when you're not on the job and for the rest of your life because you have to take these vaccines unless the testing option is valuable.
Well, what?
So the male voice is Justice Alito.
The female voice is the Marxist solicitor general that works for Biden.
And basically he's saying, wait a second, how are you trying to say that we now need to vaccinate unvaccinated people to try to protect against vaccinated people?
Alito continued by asking about adverse reactions to the vaccine.
And that segues beautifully to a news story out of NPR, which I want to build out an argument around that, which is really important.
Justice Delito continues, CUT 96.
But is it not the case that these vaccines and every other vaccine of which I'm aware and many other medications have benefits and they also have risks?
And that some people who are vaccinated and some people who take medication that is highly beneficial will suffer adverse consequences.
Is that not true of these vaccines?
Let's go to Cut 98 then, where Justice Thomas says, is a vaccine the only way to treat COVID?
We know it's not true, the only way to treat COVID.
We know about early intervention.
Play Cut 98.
This probably doesn't go to the dispositions matter, but is a vaccine the only way to treat COVID?
It is certainly the single most effective way to target all of the hazards OSHA identified, both the chances of contracting the virus in the first place, the risk of infecting other workers on the work site, and with respect to the negative health consequences, that vaccination provides protection on all of those fronts.
Even though the most vaccinated places, like Israel, are showing record rates, even though you have 100% vaccinated ships that are spreading the virus.
Israel, right now, one of the most vaccinated and boosted nations in the world, has just reported a new number of COVID-19 cases yesterday.
Highest ever.
So what data is she actually reading from?
Now, Alito is onto something.
Alito is saying, wait a second.
There very well might be adverse events.
Do we have 97?
Is that the one?
Okay.
97 is where Alito goes deeper into the adverse events.
And then I want to read to you a national public radio article that came out this morning, taxpayer-funded government article, PlayCut 97.
There is a risk, right?
Has any other, has OSHA ever imposed any other safety regulation that imposes some extra risk, some different risk on the employee, so that if you have to wear a hard hat on the job, wearing a hard hat has some adverse health consequences.
Can you think of anything else that's like this?
I can't think of anything else that's precisely like this, but I think that to suggest that OSHA is precluded from using the most common, routine, safe, effective, proven strategy to fight an infectious disease at work would be a departure from how the statute should be understood.
Now, Alito's getting into the adverse events.
He's getting, hold on a second.
What about VAIRS, your own government's website?
Now, this is a very important point.
For those of us that study the news and we report it for hours a day and we really take time to prep our shows and our commentary, you start to see a certain pattern from the regime.
There's something called a drip strategy.
A drip strategy is where there is a slow-motion cover-up that happens over a long period of time with seemingly unconnected data points that when looked back retrospectively a couple years later, someone will be able to discount the bombshell smoke and gun revelation by sharing a multitude of otherwise unrelated articles proving the point.
Let me give you an example.
If you'd read the news carefully, you're starting to see more and more mainstream outlets, NPR, New York Times, report on health complications that happen after getting the vaccine.
For example, the New York Times had one where they said myocarditis presents a risk to young boys.
Wall Street Journal.
There's all these different ones.
And unless you connect them all together, they seem to just kind of be one-offs, right?
Mainstream Media Gaslighting Campaign 00:02:17
They seem to be rare, but they do it for a reason.
It's a drip campaign to try to cover their tail in case they're ever questioned.
Well, National Public Radio this morning, NPR.
COVID vaccines may briefly change your menstrual cycle, but you should still get one.
Now, forget the second part, paid for by Pfizer, you should still get one.
COVID vaccines may briefly change your menstrual cycle.
When we said this over the summer, we were fact-checked by social media companies and we had our own post taken down.
How did I know this?
Is it through my 20 years of experience as an OBGYN?
No, I just talk to human beings.
That's how.
And I happen to have an audience that engages us that emailed me freedom at charliekirk.com.
Remember that, Connor?
We got thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of emails from women saying, Charlie, my cycle's all screwed up.
Charlie, I'm having big problems.
Charlie, my friend miscarried.
And now you have NPR, National Public Radio, doing a little bit of a trial balloon, doing a little bit of a drip campaign saying, oh, yeah, hey, by the way, your menstrual cycle might change, but you should still get one.
And then you add the myocarditis, you add the VARES data.
All of a sudden, Alito asking those questions, he might be onto something.
Look, everyone out there has been asking me, Charlie, how do I get more pillows?
Well, that's mypillow.com.
And MyPillow doesn't have their box stores anymore, so we got to help them out.
And part of them being canceled, they want to give you the lowest price yet.
So you can get the lowest price in the history of MyPillow for their classic standard MyPillow regularly, $69.98.
Now only $19.98 with the promo code.
They also have queen size, regularly $79.98 and $24.98 with a promo code.
Or king size, usually $89.98, only $29.98 with your promo code.
MyPillow is not just pillows.
They have over 150 products, everything from sleepwear to new beds.
Go to mypillow.com or call 800-875-0425 and use promo code Kirk to take Andrew Mike's special offer on his standard MyPillow.
That's mypillow.com, promo code Kirk, or call 800-875-0425, mypillow.com, promo code Kirk, mypillow.com, promo code Kirk.
Congress vs Fourth Branch 00:03:57
Just to complete the point, though, is that you start to see a drip campaign by the regime media as a way to try and say in the future, well, as previously reported, basically like this is not a story.
We told you the vaccines weren't totally safe.
It is a slow-motion gaslighting campaign.
Okay, Cut 100.
The Chief Justice Roberts, just a couple minutes ago, suggested that OSHA cannot authorize a vaccine or test mandate because Congress wasn't thinking about COVID when it passed the law 50 years ago.
Now, this is not, I'm not going to compliment John Roberts for like a heroic constitutional interpretation here.
This is really simple stuff.
Play Cut 100, and I'm going to build out the significance of it.
Play Cut 100.
Well, you're saying that Congress acted.
Don't complain that Congress hasn't done anything and that, you know, that was 50 years ago that you're saying Congress acted.
I don't think it had COVID in mind.
That was almost closer to the Spanish flu than it is to today's problem.
Now, I understand the idea that agencies are more expert than Congress.
I understand the idea that they can move more quickly than Congress.
But this is something that the federal government has never done before, right?
Mandated vaccine coverage.
It's true that there has been no standard that looks exactly like this one.
The federal government has encouraged vaccination as this standard does in other provisions like the Bloodborne Pathogen Standard.
And masking and medical testing of employees are common features of OSHA standards.
So what John Roberts is getting at, what he's saying is, wait a second.
When Congress established OSHA, I don't think they had in mind being able to mandate a vaccine with COVID.
Now, this is an important point.
This goes to show how lazy and how sloppy both Congress and the courts have become.
The Constitution did not anticipate, the framers did not anticipate, a fourth branch of government to be created simply and solely to be able to make the laws and to interpret them and to be able to have an untouched ability.
Where John Roberts should have gone, but he's basically too afraid to do so.
He said, wait, wait a second.
John Roberts, hey, wait a second.
Where in the Constitution does it give the authority to create an agency that is completely immune to legislative congressional oversight that the President of the United States can just sign by the stroke of a pen to go into private businesses?
Now, the reason John Roberts didn't say that is it would have undone the court's laziness the last 40 years that would have created the regime of the independent regulatory agencies that would have allowed the SEC, the FDIC, the EPA, any one of these regulatory agencies.
The Federal Trade Commission is another great example.
The CFIB, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, all of these different ones.
But that really gets to the heart of the issue, doesn't it?
Which is we have here the fourth branch of government flexing its muscles, and Roberts is basically saying, wait a second, I don't think that they were thinking about this.
Now, all of these mandates are built off of a bad decision that happened in 1905, Jacobson v. Massachusetts.
That decision was actually cited by Justice Louis Brandeis for the forced sterilization of, quote, idiot women, not my term, the term in the 1920s of tens of thousands of women that were forcibly sterilized because their IQs were too low.
And that was because of the Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision that is basically being challenged right now, not explicitly.
This is not a direct appeal to Jacobson v. Massachusetts, but this is a question holistically about vaccines.
Challenging Jacobson Decision 00:01:37
And it's looking less and less like a vaccine and more and more like an injectable therapeutic.
So where is this going to land?
Because I know a lot of you have been saying, all right, Charlie, I got to, am I going to keep my job?
What's going to happen?
If.
If, if, if Amy Coney Barrett rules correctly, if Amy Coney Barrett does what she should do, the Supreme Court should strike down this vaccine mandate.
Based on these arguments, and we have very little indication on where Kavanaugh's head is at, but he's actually been okay on these types of issues.
But Amy Coney Barrett was very disappointing when an Indiana case with Indiana University of her home circuit, she actually was from Notre Dame, if you remember.
She didn't want to get involved.
Axios just said, Supreme Court seems skeptical of Biden's vaccine mandates.
I don't know where Roberts is going to land.
I don't really care.
If Thomas rocks solid, Alito rocks solid, Gorsuch rocks solid.
Kavanaugh, hopefully okay.
Amy Coney Barrett's the big question mark.
We'll see if she wants to be someone who loves the Constitution or a younger Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
We'll see.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts.
As always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
And if you want to support our show, go to charliekirk.com/slash support.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection