The 6th Circuit Lifts The Stay

 Read it here:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/21a0287p-06.pdf

We. Are. F****

GIBBONS, Circuit Judge, concurring. I agree that the government’s motion to dissolve
the stay should be granted and concur fully in Judge Stranch’s opinion. I write separately to note
the limited role of the judiciary in this dispute about pandemic policy. Petitioners and various
opinions discuss at length how OSHA could have handled the pandemic’s impact on places of
employment differently. Some of the writings include sweeping pronouncements about
constitutional law and the scope of OSHA’s statutory authority. Much of this writing is
untethered from the specific facts and issues presented here and overlooks the limited nature of
our role.

 

Reasonable minds may disagree on OSHA’s approach to the pandemic, but we do not
substitute our judgment for that of OSHA, which has been tasked by Congress with policy-
making responsibilities. See Charles D. Bonnano Linen Serv., Inc. v. NLRB, 454 U.S. 404, 418
(1982). This limitation is constitutionally mandated, separating our branch from our political co-
branches. “[F]ederal judges—who have no constituency—have a duty to respect legitimate
policy choices made by those who do.” Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 866
(1984). Beyond constitutional limitations, the work of an agency, often scientific and technical
in nature, is outside our expertise. See Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400, 2413 (2019).
Our only responsibility is to determine whether OSHA has likely acted within the bounds
of its statutory authority and the Constitution. As it likely has done so, I concur."

 

And

 

By contrast, the costs of delaying implementation of the ETS are comparatively high.
Fundamentally, the ETS is an important step in curtailing the transmission of a deadly virus that
has killed over 800,000 people in the United States, brought our healthcare system to its knees,
forced businesses to shut down for months on end, and cost hundreds of thousands of workers
their jobs. In a conservative estimate, OSHA finds that the ETS will “save over 6,500 worker
lives and prevent over 250,000 hospitalizations” in just six months. 86 Fed. Reg. 61,402,
61,408. A stay would risk compromising these numbers, indisputably a significant injury to the
public. The harm to the Government and the public interest outweighs any irreparable injury to
the individual Petitioners who may be subject to a vaccination policy, particularly here where
Petitioners have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits. See Coleman v. Paccar, Inc.,

Never mind that the above paragraph says NOTHING about workplace safety, which is what OSHA is about. Never mind that none of the "vaccines" actually prevent infection or transmission. 

And never mind that per the constitution the individual holds the rights over their persons and property as enumerated in the 4th Amendment, not the "government"  or "public".

I have zero confidence that SCOTUS will do any different. And that assumes they even take the case.

As I said months ago, this will be the end of the US as it has been known. The ideology has been thoroughly implanted.