18 Comments

The most fundamental argument is missing in this brief: Medical treatments for me are vetted by me, and I alone have final veto power over somebody else's idea of a good medical treatment when it comes to my health. Even if the SCOTUS justices had licenses to practice medicine, (which they don't and I do, thereby trumping their medical judgment), and even if Omicron were threatening (which it is most likely not), and even if the vaccines were effective and safe (and it is proven beyond doubt that they are neither), the principle of bodily autonomy is still paramount and is required by the US Constitution as well as by federal informed consent law.

Expand full comment

Thank you for doing this. It's a very impressive brief.

Expand full comment

Thank you for all your efforts. Listening to Justices, Sotomayer, Breyer and Kagan was disheartening. I simply cannot get over the lack of knowledge they have on Omicron.

I find it troubling to say the least.

Expand full comment

Thank you Thank you Thank you - You are all Heroes!!!

Expand full comment

I listened as much as I could. It seemed like most of the justices weren't up on any of the latest data, and the 3 on the left were definitely going to rule for Osha, and 3 on the right were going to rule against Osha, but those 3 in the middle, a little harder to tell. though I'd guess in the end they will support their brother organization, big government. Hope I'm wrong.

Expand full comment

For non-legal folks like me, I found this definition of amicus brief and related terms helpful. https://legaldictionary.net/amicus-brief/

Expand full comment

Here is my concern. A SCOTUS justice just gave falsely inflated numbers to bolster her argument. Not once but several times. What is the plan to address this because this is now apart of court documents. This is a case that will determine our bodily autonomy. This will actually make many of us criminals in our own country because we refuse to allow experimental drugs to be put in our bodies. And the fact that the President who admitted it was unconstitutional so they worked on a “work around” speaks volumes as to the legality of this. If this is allowed to go unchallenged then a justice can lie about anything and have it apart of record for other issues. Where will it stop. We are on a dangerous path and I for the first time in my life truly fear where our country is going. I did not recognize it today as compared to just 3,5,20 or even 30 years ago. I’ve seen politics destroy the trust in our media, our government and now in our healthcare. What’s left??????? Why would you want to be an American if our constitution is so easily destroyed for an agenda?

Expand full comment

How can the people who hold one of the highest positions in our country be so clueless about this? More than disappointing- scares the crap out of me.

Expand full comment

Well done brief. But are their minds already made up?

Expand full comment

Doesn't the Nuremberg Code come to play in this situation? I applaud everything that Justin Hart, the NFIB, the attorneys, doctors, Ph.D.'s, etc., are doing. "Thank you" is hardly sufficient to express my personal appreciation.

Expand full comment

This seems awful. The argument shouldn't be but omicron isn't that bad. So oh ok well there could be another delta so breaking the constitution is fine. I am completely shocked and dismayed by this lack of an actual argument.

Expand full comment

Only one problem with this. It's about the pragmatic reasons not to. For example if the vaccines were effective this brief would imply the SCOTUS should rule in favor of a mandate.

That said. Here's hoping they read this. Esp 3 particular SCOTUS members who are either entirely out of touch with reality or pure evil. I am not sure which is worse. Evil by accident or evil on purpose?

Expand full comment

Great work, Justin. Your post here was linked to Presscalifornia.com

Expand full comment

Thank you for your perseverance on behalf of the people of this once great country. The only part of the arguments I heard today did not address at all the fact that what is being forced is ineffective. Does that matter? Are they willfully blind?

Expand full comment