The Supreme Court Has Already Set Precedent for Vaccine Mandates

The Supreme Court Has Already Set Precedent for Vaccine Mandates

Republican leaders blasted President Joe Biden after his address to the nation on Thursday where he required COVID-19 vaccines for federal employees, contractors, and businesses with more than 100 employees – imposing a fine of $14,000 per violation.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has resisted making vaccinations mandatory in any form in Texas, even barring local governments and school districts from enacting their own vaccine mandates.

“The federal government needs to stop trying to run private businesses,” Abbott spokesperson Renae Eze said in a statement. “Texans and Americans alike have learned and mastered the safe practices to protect themselves and their loved ones from COVID, and do not need the government to tell them how to do so.”

“@JoeBiden see you in court,” Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota wrote on Twitter.

Gov. Mark Gordon of Wyoming said the executive order “has no place in America,” and said he had asked the state’s attorney general to be ready to take legal action.

But is there legal precedent for enforcing vaccine mandates? As it turns out, there is. See how the Supreme Court ruled on the issue in 1905. Supporters of Biden's mandate cite this to ruling to justify their position.

Next Page »


Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest