Connect with us

Politics

Supreme Court rules for Navy and its vaccine requirement

Published

on

Supreme Court rules for Navy and its vaccine requirement

The Supreme Court docket lifted a part of a Texas choose’s order Friday and dominated 6-3 that the U.S. army could refuse to deploy Navy SEALS or different troops who’ve refused to be vaccinated for COVID-19, citing their non secular beliefs.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.

The choice is a victory for the Biden administration and Secretary of Protection Lloyd Austin, who final yr required all service personnel to be vaccinated. In November, the Pentagon mentioned 99.4% of the troops have been vaccinated.

Advertisement

In a quick unsigned order, the justices put aside decrease court docket rulings that might forestall “the Navy from contemplating respondents’ vaccination standing in making deployment, project, and different operational selections.”

Underneath the Structure, “the president of the USA, not any federal choose, is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces,” Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh mentioned in a concurring opinion. “I see no foundation on this case for using the judicial energy in a way that army commanders imagine would impair the army of the USA because it defends the American folks.”

In dissent, Alito and Gorsuch faulted the bulk for “rubber stamping” the federal government’s vaccination order and for “brushing apart” the non secular objections raised by the SEALS.

In latest months, the justices stopped the federal authorities from implementing vaccination mandates on all non-public employers, however they’ve allowed states, hospitals and college districts to require vaccinations for their very own workers.

For many years, the excessive court docket has repeatedly mentioned judges should defer to the army and its commanders on issues involving order and self-discipline throughout the ranks.

Advertisement

However in January, U.S. District Choose Reed O’Connor in Ft. Price, Texas dominated that the Navy could not self-discipline or discriminate towards 36 SEALS and different particular forces who refused to be vaccinated citing non secular causes.

He mentioned a few of them believed aborted fetal cells performed a key function in creating the vaccine, whereas others cited “direct, divine instruction to not obtain the vaccine.” He mentioned these beliefs “are undisputedly honest, and it isn’t the function of this court docket to find out their truthfulness or accuracy.”

The choose issued an order telling the Navy it could not refuse to deploy SEALS on any mission due to their refusal to be vaccinated. Final month, the fifth Circuit Court docket in New Orleans refused the federal government’s request to elevate his order.

In interesting to the excessive court docket, U.S. Solicitor Gen. Elizabeth B. Prelogar known as the choice an “extraordinary and unprecedented intrusion into core army affairs.” She mentioned that previous to the outbreak of the brand new coronavirus, 9 vaccines had been required of all service members. And the historical past of the coverage dates again to 1777, when George Washington required members of his Continental Military to be vaccinated towards smallpox.

She cited the testimony of Adm. William Okay. Lescher, vice chief of Naval Operations and the second-highest uniformed officer within the Navy, who mentioned the sickness of “even one member” of a small SEAL crew as a result of COVID-19 may “compromise the mission.”

Advertisement

He mentioned he would regard it as a “dereliction of responsibility” to order “unvaccinated personnel into an surroundings by which they endanger their lives,” threat “the lives of others,” and “compromise accomplishment of important missions.”

The Biden administration’s legal professional didn’t ask the excessive court docket to overrule the choose’s resolution fully however, fairly, to restrict its affect. She mentioned the order not solely shields the SEALS from being disciplined or discharged, but additionally “requires the Navy to assign and deploy them with out regard to their lack of vaccinations however army leaders’ judgment,” she mentioned. “Doing so poses insupportable dangers to security and mission success.”

O’Connor’s courtroom in Ft. Price is a pleasant discussion board for conservative causes. In 2018, he dominated the Inexpensive Care Act was fully unconstitutional, a choice overturned by the Supreme Court docket on a 7-2 vote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Trump says Israel should hit Iran’s nuclear facilities, slamming Biden’s response

Published

on

Trump says Israel should hit Iran’s nuclear facilities, slamming Biden’s response

Former President Trump on Friday said that Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities while mocking President Biden’s answer earlier this week on the subject.  

While speaking at a campaign event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, he said when Biden was asked about Israel attacking Iran, the president answered, “’As long as they don’t hit the nuclear stuff.’ That’s the thing you wanna hit, right? I said, ‘I think he’s got that one wrong. Isn’t that what you’re supposed to hit?’” 

Trump went on to say that nuclear proliferation is the “biggest risk we have.” 

TRUMP SLAMS THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S RESPONSE TO HURRICANE HELENE

Former President Trump on Friday during a campaign event in Fayetteville, N.C., said that Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities while mocking President Biden’s answer earlier this week on the subject.  (AP Photo/Karl B DeBlaker)

Advertisement

The former president said he rebuilt the “entire military, jets everything, I built it, including nuclear” while he was president. “I hated to build the nuclear, but I got to know firsthand the power of that stuff, and I’ll tell you what: we have to be totally prepared. We have to be absolutely prepared.”

He said when Biden was asked about Israel and Iran: “His answer should have been “‘Hit the nuclear first, worry about the rest later.’”

Trump made similar comments in an interview with Fox News on Thursday, telling correspondent Bill Melugin Biden’s response on Israel attacking Iran was the “craziest thing I’ve ever heard. That’s the biggest risk we have. The biggest risk we have is nuclear.” 

TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORS MOCK BIDEN’S WARNINGS TO ISRAEL TO STICK TO ‘PROPORTIONAL’ IRAN RESPONSE

Rockets over Israel this week

Many rockets, fired from Iran, are seen over Jerusalem from Hebron, West Bank, Tuesday. The Israeli army announced that missiles were fired from Iran towards Israel and sirens were heard across the country, especially in Tel Aviv.  (Wisam Hashlamoun/Anadolu via Getty Images)

He continued, “I mean, to make the statement, ‘Please leave their nuclear alone.’ I would tell you that that’s not the right answer. That was the craziest answer because, you know what? Soon, they’re going to have nuclear weapons. And then you’re going to have problems.” 

Advertisement

Former deputy director of national intelligence Kash Patel, who served under Trump, said this week: “Iran launched a war into Israel, so to say that the Israelis who are defending themselves and our hostages shouldn’t attack sites in Iran that could kill them – especially when you’re the one who gave Iran $7 billion as a commander in chief and then allowed them to acquire nuclear materials – is wildly political.”

Biden speaking to reporters

Biden told reporters this week that he and the other members of the G-7 were in agreement that Israel should have a “measured” response to Iran.  (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Following Tuesday’s attack by Iran on Israel, Biden told reporters at Joint Base Andrews, “the answer is no,” of Israel potentially targeting the country’s nuclear program. 

He added that he and the other members of the G-7 all “agree that [Israel has] a right to respond, but they should respond proportionally,”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump blames immigrants as if that were a policy position. It's racist

Published

on

Trump blames immigrants as if that were a policy position. It's racist

On Friday, we learned that the U.S. added 254,000 jobs in September, bringing the unemployment rate down to 4.1%. When President Obama was elected, the Great Recession had pushed the rate to 7.8%. President Trump inherited a rate of 3.6%, and he gave President Biden a mishandled pandemic and 6.4% unemployment.

Opinion Columnist

LZ Granderson

LZ Granderson writes about culture, politics, sports and navigating life in America.

Advertisement

The next president is likely going to inherit an economy that is strong, even if many Americans aren’t feeling that way. The next president will also bring with them a narrative about the economy. In the case of Trump, it’s a story we’ve heard far too many times: Blame the minorities.

Over the eight years of the Obama administration, wages went up and unemployment reached historic lows, but the subprime mortgage crisis that began in 2007 left a lasting mark on housing. How could it not, when home ownership fell to its lowest point since 1965? Construction slowed, but demand for housing did not, and that’s how we ended up with the affordability crisis we have now.

Trump wants voters to blame desperate migrants for the shortage of affordable housing, but it was his friends on Wall Street who began this cycle.

Just as it was his intentional downplaying of the pandemic during the first few months — something he said he did to prevent panic — that left Americans misinformed and sent the economy into a tailspin. Instead of preparing us, Trump told us to blame China. That rhetoric sparked a wave of anti-Asian hate crimes.

Advertisement

During the Obama administration, more than 2.5 million immigrants were deported. That’s more than any other administration had forced out before, and Americans were still losing their homes — because that housing crisis was caused by corporate greed, not by illegal immigration.

Trump fared well in 2016 by blaming desperate Black and brown people as the root cause of housing problems and any other economic issue, neatly avoiding any context about Wall Street’s role. And because this helped get him to the White House the first time, I understand why there’s a temptation for his campaign now to couch this rhetoric as policy — to claim, for instance, that deporting people will ease the housing shortage or that disaster relief money for victims of Hurricane Helene was diverted to migrants at the border.

But it’s not policy.

It’s just racist.

And we need to just call it out for what it is.

Advertisement

This week, the Trump campaign sent out a press release that read “Kamala’s Open Border Jeopardizes FEMA’s Hurricane Response.” It was in response to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas reiterating that the Federal Emergency Management Agency may not have enough funds to make it to the end of hurricane season in November. The agency initially raised concerns at the beginning of the season in June, and the Biden administration overhauled aspects of FEMA relief to get funds out quicker. From Hurricane Katrina in 2005 through 2021, FEMA has spent more than $12 billion a year. From 1992 to 2004, it was $5 billion.

It was weather, not immigrants, that forced more than 3.3 million Americans out of their homes in 2022, nearly half that number for more than a month. However, the Trump campaign didn’t mention climate change, perhaps because the former president still thinks it’s a hoax. But the data show more funds were needed in response to the sweeping damage caused by natural disasters, not because of any trend in immigration.

And yet, the Trump campaign’s press secretary said: “FEMA has run out of money for the rest of hurricane season because Kamala Harris used the funds for free giveaways to illegal immigrants.”

That’s not true.

During the vice presidential debate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) took every opportunity he could to fault migrants and immigration for economic issues, echoing his boss. For his part, Trump’s comments about immigrants “poisoning the blood of our country” echoed Adolph Hitler. No wonder Vance compared Trump to Hitler in 2016 before switching allegiances.

Advertisement

Now the two of them are floating “mass deportation” as a solution … to problems caused by corporate greed. Never mind that deportations would aggravate many problems, including food costs and housing shortages.

In 2019, more than half the farmworkers in the country — 450,000 — were immigrants. In addition to the billions it would cost for the Trump-Vance deportation plan, what do you think would happen to food prices if they had their way? And to housing availability if a huge percentage of construction workers were deported? In Texas, half of the industry’s laborers undocumented.

Blaming Black and brown people might be red meat on the campaign trail, but it just isn’t sound economic policy.

It’s just racism.

@LZGranderson

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

Published

on

Video: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

new video loaded: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

transcript

transcript

Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

President Biden said Israel should consider alternative ways of retaliating against Iran, a day after he said the United States was “in discussion” about the possibility of Israel striking Iran’s oil fields.

“The Israelis have not concluded how they’re — what they’re going to do in terms of a strike. That’s under discussion. I think there are — if I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields.” Reporter: “At this point, you still haven’t spoken to Netanyahu. Is it fair to say that you have little personal influence over what he decides to do?” “No, look, our teams are in contact 12 hours a day. They’re constantly in contact. I’ve already had my presidential daily brief. We’ve already had interface between our military, our diplomats. It’s in constant contact. They are trying to figure out — it’s the high holidays as well — they’re not going to make a decision immediately. And so we’re going to wait to see when they want to talk. The Israelis have every right to respond to the vicious attacks on them, not just from the Iranians, but from everyone from Hezbollah to Houthis — anyway. But the fact is that they have to be very much more careful about dealing with civilian casualties.” Reporter: “So how should they respond? You expressed concerns about attacks on Iranian oil facilities. How should they respond?” “That’s between me and them.” Last night you said that there’s still a lot to do to avoid an all out war in the Middle East. Firstly, aren’t we pretty close to that definition already. And secondly, what can you really do to stop that happening. There’s a lot we are doing. The main thing we can do is try to rally the rest of the world and our allies into participating the French are and in Lebanon and other places to tamp this down. But when you have proxies as irrational as Hezbollah and the Houthis, and it’s a hard thing to determine. Did you have any worries that Netanyahu may be trying to influence the election. And that’s why he has not agreed to a diplomatic solution. No administration has helped Israel more than I have. None none. And I think Bibi should remember that. And whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know. But I’m not counting on that. You’ve said many times recently that you want to speak to him, that you plan to plan it and say, I want to. You don’t want to. No, I didn’t say that. You’re making it sound like I’m seeking a speaking. I’m assuming when they make their adjustment, how they’re going to respond, we will then have a discussion.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Middle East Crisis

Continue Reading

Trending