Inside a Supreme Court Argument
|
 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -1:24:58 |
On today’s episode, David and Sarah do a deep, deep dive into the vaccine mandate oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Sarah walks us through the HOP's (husband of the pod) arguments, and she and David decide the vital question of which basketball analogy to use to describe the likely outcome. They also take a quick look at the health care worker mandate and make their predictions.
Show Notes:
-Biden v. Missouri oral argument
-Nat. Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Dept. of Labor oral argument
-Wall Street Journal article with sketch of Scott
-SCOTUSblog: “Court seems poised to block vaccine-or-test policy for workplaces but may allow vaccine mandate for health care workers”
I am forever calling the OSHA mandate the “Sweeping-ass ETS” 😂
Long time reader/listener, first time writer. I felt I needed to say something because Sarah has now twice said something that is incredibly close to, if not a legitimate vaccine misinformation talking point and it's not great. Maybe just a clarification is needed.
No, the vaccine does not completely stop transmission between vaccinated individuals but it does significantly reduce the likelihood of transmission. Vaccinated people have died, vaccinated people have been hospitalized and breakthrough cases have occurred before Omicron but being vaccinated significantly reduced those risks then and still does today. Stopping the conversation at vaccinated people can spread and contract COVID is a gross oversimplification that is current being exploited by the antivax movement.