6th Circuit Court Split Decision Unblocks Biden Vaccine Mandate: Dueling Courts

Faye Higbee
biden's jab mandate
Screenshot via RiteAid.com

Sleepy Joe’s vaccine mandate has been unblocked by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals after the Biden administration begged. In a 2-1 decision, the 6th Circuit Court rescinded the 5th Circuit Court’s injunction against the vaccine mandate for businesses over 100 employees. The plaintiffs immediately sent an appeal to the Supreme Court. In this business of dueling court decisions, there may be no winner available. (The Epoch Times) The Supreme Court has been reluctant to wade into these matters.

Update: A Missouri Court judge on Dec 20 issued a stay on the mandate for 10 states.

Story continues below:



While South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson may be confident in the Supreme Court, some of us are not. Their track record thus far with regard to the mandate has been dismal. They have refused to take up the challenges.

A growing number of organizations and businesses suspended the vaccine mandate because of the stay issued by the 5th Circuit Court.

The ruling of 2-1 reflected the wide variance of opinion on the vaccine mandate. As we previously reported, three judges on the 5th Circuit court ruled that the OSHA mandate had “grave unconstitutional issues.” But two judges on the 6th Circuit Court did not see those issues and reversed the stay. The lone dissenting judge, a Trump nominee, gave several pages of arguments in her dissenting opinion – these are only three of them:

‘”The Secretary has not made the appropriate finding of necessity. An emergency standard must be ‘necessary to protect employees from (grave) danger…

The purpose of the mandate is to protect unvaccinated people. The rule’s premise is that vaccines work. And so, OSHA has explained that the rule is not about protecting the vaccinated; they do not face ‘grave danger’ from working with those who are not vaccinated…

 The multitude of petitioners—individuals, businesses, labor unions, and state governments—have levied serious, and varied, charges against the mandate’s legality. They say, for example, that the mandate violates the nondelegation doctrine, the Commerce Clause, and substantive due process; some say that it violates their constitutionally protected religious liberties and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.  To lift the stay entirely, we would have to conclude that not one of these challenges is likely to succeed. A tall task.

Judge Joan Louise Larsen from her dissenting opinion

The Attorneys General, multiple businesses, and individuals who filed the challenges to the mandate plan to appeal the ruling immediately. But with the dueling court rulings in this situation, the seesaw effect will likely continue. And getting the Supreme Court to take up this case is problematic.


Featured photo: file

Sign up for our Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children newsletter and check out our shop while you’re there! Our website link has been censored on Facebook and Instagram, so be sure to visit us on the web or TwitterParlerMeWe page and groupGAB, and Instagram account is here.   Here is the link to our gun store at https://unclesamsguns.com/.