Conservative Supreme Court Justice
Amy Coney Barrett handed down
a decision that is shocking.
Now this had to do with a vaccine
mandate at Indiana University.
And this case made its way
all the way to the Supreme Court,
where students were hoping that the
Supreme Court would block Indiana
University's vaccine mandate, but
that is not what happened.
Coney Barrett rejected an emergency
request by a group of
Indiana University students who
were seeking to block the school
from enforcing a COVID-19 vaccine
requirement for
the coming semester.
She denied the request without
comment, and without referring
the matter to the full high court
for consideration.
I have to be honest I am pretty
surprised by that, because the
whole point of ensuring that you
install these conservative justices
is so they carry out this, vision
of America that's deregulated.
It's all about the individual, but
that is not what happened here.
Now, look, if we were talking
about corporations, I guarantee you
Amy Coney Barrett would vote in
a way that would not shock us.
But let me give you more details.
Lower courts, actually, declined
also to block the policy saying
the students were unlikely to
prevail on claims that the mandate
violated the Constitution.
And just to give you one of
the comments from a judge
in the US Circuit Court of Appeals.
He's from the lower
courts, of course.
He argued a university will have
trouble operating when each fears
that everyone else may be spreading
disease.
Few people want to return to
remote education.
And we do not think that the
Constitution forces the distance
learning approach on a university
that believes vaccination or
masks and frequent testing of
the unvaccinated will make
in-person operation safe enough.
Now the school states that if
you refuse to get a vaccine,
you have to wear a mask at all
times when you're on the campus and
you have to submit to COVID
tests on a regular basis.
But, of course,
the students don't like that, which
is why they made this a big case,
in the first place.
>> Okay, so,
first of all, Easterbrook is right.
He's actually a storied judge, and
one of the writer judges we have,
whether you agree or disagree with
his judicial philosophy.
And he's saying something really
simple.
Of course, institutions have
a right to stop the spread
of disease at their institutions.
Who would say that they don't
have the right?
So let's say that the plague is
back and we can't control it.
That killed 75 to 200
million people.
So, is the university supposed to
say, yeah, come on in with
the plague no problem?
You don't have to wear a mask.
You don't have to be vaccinated,
just have the plague and
smear it all over the rest of us.
Are they allowed to then spit
on us too?
For freedom, freedom.
Well, but in a situation where you
have a contagious disease,
breathing on us is
actually similar to spitting on us.
And so that's just a fact.
And it's an uncomfortable fact, but
it's true, right?
And so this is not the plague, but
over four million people have died
and especially in modern times,
that is stunning.
Absolutely stunning number, and
in America over 620,000 people
have died.
If you're a university and
you're not trying to stop
that spread on your campus,
you're negligent and incompetent.
And so, of course,
this is the correct decision.
By the way,
quick fun note on freedom,
I think that the right-wing would
agree that one of the guys who gave
us freedom was George Washington,
one of the Founding Fathers and
the general of our army and
that won freedom.
He vaccinated his troops,
because the British had already had
an outbreak and were pretty much
immune from smallpox, at the time.
And vaccines back then were brutal
and really risky.
And he vaccinated his whole army,
anyway.
Otherwise we're going to lose to
the British and never have America,
in the first place.
So, read history.
And then finally on
Amy Coney Barrett, Ana, I think you
hit it, is, she's ruling this way
in the case of the university.
>> Exactly.
>> Sure, but the very next case is
going to be corporations.
And so,
when it comes to corporations,
she dismissed it's so out of hand.
She did not bring it
to the entire court.
And she said they could not win on
the facts, no matter what,
basically.
>> She didn't even give reasoning.
She was like no, sorry.
>> No, like it was as much of
a rejection as you could
possibly have on the Supreme Court.
And one of the reasons is,
because these conservative judges
are just pro business.
They are in favor of giant
corporations, that's why they were
selected by corrupt politicians.
And so when corporations come and
say we're going to do a vaccine
mandate, trust me that Barrett and
all of the almost all the other
right-wingers will be like,
yes, sir.
Absolutely sir, corporations can do
anything they want, sir.
And that's a preview for this.
>> Exactly, and
look, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas
should take note, because he has
implemented an anti, basically he
has banned mask mandates.
Now, the Dallas School District
has decided to ignore his ban.
The Dallas Independent School
District in Texas will maintain its
mask mandate for students despite
Texas' Supreme Court ruling
that upheld governor Abbott's ban
on such measures.
So who knows if this
case is going to make its
way to the Supreme Court.
But at this point we have precedent
based on the way that Supreme Court
Justice Amy Coney Barrett handled
the Indiana University case.
So, we'll see what happens.
>> Yeah, and by the way,
look in the bonus episode for
the members.
I'll tell you a story
of my kids first day of school and
a little bit of drama that happened
there in LA.
Hit the Join button below if you're
watching on YouTube and
you can get that bonus episode.
But, just think about what Abbott
is saying in Texas.
If you've decided that your school
is going to be safer with masks,
I'm not going to let you make
that decision.
>> That's banned.
>> Yes, I'm going to ban you from
being safe.
So now imagine you had your kids in
that school.
And the people running the school
said we're positive.
They'd be safer if everybody was
wearing masks.
And a bunch of people said, no,
we don't want to.
We want to endanger your kids.
This is a recipe for disaster.
And these are the guys who said,
we're in favor of local rule.
Nope, nope, the minute
you disagree with local rule,
you're in favor of, basically,
what you would call tyranny.
That ain't freedom.
>> Right, and only 45.3% of
Texans are fully vaccinated.
One of the lowest vaccination rates
in the country.
So, keep that in mind.
>> And by the way, one of the worst
outbreaks in the country and
the most amount of deaths
in the country.
Way to go Texas you really got
this thing figured out.
Keep voting for Republicans,
see how many more people can die.