News.

As set forth in more detail in its Order, a Georgia federal district court judge today issued an injunction halting enforcement of Executive Order 14042, which requires that federal contractors and subcontractors with specific types of covered contracts ensure that their covered employees are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by January 18^th, 2022.

As the Order states,

Accordingly,  the Court ORDERS that Defendants are ENJOINED, during the pendency of this action or until further order of this Court, from enforcing the vaccine mandate for federal contractors and subcontractors in all covered contracts in any state or territory of the United States of America.

In a brief 28-page decision U.S. District Court Judge R. Stan Baker found

it necessary, in order to truly afford injunctive relief to the parties before it, to issue an injunction with nationwide applicability.

The case was initially filed by the states of Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah and West Virginia.  However, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. a nationwide trade organization “representing tens of thousands of contractors and subcontractors that regularly bid on and work on federal contracts for services” petitioned to intervene in the suit and joined the states in their request for a preliminary injunction.

In granting the injunction, Judge Baker found

The Court finds that Plaintiffs have a likelihood of proving that Congress, through the language it used, did not clearly authorize the President to issue the kind of mandate contained in EO 14042, as EO 14042 goes far beyond addressing administrative and management issues in order to promote efficiency and economy in procurement and contracting, and instead, in application, works as a regulation of public health, which is not clearly authorized under the Procurement Act.

The Court also found that “Plaintiffs have a likelihood of proving that EO 14042 does not have a sufficient nexus to the purposes of the Procurement Act and thus does not fall within the authority actually granted to the President in that Act.”

This Order follows the order of a Kentucky federal court also enjoining enforcement of the Executive Order in Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee.  In contrast, today’s Order halts enforcement of the Executive Order nationwide.

Zero Hedge is also covering this.  This one comment sums up how I feel about all of this.

Damage has been done. How many lost their jobs over an illegal order? How many millions that didnt want the death jab were forced by their employer? You can vote your way into communism but you have to shoot your way out.

As I’ve noted before, the cowering cowards of the SCOTUS have already declined to hear this several times and let the mandate go forward, knowing full well it’s unconstitutional.

Oh, they would probably say something like “But cases must be heard first at the appellate court level to flush out the issues.”  In the mean time, good men and women get injured, and religious rights get violated.

One good sign is that some prog commentator is astonished at Gorsuch and pens this ridiculous title “Neil Gorsuch’s Terrifying Paragraph.”

“I accept that what we said 11 months ago remains true today – that ‘[s]temming the spread of COVID-19’ qualifies as ‘a compelling inter­est.’ At the same time, I would acknowledge that this interest cannot qualify as such forever. Back when we decided Roman Catholic Diocese, there were no widely distributed vac­cines. Today there are three. At that time, the country had comparably few treatments for those suffering with the disease. Today we have additional treatments and more appear near. If human nature and history teach anything, it is that civil liberties face grave risks when governments proclaim indefinite states of emergency.”

That’s weak tea, but tea nonetheless.  Hopefully the SCOTUS does the right thing when it finally makes its way to them – and it will make its way to them.

It would have been better to have addressed this months ago.