ACLJ Wins Major Mandate Case At Supreme Court

Secular a major victory for the ACLJ Supreme Court now this is what I hear from you.

Call one 800-6843 11 secular why major seal J Maj. Rick, the American worker yesterday at the US Supreme Court. Two thirds of the American workforce was beginning to comply with the Biden ministrations vaccine mandate and for most of you in your employer. That meant that you either had to show your vaccine card improved your employer that you were back say the employer had to build a new database of people who were vaccinated and make sure you know that was ready in case the definition might've changed you later on having to have to have a booster shot to be considered fully vaccinated, then you also if you if you wanted to allow the option you could either terminate the employers who work vaccinated or you are allow the option of weekly testing and masking at a time when you it's very difficult to even find those testing you, that of the database of testing even applied as the Supreme Court noted to only 9% of landscapers and groundskeepers would be considered outdoor workers for this not to apply.

Think about that lifeguards at the pool this summer.

They would actually be considered indoor employees because there is some time where they might be inside for landscapers because this they spent some time in vehicle together, but the Supreme Court in a resounding 63 decision sip told the Biden administration that OSHA in this agency under the Department of Labor does not have the constitutional power or the authority under statute to implement this kind of wide spread mandate and I get I wanted just reinforce, this was a victory for two thirds, nearly 100 million American workers and their employers won't have to be this bizarre employer employee relationship, which I'll tell you folks was was becoming very bizarre.

It will we were having to do it have anything weird employees can get the replays I cannot get the court can get tested because the tests were available. So that was one and then at the same time you had the situation was a lot you could do about it and we have a very high vaccination rate actually here but it made it very difficult for these employees to do. We had to create this database only say what would happen here. I hope that this decision. I really believe this is not happen deeply at us, as is this issue. I think it does is not is not a mandates. No one can make you do it you do what's best for you. For me that was getting vaccinated. That's a decision that I made based on my advice. My doctor and the science that's where I came out but what this does is the government never had the authority. This was what we argued that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration did not have the statutory authority to do this and that they overreach by doing it in six justices and in the Supreme Court agreed with us. That's exactly ride today the government of the thing in the heart of the opinion was that the Congress did not give the Labor Department through the OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the statutory or regulatory authority. I should say to interfere in the mandating of vaccines or testing or any of those things that they attempted to do because it just wasn't in the congressional mandate and what Congress gave was not that power.

That power was not given to OSHA therefore OSHA had no authority to regulate and to interfere in that particular think it was a resounding victory in my view of the Constitution of the United States because it emphasizes the fact that only delegated powers by the states to the federal government apply and even then, the federal government has limited authority under what it can do and give to its agency J is asking a lot of the chapters that there's a second case, it was not the same case we were not part of the reps the heritage foundation, private employers about the medical employers that was a separate and their employees a separate case entirely and by the way, if you work for those companies. Not one of them challenged challenges will come from the states and visual employees, your employer, your hospital Supreme Court noted. Unlike heritage who challenged it for their employees, your employer didn't and the Supreme Court took note is right on the edge five force of your upset their eye next to direct your anger toward your medical employer who decided not to challenge this on your behalf.

We write back and say the challenges facing Americans are substantial time and or value freedom and sword constitutional rights are under attack is more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ is on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you.

If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is certainly contact. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called mission life will show you how you are personally support the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the and what Obama care means to the pro-life in many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to life question free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/secularity of phone calls to throughout the broadcast I really enjoyed by Kevin Roberts.

He is the President of the heritage foundation he'll be joining us later broadcast Mike Pompeo later in the broadcast as well to weigh in on this, but I want to walk through to how quickly the ACLJ was able to engage with the heritage foundation came to us. They were interested in filing the challenge was the first time.

Heritage foundation ever went to federal court as the actual petitioner they found a couple of amicus brief before they never been represented before federal court that this wasn't something they do before they decided this was important. This was so important that they wanted to do so and they chose the American Center for Law and Justice to represent them. So on November 29, 2021.

So right after Thanksgiving holiday. The ACLJ filed a federal lawsuit in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on behalf of the heritage had a shift to file where there based on December 7 we filed the heritage foundation's opposition to the defendants motion to dissolve the state. Remember this day then was dissolved by that was December 17, 20, 21, the Sixth Circuit dissolve the state so this was set it for set the mandate to go into effect January 4 when people return to work after the New Year's holiday on December 18. This is again just the significance of the amount work and where we get these dates when you get to when I talk about November 29. As will be filed. There were it was dates between without weeks, days are attorneys had to get that ready. December 18, the ACLJ filed the heritage foundation's emergency application for stay of agency action at the US Supreme Court or a great assert on December 20.

The case was docketed, the Supreme Court, the heritage foundation case and Justice Cavanaugh set the government. Government's response would do was due by 4 PM on Thursday, December 30 something days of work with right through every single holiday Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's.

I December 21. This report announces the oral argument would be on January 7 that last week December 23 at the circuit court dismissed or an order issued that a reply from us, if any, would be due on January 3, two days after New Year's Day at the ACLJ, filed on January 3 heritage foundation's reply and on January 13 the application for stay was granted by the US Supreme Court and that was of course the victory yesterday when I need people understand like everybody understand and begin the end of this happens without a member support because this unit we talk about Thanksgiving summer working on this right before Thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving comes you still working on it Thanksgiving and is still working on it in a six-week period of time.

We went from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court in United States for the decision so I mean you talk about record-breaking speed week Chandra knighted Sean Hannity's cages and was led by human had about 20 wins.

The Supreme Court maybe a little bit more with the similar summary reversals with gotten over the year from a closer 25 or 28 but the Internet has ointment not. We just got this one so that same 2028. Nine now and the fact is that this case moved at record speed. But we were very tailored in our approach because when you when you've lost the case in the lower court what you want to do is somewhere in the opinion you wanted to say reversed or stay granted and everybody's time, but what I could maybe they'll strike it down on constitutional grounds. We lead with the lack of statutory authority and this is what the Supreme Court said OSHA has never impose such a mandate, nor has Congress indeed. Although Congress has enacted significant legislation addressing over 19. It is declined to enact any measure similar to what OSHA has done.

We agreed that the applicants are likely to prevail in the grantor applications and stay the rule began.

The court then went and said that because this did not apply just to the workplace. So that's what was so interesting about this, but we went for a very specific type of relief here. Andy this today based on a lack of statutory authority we address the constitutional issues.

Of course, because you never know where it's going go but we focused on the statute that's exactly right that the stay is what we wanted to have in place that is the preclusion by the Biden administration of and enforcing this anti-covert vaccine mandate castings stay that had been put into place and we focused on what did the Congress give in terms of authority to OSHA and the Supreme Court found that it did not give it authority to do anything other than occupational hazards and workplace safety of these were not. It's not a public health farm is not a public health institution.

It did not have the authority to do that and we focused very very laserlike on the statutory authorities given by Congress to this agency and the Supreme Court found they did not have that authority. You can do it and removed with lightning speed on this West. As you saw the there is no other organization.

This position quite like we are to defend the Constitution and to represent rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans, businesses and groups even states and cities who are our representatives in Congress that we had direct contact with two epics in the media through our FOIA request, but especially in the court's J and and we are defending the rights of ordinary Americans and our Constitution. NJ is only possible. Think about just through donations.

No interpersonal who support the ACL diagnosing you all get the thank you. Here I mean we get to do the work because your support of ACLJ which is just incredible. So I mama say that throughout this entire broadcast.

Thank you only get a fair advantage. It was interesting because the one thing that the opinion does say is that while OSHA could not do this Congress might be able to do it or and certainly the states.

I think we all agree to states have the authority to do it under police power, but you see nothing moving in Congress on this correct and I think this issue is now depoliticize and people make smart decisions. I hope gets a major win all the way around and I think there's a there's disagreement here in town on whether or not Congress should have the ability to pass a statute and do this to the court in its opinion reference that the Senate has actually taken a substantive vote on this. They voted on a sense of the Senate on what the weather not the mandate I should stand there is actually bipartisan opposition to the mandate jaded. The vote was 52 to 48, and the court recognized that that was the most significant note that Congress had taken so look even if even if Congress were to come back and say we want to implement this mandate statutorily and even if, hypothetically, the court would let that stand. I J there just aren't the votes in either chamber to do that. So were not going to get a statutory mandate on this. I feel very confident about that I was getting a lot of calls coming in short try to help people with questions in my nap was going to get Mike Scully from Utah on line 1 a Mike welcome the secular young the place look like and like all I meant embedded big mirror work for a Fortune 150 defense contractor was unclear to me based on the things that I watched on the news yesterday and on your program. Whether or not DOD contractors are going to be exempt from part of this mandate still Oracle going. Since it would be like that private industry to help you see this, what is your work for private defense contractor. So what is their policy. I think they're going along with what the CDC said that, I think that there unclear as to whether or not I hate they were forced to buy so there's a reason why their inclusive Mike, this is like another category of this case. So we we see the case for private employers. These are not government contractors. That's two thirds the American workforce.

No mandate for this then we see the case of pay for the medical employees but rumor these these hospitals. They take somewhat upwards of 70% of of their income coming in is coming in from CMS Medicaid and Medicare services, but your case is still in the District Court and so there are depending on where you are, no Utah even filed in the case in Georgia and right now the District Court fair has issued a stay on any mandates for government contractors but give the calico district by district.

So I think you employers doing the right thing. Mike they they don't.

I don't know if they filed and challenge to your state has in Utah there to be looking to probably the circuit courts and potentially the US Supreme Court on how this will impact your defense contractor, but as yet as it was put out by you, and I think this is what clears your employers doing the right thing and try to figure out what to do, but so far, Mike. They've not issuing mandate on you have a buyback undocked data, given your card or anything like that yet with building a database like I did get that light my data. Interestingly enough, Monday actually concocted on the Koran and actually all-male capital even though I'm fully documented. I actually concocted the same position we were served three days ago, which was four days ago which is week we started the good faith compliance with the law, because that was where lawyers we comply with the law.

If we don't like it and that was before the testing requirements kicked in, so we started to build a database is no longer necessary now for us it's probably your employers doing you can't really rely on just a District Court opinion that, but that's where these cases are, they are moving through the District Court today and then that'll go to the circuit court to then that will impact more states and and that's I think you and your employers have figured out for you and and do the right thing yet there's a lot of nuances still to be determined on this, but what the one thing is clear is this mandate is done. Two thirds of the hard work of the workforce on and that was good.

Now again compartment Blumberg any questions on this and it can private employers put in their own protocol. Sure is that private employer from doing that. That's allowed so again that those are individual decisions that comes may we put in the filtration system that was our decision wasn't mandated by the government.

That was a decision we make surprise employers that have a vaccine mandate are allowed to do that minutes that's allowed into government can compel it.

That's different here exactly and it has to be some exceptions, except only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like it will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists. The ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the end what Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans for substantial time and are now free to soar.

Constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.

ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ3, two thirds of the American workforce free of this federal mandate employer not forced to do anything the employees again. It's a huge victory and it was because I don't make it clear your employers to the free, so your states to the fruit your employers. This national.

It outlives the Federation of Independent businesses and in small businesses they they stood opposite entire trade associate Association, the nonprofit sector and coordinating that they said you know it's states private employers, nonprofit organizations, trade associations of businesses that all stood up to say we don't want to be in this position. We know what we need to do what's best in our small business or our company delivers 100 or more employees impact a lot of small businesses.

Let us do what's best.

That's what let's work with the states and municipalities. We don't need this federal mandate that treats the landscaper and lifeguard the same way as someone working at a meatpacking plant and that's with Ace and the court said that to me what was good about the opinion is, and it was a procurement opinion by the way, which means is it's unsigned it's not by 63 was a three just as the sent but the Chief Justice, along with justice Alito Justice Thomas does discourses Justice Barrett Justice Cavanaugh all came to the same conclusion that OSHA did not have the statutory authority to do this. That doesn't mean again that states can't because they say the states can and they say the Congress can actually mean them in the Gorton's opinion in his concurring opinion, he believes in and they say that in the procurement opinion as well, but I think what this did and I go back to this fan.

It does depoliticize this, which I think is healthy for the American people, and as I said, I'm a big advocate of the vaccine is is you will know I lost a brother to COBIT so this is very serious for me and my brother was nonvaccinated and I you know I regret that.

But there's nothing like I can't say it over and over again, that doesn't mean the government had the authority to just mandated toward agency that had no authority to do that in the first place.

But I do think it depoliticize that and I think that's a good thing yet I totally agree with you I think it's a huge win on a number of fronts. It's clearly a win for liberty. It's clearly a win on a proper recognition of the limits of federal government.

I do think it depoliticize the vaccine and other options available for people to contract COBIT. I've had COBIT as well. Jam also vaccinated. I'm glad to have an individual opportunity to choose the best options for my family and me. I think this this opinion does all of those things in the day. I actually think more people get to choose the vaccine because the government is not demanding, and upon them, and I think that's a good thing I tell you one thing to. I was kind of chuckling as Jordan was going through that timeline because J you know this is true, this just always happens in Washington DC. The biggest issues in the biggest cases always seem to come at the most inconvenient times either have a a Friday evening document.you have a Thanksgiving and a Christmas holiday were all of the filings are due. But J luck if you want to fight for liberty.

That's what you've got a doing that's what we do at the ACL that I've interviewed lawyers before the business been years and years ago and they were to buy don't work on this day, and I can't work on it was a work in an emergency state Supreme Court.

I have gotten calls from the Supreme Court in years pass. On Christmas Eve where they needed something on a case that were involved in it was Christmas Eve and guess what we did. We responded and here we responded in record speed. Basically about Russ, about two months worth of work six weeks worth of dates. We have filings and responses and then oral argument and then decision so it moved really quickly here. I mean if you look at it it it's remarkable and I want think our entire team and includes our production team and you ate yesterday was a prime example we are production going on in another study, we had just finished radio is no decision, the decisions came out Thursday morning at 930. Nothing happened so erasable that said, I'm in my office were waiting for working on other things and then all of a sudden the opinion comes without production going and in the small studio next door in our building and office and then we had. We did support an idea handy radio took a 10 minute break to Ghana letter voices rest as you can tell voices or shot a little bit and then we went and did about 50 minute thing on Facebook and periscope and all the different social media platforms, but that's because we're able to do that because of you. Also, will we have this victory discreetly. I states it is a big victory.

We want to thank you for that and I think in a westerly kind of experience that by watching this malpractice lawyer legally trained in the Masters of law, but you saw it and it it was a lot of work and a lot of effort put a good result in a team effort, for sure, not just the team here at ACLJ but the people who support the ACLJ and R Multiplan capabilities to affect change into represent freedom and democracy to defend the Constitution and again.

It's possible because of the people who support the ACLJ and I know I'm like a lot of people on staff here were just glad we get to be a part of it.

To Mary's call Virginia online to a merry walker secularly on the air. There are like now that Rancourt had mandate our company that are played a more yellow going mandating a requirement for acting like the other company I work for is held by demanding they can be hundred employees and retain employees in the private companies can say look at. We mandated a filtration system in our office, we put them in offices all over our facilities and not just here in her other office locations as well. The private employer still have the capability of saying you know if you can work your organ require vaccine that that's there's nothing in the law that prohibits a private employer for setting workplace conditions night. The only thing that offers probably religious exemption government made that argument in court sailing behind ministration knowledge that and for people who I really cannot get the vaccine because immunocompromised obviously that can be terminated because of that, so there still would have to be some system set up within even that of a private employer decides to this on their own that allows for certain exemptions based off either religious exemptions or this would damage your body in a way because you're immunocompromised that's a case-by-case basis. I let him go back to vote again, Linda in Texas online, for he lived quickly when the go ahead hello Linda and I'm an art yes and worked at a title I out of our student are medical.

This nerve belt for the COBIT vaccine kind. But also, it's not a win or a nurse. If we participate in company that take Medicare Medicaid. Here's the issue, use issue and while you a lot of nurses challenged individuals and states your employer didn't hospitals in the hospital and not suggest you're specifically no hospitals. So, the Supreme Court noted that was a close decision. 254.

I think that if the actual employers would've been there making that case and how many there were missing abatement but no one was there back in known was there to file an affidavit from the employer to say you we can operate as a hospital because this is impacting too many of of our nurses and doctors and staff so I would take this up as the Supreme Court noted your heart, your employer didn't challenge it for you. That's just the bottom line and it's it was noted it was a big enough deal that was noted by the Supreme Court in that decision know that eventually heritage groups like that stood up for their employees and I insisted up for their plan elicited heritages is not an anti-vaccine, they stood up they want that weird it what the government engaged in something that the government and have the authority to do that's what this case is about our separation powers and that is exactly why heritage exists. I we got another half hour taking your calls and hundred 684-3110 but I want to thank you for supporting the work of the American Center for Law and Justice is big with the Supreme Court of the United States. I hope it depoliticize this whole issue. People forget that this vaccine was created under Pres. Donald Trump works maintenance probably saved, probably to save millions of lives, but the government was not in a position to do what they were trying to do here and that was the right decision. This report will take your calls. We come back from break 864 31 decades ACLJ is been on the frontline protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ keeping you informed and now is Jordan secular back seconds to reset a major victory for two thirds of the American workforce. Yesterday was supreme. Your ACLJ representing the heritage foundation. I then their first challenge is a petitioner in federal court in the entire history shows ACLJ to represent the record, I states were in court at that independent business Association.

Small businesses were in court are not other nonprofits.

The court noted that can keep comparing contrast the different cases that everybody lined up here to say in the private employment world and all the different kinds of private employers that this was wrong, that OSHA did not have the statutory authority. This is not a workplace danger and that is the court work through this is a danger that you face just like any other air pollution or crime just it's a danger you face by being a human being and that it's not specific to the workplace because you can catch covert home schools, sporting events, any kind of gatherings of people and because of that it's not OSHA it's a workplace specific danger and so it was, as the court said you cannot use a blunt instrument approach to every employee to treat the lifeguards the same as the meatpackers you can't.

You don't treat medical staff the same way you treat people work in a production studio and answer the court. They understood to this idea that if you if the federal government and divorce its concurrence with this for November started having this power we have emergency afterwards on the network. It was never given.

They always come up with an emergency.

The issue of rule issue a mandate that they didn't have to go through the normal process. It was so outside the norm of what is that in constitutional principles and such reconstruction was out of the way. Adeline was glinting a phone call in this issue. I want to craft just came in, but actually in Texas because this is a good question Ashley walker secularly on the air now and negative water. Those cases are working through right now and this is what happened is it just a decision yesterday Texas that laws no more than direct conflict with federal law right to have a federal statute that that overrides it. That was kind of the issue before now. You can find it out in court find that these are all happening in the state governor order a private company to do something they don't want that they had wanted to proactively. I mean I think it's erase it but it's a completely different question. In the end, this doesn't impact that opens the door to those challenges.

Being able to be worked out because of the federal statute on up by the ocean.

It would've been of some insurance companies are beginning to put this this again. It can clear the way for this case it depoliticize all this.

Yes, biomedical medication is mounted forward as well we do in the middle of it. I can try take what were more for the broomstick at Nancy Texas would hold unalienable equipment to go ahead with Dell employee now and is on its way to the Senate bill about math and policing authority right but it was amended yesterday afternoon and sister the Brocket Steinmetz would use in the broadcast. It was changed to a voting rights act to use this as well say… That they were supposed to vote last night but two senators while Joe Biden is been a horrible week for present while the Joe Biden was at the U.S. Senate. One of those senators Christian Cinema that we Ashley called her office to yesterday went to the floor. The citizen I don't support change the filibuster. She said she didn't support the legislation.

She said I don't support change the filibuster to pass. So now it was supposed to go before the Senate yesterday. Now they're looking at Tuesday. Save already missed their first deadline, it's not over yet. They missed their first deadline which was try to get this done for the Martin Luther King holiday on Monday. That is no longer the case. So it appears now. The earliest we brought up by the U.S. Senate is now Tuesday. There's already been a little victory there and the fact that they've already lost track because two US senators came out mansion sentiments at little support change the filibuster challenges facing Americans as time and are now free to insert constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades. ACLJ on the frontline protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.

Thank you. Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later, parenthood's role in the Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy mission life today online ACLJ/be joined by our client, the President of the heritage foundation organization heritage.org Dr. Evan Roberts, Kevin welcome back to the broadcasts. Here we are.

This was a you and I were a text last night. This was a great win. What's so interesting to me. I'm so thankful is that is exactly what we argued, it wasn't getting into the science of this vaccine or not this vaccine.

It got into the law and to an issue that has been a huge concern for heritage really since rebounding and that was the whole separation of powers and states authority in these kind of matters, so the decision was great, but also the rationale for the decision was great. What was your reaction all my reaction first and foremost with gratitude to you and Jordan everyone ACLJ for representing us and secondly as I've told many people J. My reaction was your spot on a minute. This is exactly what you predicted that the merits of a number of cases that focused on separation of powers on the proper role of government, rather than getting into the weeds of the science because we know it's too premature in the history of this disease to figure that out was the right way to go and so were just ecstatic here at the heritage foundation, not just because we and many others. Any employer with over hundred employees at one these cases where ecstatic because it is a line in the sand against this regime that they better not cross again. Kevin went to the court noted here in. It was interesting to me because they actually focusing on this. In these cases, sliding cases is who brought the challenges and they noted it was just the states.

It wasn't just big companies. It was the small businesses and they actually sent and nonprofit organizations and see the entire private employment world together, stood up and said no and from the heritage foundation, and as as your present now that of the heritage foundation.

This was a big step to stand up for your employees because this is the first time heritage never been the petitioner in federal court. That's exactly right. It is like I told our board several weeks ago Jordan and I told my colleagues in very first hour I will post here on December 1 I will never, the heritage foundation will never ask for your private health data. We are never going to submit to an unconstitutional government order that requires that we were very confident given your representation we were going to win this case. But let me be clear when it comes to putting government back in the box. It is a series of battles we have won one battle with not on the political and policy war and just now the heritage foundation. All of this year stand at the ready for the next battle not just for us in that very special relationship that I have with my colleagues here is their employer, but for all Americans and not even care if there left of center and disagree with us.

We want to protect their rights from an overreaching government this day and every day was interesting in this case because coming when you and I first talk way back in the beginning, since usually a lifetime ago was only for six weeks there's been so much activity in this thing over, so we went through the timeline of this you go through the timeline. Kevin just said just put this down in our history books.

You get into the present become the President of heritage of it was announced before beginning become effective until January 1 we filed you are already involved. Obviously, on November 29 40 will officially be present.

But you would obviously be incoming President.

We filed another motion on December 7 on the 21st think on the 17th. The court ruled against us at the Sixth Circuit on the 18th we filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court of the United States on the 20th the cases docketed on the 21st the supreme County Court announced oral arguments for January 7 on the 23rd, two days before Christmas, the court issued an order that we had a reply by January 3 right for New Year's. We filed on January 3.

The case was argued on January 7 decide on January 13 in the application for stay is granted and I might add. This is the first time. Heritage is ever been in a lawsuit where you been a plaintiff as it is and it also is sort of of you in the future all at one little tidbit there that I think everyone appreciated personal story. I found when I moved from Texas starting last Saturday we arrived in Northern Virginia at our new home on Wednesday and so one of my senior management colleagues here heritage text me last night and said Roberts your 24 hours in Northern Virginia we want our super Supreme Court case what he can do next and my response today. Very heartfelt was on the skull.

J. And Jordan and see what ideas that you and I appreciate that Liz and I also think your staff and your team work with your team, for I mean I'm going to go back with Paul Larkin and John Malcolm, I think I wanted mild bait. I don't care I'm 65, think about working with these guys since we were in our late 20s and you got others thereto that we work with, and they did a great job and I know Dan been in our director of government affairs enjoys working with your team as well and obviously were to continue that effort. This was a big, big. When Jordan got try think that this shows that with your conservative movement groups come together and get the Supreme Court noted they noted that who were the plaintiffs here.

It was important to the court to note who actually was challenging this mandate was it just states it wasn't just big companies. It was small businesses. It was nonprofit organization that came together in this unity, and as you said This is one battle I was a bit bad week for the Bible team, but they are going to consistently try and do what they cannot federal power grabs. We know that from this administration and the left is just getting more radical when it comes let's right in and what I would say two things will click toward the first is for the regular listener out there. We know that the heritage foundation is seen by so many people in America as being at the vanguard of America, the vanguard of of conservatism and were never going to miss an opportunity to take the lead so that individuals can do what they do and that spread the word through all of their different networks through comments on the news and so on. That's y'all know better than anybody.

The justices pay attention to that kind of thing. As you pointed out the second last thing is never doubt that when you are faced with a decision go on offense. Heritage foundation is an offense every day. We've won this with your help, were so grateful most of all for your work and and really happy for private employers that we want, but there are more battles ahead, keep the pedal to the metal. We got a country to take back again and think it's been on her cabin representing you and representing the heritage foundation.

I look forward to our continuing relationship. Congratulations on your appointment. Congratulations on your move was get a snowstorm here this week and that I think his head right you're right so you're from Texas not used a lot of snow.

Get ready. Men in the mid-Atlantic to say something like that. This of this storm. At least this storm has now passed and you know Tim I said as I wanted to comment on this. I said the good thing about this, besides it was the right statutory interpretation constitutional principles. It also be politicized. The issue of vaccines and an therapeutics to depoliticize that and I think went where everyone on the spectrum.

It is of of yes no maybe it depoliticize it is a good thing for the American people what is and you would appreciate effectively to relay this to you anyway J that a physician friend is a friend of heritage told me last week and he said Kevin I was a little circumspect about heritage filing suit on this and then I read the merits of the case and realized you're getting in the science you're getting into the medicine you are doing what we would expect heritage foundation to do and use the word that you did J your D politicizing something that must be.

That is true north for heritage and for America if all of us across the political spectrum could spend more time doing that making sound policy decisions. I think we would all be a lot more fulfilled in our everyday lives is America.

I think this for history to show that this actually decision and the position we advocated which was not given to the science not to attack the signs but to go because Simon's action accented a zillion times the fact of the matter is by going to the constitutional principles and the statutory principles we serve the interests of the Constitution of the session. I do think D politicizing this is good for the American people in the long-term will surely be a positive limit. Kevin, congratulations for all to have you on the part having you on again next case right my friend thanks my friend. I think your hi folks, we are to your focus to what hundred 684 31). The 2000, he would grab one now. I John in Pennsylvania because I work we were clear up things for people with questions a lot of questions after hey John, welcome the secular you're on the call.

One quick question ruling will mandate for federal employees different.

I mean it's it's different than other questions could be where those challenges are the Medicare Medicaid one was unique to the healthcare situation and what the hospital signed up so it's it's different than the court noted that even in our case, yes it unites a picture that the reason one of the reasons why OSHA lost here was that they try to use a blunt instrument. Treat every employer same as it was, there's a potential down the start. I think that makes him suspect right. I do think it makes it sound like what just what what job you have in the federal government.

So, are you more like the person in the medical art that's actually act or research scientist may be dealing with covert or are you someone who's who's outworking and ended the totally different environment so I think that's what it's open the door to is actually using. Surprise surprise, which is we don't always get the court common sense what employers also are employers want their employees to be at work like they want their employees sick so they want to figure out the best way to get their employees at to work and bigger employers had to tougher job doing methods of the smaller employer but no one should forget that the court understood that as well.

People want their employees sick and they don't want that employees not really get into the workplace.

If there's someone who works in an office. And so you look at each place, and let them decide what's best for their employer. Employees and employers want to protect their points. They want to work.

That's why you make the salary makes because you work your employer.

So I think you get comments. It's very important. Again, thank you for those of you that support the work of the ACLJ I want to keep, but stay alive during this next break I went from Facebook in person. I got something for Indian fan and when someone asked to let Satan folks very back only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later, planned parenthood's role in the Obama care means to sever many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans is freedom to sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the front lines projecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing, member today ACLJ secular we're doing now our senior counsel for global affairs. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. It sick to prepare first is your reaction to the US Supreme Court to travel the country as it sits leaving the office Secretary of State. This is been bothering people around the country for had a bit bothered employers and employees. This mandate by the binder ministration a power grab. The Supreme Court said if they allowed would be never ending.

They'd always be doing this it always be looking for emergency orders and now for two thirds of the American workforce that 100 million people. The these federal mandates are not going to apply to them or their companies is a good outcome on so many levels you just described that the first one is for individuals who now have the capacity to make good decisions for themselves. People say well you have to learn to live with that. I think that most Americans have figured out how to live with this second we saw massive federal overreach and without the United States Supreme Court reject that.

That's good news not just on this issue. Covet the good news on so many fronts. And finally, now employers to have the freedom to make good decisions for their own workplace. Just I ran a small company for seven or eight years back in south-central Kansas.

I want to be a really good decision for the health and safety for shareholders for my team for my customers everybody involved in the government stepped in and taken that away from these small business owners and yesterday, the Supreme Court restored that balance and it's a good thing for the country for the economy and for workers all across the nation. Might one of things I said during the breaker were talking to our folks on social media and that was you know elections have consequences. One of those consequences happen to be during your administration.

Three justices of the Supreme Court. At present, Trump was able to nominate and appoint who are now serving on the court and most reject this was a 63 decision so these situations make a big difference in the importance of Supreme Court nominees. I I drill down on that often on this broadcast now for 40 years I have litigated the Supreme Court in the 80s the 90s. The 2000's. The 2010's in the 2020 over almost 5 decades of litigation email and it's important, but this is where you see how important it really is that they could be more true. You know that Hume outlived it. I think American people are living it as well. Remember the hearings on these medications.

Remember that counterfactual statements made by couple of the justices one should remember who nominated and confirmed this justices that made outrageous statements about freedom and about people being like machine does work nominations by Republican Presidents. Public Presidents tend to take really capable constitutionally grounded people who understand the things that have made America successful and do the job of interpreting the law not creating it, and that's what you saw yesterday. This would have gone very differently at Sec. Clinton won that election in 2016 yesterday would have been very different on it that you integrate because they would've walked away that deficit that she would have picked three of them would've walked away from this is that you bet can go grab this girl each year to do this to the American people, and I'm confident that it's unfortunate is not political.

It is legal and constitutional. Yup, I didn't yet know him.

When I am really pleased when II think are ACLJ members all over the country because our team put this together in from beginning to end in eight weeks.

It went from six circuit to the Supreme Court of United States to a decision in in six weeks we were working on about two weeks before the first public filing beginning about who I get it ready so we moved at lightning speed or team did a great job or donor supporting the work of ACLJ made it all happen, but I also think like that. This deep politicized this issue which I think is important for the American people as well. It's not making this a political issue. Now you do what's best for your family for yourself with your doctors. That's what you people need to be make decision the government had no business getting in by specially OSHA had no business getting in here, but it does. I think it depoliticize some of this as well. I think that's very true. I hope we see the same kind of people. It is a small income to the cases that protect every human life is another issue that the ACLJ has been front and center on that setting before the court today that they'll decide during the next handful of months again want the court to give its function performance function. We want families and communities and cities to do their work taking care of themselves. What the government to be out of the way as much as is humanly possible and consistent deeply with the Constitution. The ACLJ has done great work making sure that every time they reach someplace they ought not to be reaching they found the file that make cogent good arguments that ultimately prevail and make sure you get the right nominees. The Supreme Court is an important part of insurance and look at me if you just look at the age of the Supreme Court and where it is now the next Presidential meaning In the cycle course to, you know, not hoping that on anybody involve these calls for his call for Dean of the leftist try to get justice prior to retouch, I think, by the way, be time they try to do that I think is justices that say they're not to do it. By the way you if you ever get a supreme court appointment take because they live to be 100. I mean it's great. I mean I'm not saying that not a good way. Made they serve a long time. It's a lifetime appointment and in the concert for 40 years. Some of let me ask last question here and that is obviously were thrilled with the when you just mentioned Dobbs that's in in the next cases I think this I'm hopeful this bodes well with similar kind of rationale here deferring their to the state in their decision on on protecting life. I think that's the trend where this is going, which will be great, but when you see this situation might now and you looking at midterm elections in just a couple of months.

It's hard to believe but here we are again and then the Presidential stop will start start up and then right after that in in all reality there's a lot at stake for the country in the next 48 months weight.

We have seen that the American people are suffering from that, whether it's inflation of the fact the shelves are stocked. It's hard to find folks who want to go to work all the things a result of governmental choices and policies that have been placed under Pres. Biden with Democrat control of both houses of Congress.

I think the American people as it is deeply political. I think it would if they this is not working for them and for the families of the schools. Further, and they're gonna walk away from this and I think you're right.

But here in the United States in September of this year. Just a handful of months away in some state time that the American people demand they take back things that are most fundamental to them and I think they going to him.

Why appreciate your work with us in your work also was Secretary of State but also now on the McClary invoice that you are on all of these big issues and great information that Mike Pompeo or Sen. St. our senior counsel has on ACLJ.org whimpered encourage people to go there. Thankfully with this is always the middle of working with Demetrio Washington state line to a Demeter thinks will not be on their blog. I thank you so much on behalf of the community of Washington want to say thank you very much for your job. Unbelievable. Incredible.

Thank you not to go to protect and mandate our friend or in medical field here in Washington who and I told him that you know something that if I don't stop at their gonna come to me and he did come to you now. A few days ago I would never delete yesterday or the Supreme Court do not have to document the different edge of my friends about their job level.I agree with you on that memo. At the liberal move forward with something like that. What can we do it out so they have the most power and that's that's look at is you get to choose where to live and ends there some consequences to where you live to be beneficial. Positive but is there really lies that leads to the that there representing the people. So are you my shaman a really liberal state right now that doesn't necessarily rush mandate private employers to they certainly have the power of the state and local level, but you also have decision to leave and unfortunately many people have had to move the delivery I was clear they deserve to clear the state have the power to ACLJ on the front lines, protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ