Federal Funding and Civil Rights

Quick note on today’s SCOTUS decisions on the vaccine mandates . . .

The court’s justification for upholding the vaccine mandate for healthcare workers was essentially this: Because the federal government is paying for medical services, it gets to set rules for providers.

Regardless of whether you think this particular mandate was wise, consider these words from the dissent:

These cases are not about the efficacy or importance of COVID–19 vaccines. They are only about whether CMS has the statutory authority to force healthcare workers, by coercing their employers, to undergo a medical procedure they do not want and cannot undo.

The Supreme Court has, in the majority opinion, drawn some clear lines.

***

Although I am a strong proponent of school choice, I have serious reservations about government funding of private schools for exactly the reasons outlined in today’s SCOTUS decisions.

You can read the OSHA ruling here, which draws another set of lines.  The two rulings in juxtaposition with each other frame the issue with a clarity that either one on its own would lack.

***

After today’s decision, my reservations about government funding are stronger than ever.

I say this, I remind you, as a person who is vaccinated.  It’s not about the efficacy or importance of the vaccines.  It’s about whether the government has the authority to coerce people into undergoing medical procedures they do not want and cannot undo.

Photo: An American soldier vaccinates a civilian as part of a vaccine clinic, detailed description at Wikimedia, public domain.  To be clear: I am 100% AOK with government-sponsored voluntary vaccination initiatives.