News
Featured Image
 Drew Angerer / Getty Images

(LifeSiteNews) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has ruled that the Biden administration can resume enforcing its coercive COVID-19 jab mandate for large businesses. 

In its 2-1 decision late Friday night the federal appeals court ruled the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) can move ahead with the Biden administration’s sweeping mandate, which will force businesses with 100 or more employees to require workers to get inoculated against COVID-19 or submit to masking and frequent testing.

“Recognizing that the ‘old normal’ is not going to return, employers and employees have sought new models,” the court stated in its decision.

Minutes after the ruling 27 business groups filed an appeal asking the Supreme Court to take up the case, arguing the mandate “will impose substantial, nonrecoverable compliance costs” on businesses and could lead unvaccinated employees to “quit en masse rather than suffer additional testing costs each week.”

Nonprofit legal group Alliance Defending Freedom has also joined the fight, announcing it will ask the Supreme Court to reinstate an earlier stay of the federal mandate.

The Friday decision to allow enforcement of the coercive mandate came after a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit temporarily halted the mandate last month. The case was then moved to the Sixth Circuit Court, which agreed to hear a consolidated challenge to the requirement.

Set to take effect January 4, 2022, the OSHA mandate would force employers to “develop, implement, and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy” or require workers to “undergo regular COVID-19 testing and wear a face covering at work in lieu of vaccination.”

If upheld, the rule would penalize noncompliant businesses with fines ranging from over $13,000 to more than $136,000 for repeat violations, while workers who refuse to comply would face termination. 

The U.S. Department of Labor has also suggested it may consider expanding the requirement to include businesses with fewer than 100 employees.

The move by the Sixth Circuit Court to allow enforcement of the sprawling mandate comes as many Americans remain concerned that the COVID-19 injections currently on the market have not been sufficiently studied for negative effects given their accelerated clinical trials, while some harbor ethical reservations about the use of cells from aborted babies in their development. 

Still others simply consider the injections unnecessary given COVID-19’s high survivability among most groups, low risk of asymptomatic spread, and research indicating that post-infection natural immunity is either just as protective against reinfection or provides even greater protection.

Meanwhile, those who push for mass immunization against the coronavirus fail to acknowledge that coronavirus vaccine trials have never produced evidence that the injections stop infection or transmission, while there is strong evidence to suggest that the “vaccinated” are just as likely to carry and transmit the virus as the unvaccinated. 

Moreover, as the CDC reports an infection survival rate of greater than 99.95% for those under age 50, the list of FDA-recognized adverse events has grown from severe anaphylactic reactions to include fatal thrombotic events, the inflammatory heart condition myocarditis, and neurologically disabling disease like Guillain Barré Syndrome, as well as thousands of recorded deaths and permanent disabilities. 

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.