Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Jan 14 2022 03:04pm)
Okay, so I read through the majority and dissenting opinions.
IMO the majority drastically missed the mark here. They cite the non-delegation doctrine, which specifically seeks to prevent governance by bureaucracy. The Covid mandate pretty clearly doesn't fall under that because Covid measures are temporary and related to a specific emergency. This is pointed out by the dissent, and is far more convincing.
The majority opinion relies on what I can only see as an intentional-misreading of the standard to fulfill a pre-determined conservative agenda. The dissent has a much stronger case here.
The only part of the majority that holds up is that the law is too vague. If it's being enforced on people who spent 95% of their job outside because it isn't "exclusively outside", then that's an issue, but probably not a strong enough issue to stay the entire mandate.
However, this is not a total refutation of all laws via the non-delegation doctrine. It's an application of the doctrine to this specific case. So the doom and gloom of the OP can be put to rest until we get a full ruling, since this was just a stay of the law until the case can be heard in full.
The majority argues that order is too broad, and quite clearly a public health measure, and not something that falls under the regulation of workplace and occupational hazards.
Quote
The Solicitor General does not dispute that OSHA is limited to regulating “work-related dangers.” Response Brief
for OSHA in No. 21A244 etc., p. 45 (OSHA Response). She
instead argues that the risk of contracting COVID–19 qualifies as such a danger. We cannot agree. Although COVID–
19 is a risk that occurs in many workplaces, it is not an occupational hazard in most. COVID–19 can and does spread
at home, in schools, during sporting events, and everywhere
else that people gather. That kind of universal risk is no
different from the day-to-day dangers that all face from
crime, air pollution, or any number of communicable diseases. Permitting OSHA to regulate the hazards of daily
life—simply because most Americans have jobs and face
those same risks while on the clock—would significantly expand OSHA’s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization.
Nor does the majority deny that the OSHA has the authority to regulate workplace risk related to Covid-19. They only draw the line at issuing blanket orders that impact 84 million Americans irrespective of whether the workplace in question is actually significantly more at risk of spreading Covid-19. The OSHA might have a very good reason for regulating crowded events, but the all encompassing nature of the order makes it clear that it's part of a wider public health campaign, something that the OSHA is not empowered to do by statute absent additional congressional authorization.
Quote
That is not to say OSHA lacks authority to regulate occupation-specific risks related to COVID–19. Where the virus
poses a special danger because of the particular features of
an employee’s job or workplace, targeted regulations are
plainly permissible. We do not doubt, for example, that
OSHA could regulate researchers who work with the
COVID–19 virus. So too could OSHA regulate risks associated with working in particularly crowded or cramped environments. But the danger present in such workplaces differs in both degree and kind from the everyday risk of
contracting COVID–19 that all face. OSHA’s indiscriminate approach fails to account for this crucial distinction—
between occupational risk and risk more generally—and accordingly the mandate takes on the character of a general
public health measure, rather than an “occupational safety
or health standard.” 29 U. S. C. §655(b) (emphasis added).
Covid-19 measures are only temporary insofar as they have a clear start and stop date. The virus is endemic at this point, so perhaps the emergency will never truly end. That's clearly not the basis for adjudicating law. Either the OSHA has the authority to broadly regulate public health during a pandemic, or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, the solution is both clear and readily available. Congress can pass amended legislation that clearly authorizes the OSHA to broadly mandate vaccinations in the workplace.