Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Sep 12 2021 10:38am)
This is narrowly tailored and would almost certainly pass strict scrutiny. Testing is an option to get out of it so "they're forcing us to vaccinate" isnt going to fly.
Also "health" isn't a fundamental right. So you're losing right at the start
How can a law possibly be considered narrowly tailored as its used to pass completely open ended regulations that have nothing to do with its original intent or text, used to deprive a fundamental right not even considered in the bills drafting? A court can't pretend the legislature weighed rights and needs and came up with the least restrictive option if its used decades later for some random social policy.
And for real, as long as Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey exists I dont see how anyone can argue that bodily sanctity and health isn't a fundamental right. Could the government pass a capricious and arbitrary law that mandates every citizen cut off the 3rd finger and 3rd toe of every hand and foot? Why not? If personal health and intimate decisions bodily sanctity aren't subject to scrutiny, what's the problem? There can be no fundamental right higher than the
right to exist.