"This is from the Supreme Court over 100 years ago: "

has nothing but contempt for precedent, facts, science, and sound, responsible governance.

Expect more rulings placing subjective religious doctrine and dogma over facts, the truth, and the wellbeing of the American people.

we have devolved, in too many ways, as a country

This very subject came up in May and the court denied relief. Roberts cited Jacobson vs Massachusetts in his concurring opinion. Gorsuch took the opportunity this time to lay into Roberts and state he was wrong in his decision and basically stated Jacobson was out of touch with modern times. Gorsuch's remarks were telling in my opinion and amounted to more than professional disagreement.

The decision is even more applicable now with increased population and transportation that can more easily spread a disease.

That is all.

I can't stand all three of Trump's selections. .

Thanks

Seems they didn't cotton to anti-vaccers back then.
They let common sense rule instead of inflamed, illogical passions.

How things have changed.

They appear to believe that neither the laws of Gravity or Momentum apply to them. They also have a rather exaggerated valuation of their own privilege over those of the community at large.

which the nazi party claims to hate to happen.

The case has been used as precedent in other public health cases as well, not just those involving vaccinations.

But I try.

opens the ears of SOME to the constitutional facts.

... "The courts/government cannot interfere with beliefs, but they can interfere with practices if it breaks the law".

One example I recall off the top of my head was the Coptic church congregation in Florida that used marijuana in their religious services. Because of their belief... but marijuana is/was illegal at the time, so they were guilty of possession, place where illegal substances were partaken... So their, "right to religious freedom", stopped when they broke the state and federal laws with their practices.

Snake handling in religion is illegal in every state except West Virginia.

life-saving blood transfusions for a minor. The life of the child takes precedence over the parents' religious beliefs.

These crazies who refuse to wear masks were alive and well a hundred years ago, too.

Seriously. They had the SAME crap we're all facing. Not as good medical technology, and a higher mortality rate. But the SAME crazies.

My favorite was some lady at a town hall in Miami who said that God breathed life into Adam, and to make her wear a mask to to DENY her God's breath! That is just bizarre.

And Trump - he hasn't helped a bit.

But, Ellen, this Supreme Court ruling from a century ago tells us all we need to know about the general stupidity of human beings, doesn't it?

My grandmother, whom I never met, died in the 1918 flu epidemic, in NYC, leaving my father (the youngest of 5 children) and grandpa, who I think did hold me. He may have passed during my 1st year.

A hero in my mind, tho I don't remember him, he cared for all of his kids, ran a deli, cooked and left recipes, did all the parenting things we and our children do now, like seeing to it that our grandchildren (1 - 7 years old) are vaccinated, wear masks, and stay away from crowds.

So my my constitution-worshiping anti-mask family members (thankfully, there are only a few) can read it. I never stop trying to reach them and I know it's pointless, but still I try. I read in the responses that it was about anti-vaxxers, but I thought of anti-maskers when I read it. It's about both (and other) safety measures that some people see as an infringement on their freedom.

Would you mind, elleng?