State Supreme Court reinstates employees fired for refusing vaccine

So the mythical Obiden was crushed by the decision of a New York trial court in Staten Island that in reality only affects a few workers and which is currently under appeal by NYC the government responsible for promulgating the mandate. Who would have thought.

 

(too stubborn to recognize it)

 

Just one question. Do you genuinely believe that the highest court in New York State held that New York City's policy of mandating Covid vaccinations for certain employees is invalid and that the City now has to reinstate every employee terminated for failure to comply with the vaccine requirement?

 

Almost certainly because the city's attorneys have advised him that the ruling is applicable only to named petitioners.

 

While that has turned out to be true, initially the vaccines were also pushed upon people with the reasoning that it would decrease the spread and ability to get COVID as well. The science has not shown that to be true, some have issue as it was pushed as fact at the time even though there wasn't data to support those assertions.
The goal posts have been moved just a bit and for some therein lies the rub.

 

The vaccine mandate was imposed in early 2021. The vaccine has been effective at decreasing the spread of Covid before the emergence of the much more transmissible Omicron variant in late 2021. Even after the emergence of Omicron it has still been very effective at preventing serious disease albeit less so at preventing spread with the Delta variant and much less so at preventing the spread with the Omicron variant.
This is from an article written before the emergence of the Omicron variant. The article is dated September 15, 2021. The Omicron variant was identified in November 2021 and probably became the dominant variant in January 2022.

Multiple studies from the United States and other countries have demonstrated that a two-dose COVID-19 mRNA vaccination series is effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection (including both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections) caused by ancestral and variant strains and sequelae including severe disease, hospitalization, and death. Early evidence for the Janssen vaccine also demonstrates effectiveness against COVID-19 in real-world conditions. There is now a substantial volume of scientific literature examining the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic disease, and other clinical outcomes; detailed summaries of these studies are available in the International Vaccine Access Center’s VIEW-Hub resource library.​

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

 

The title of this thread and story aren't. As usual, you're not a very informed fella.

 

So... Polio vaccines don't prevent you from getting Polio either?

I'm just curious that some people call these mRNA experimental shots "vaccines" to this day.

 

Vaccines are meant to generate an immune response for protection. Not all are capable of preventing infection. Yall should have paid attention in biology.

 

Yeah, that's like saying "science" works some of the time... and that's maybe more true than calling that clot shot a vaccines.

 

Well. Them and 99.99% of Americans probably, as we are all accustomed to that title being the highest court.

 

I think that was his point.

 

The title isnt correct? Or his opinion of it? Didnt the state supreme court actually rule in that fashion?

 

Which is understandable for you. But you're not reporting on legal news.

 

When you use the phrase "State Supreme Court," it's interpreted as referring to the state's high court. If they wanted to be accurate, they should have said New York Supreme Court 13th Judicial District. But even then, they could have clarified within the article that it was a trial judge who made the ruling. Note how they didn't. At best, they erred. At worst, they affirmatively tried to mislead folks.

 

These sites also use the Supreme Court terminology. No one is saying the Supreme Court is their highest court:

Yahoo: New York Supreme Court Orders NYC to Rehire, Pay Back Wages to Unvaccinated City Employees

AP: https://apnews.com/article/health-n...and-politics-c8d7e2676ee45b3abf2a8e43647c1b8d

USNews: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...th-fired-nyc-trash-workers-in-vaccine-dispute

 

Your Yahoo link is from the National Review, which pulled the same disingenuous move the article in the OP did. They at least noted that the city is appealing and the judge who issued the order. The other two articles clearly state in their title that a single judge made this decision.

Meanwhile, this is a claim the OP's article made: "Judges: Shots don't 'prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19'"

Clearly, they were unaware that this wasn't the high court of New York, as I noted above. Or they lied.

EDIT: And this claim from OP's right-wing propaganda source is also a lie:
"Finding that 'being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19,' the New York State Supreme Court ordered the reinstatement of all New York City employees who were fired for not being vaccinated for the disease."

 

And the writer of the story upon which this thread is based either didn't bother doing very basic research and/or he was intentionally deceptive knowing that most readers would assume that the term "Supreme Court" referred to the highest court in the state. Same applies to the OP of this thread. Referring again to the writer of the story, I think that a journalist who is purportedly reporting a true story should be held to a higher standard than the average American.

 

The first linked story from Yahoo is as deceptive as the story in the original post. As @gator_lawyer pointed out the story was a product of a writer from the National Review, not exactly an objective source and he almost certainly knew better. The other stories make it clear that the decision of the court which ruled against NYC although formally called the Supreme Court was not the state's court of final appeal.