If Justice Sotomayor Gets Covid Facts so Wrong, How Misinformed Is She on Our RKBA

Opinion

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- On January 7, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard an argument in the case Biden vs. Missouri. The formal issue before the High Court in that case as set forth on SCOTUSblog was “whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of the injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri blocking a federal rule that requires all health care workers at facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 unless they are eligible for a medical or religious exemption.”

Missouri and other States filed a direct challenge to the autocratic Harris-Biden Administration’s demand that all Health care workers—22 million as of April 5, 2021, whose medical facilities participate in Government funded Medicare and Medicaid programs, according to the Government census report—accede to Government demands that health care workers obtain COVID-19 vaccinations.

The red States contested this broad Government mandate against liberty and the rule of law.

Missouri, in its Brief, stated at the outset, that the “Secretary of Health and Human Services’ sweeping and unprecedented vaccine mandate for healthcare workers threatens to create a crisis in healthcare facilities in rural America. The mandate would force millions of workers to choose between losing their jobs or complying with an unlawful federal mandate. But for the district court’s preliminary injunction, last year’s healthcare heroes would have become this year’s unemployed.” The Government for its part, argued that its mandate is a response to “an unprecedented pandemic that has killed 800,000 Americans.”

The Government retorted that “the Secretary of Health and Human Services exercised his express statutory authority to protect the health and safety of Medicare and Medicaid patients by requiring healthcare facilities that choose to participate in those programs to ensure that their staff are vaccinated (subject to medical and religious exemptions).”

  • Does the Government have this broad legal authority?
  • Is the exercise of that authority consistent with the Constitution, or is it a direct infringement of it?
  • Is the Administration truly concerned about the health of Americans or is it using the Pandemic merely as a convenient pretext to take control of the States and the people?

The unstated but underlying issue, in this case, is:

…whether the Harris-Biden Administration is engaging in an unprecedented power grab to exert control over the States and the American people.

One expects this from an autocratic Government and an autocratic Congress, controlled by the Pelosi and Schumer stooges.

That leaves the American people with one Branch of Government to place constraints on unlawful moves of Congress and the Executive Branch. And that Third Branch of Government is the U.S. Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, the High Court consists of a few people, who don’t seem to concern themselves with defending the Nation and its people from the throes of autocracy and, hence, tyranny. One such person is Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

For whatever reason, Justice Sotomayor asserted—didn’t ask the attorneys for the Government or for the State of Missouri—during oral argument, that 100,000 children have been hospitalized and are on ventilators.

As reported in the National Review, Sotomayor claimed that

“‘We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators. We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.’” This was a grossly inflated figure.” In the same article, the National Review pointed out that,

“The current number of confirmed pediatric hospitalizations with Covid in the U.S. is 3,342, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services released on Friday. The average number of children admitted to the hospital per day with Covid was 776 as of Tuesday, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

Why did Justice Sotomayor make such a spurious claim during oral argument?

She must have known that a straightforward declarative assertion could be and would be fact-checked as, in fact, it was. The legacy Press itself jumped on this falsehood. Fox News points out that even the Washington Post said the claim deserved “four Pinocchios” for the “absurdly high” figure.

Washington Post said the Sonia Sotomayor claim deserved four Pinocchios
Washington Post said the Sonia Sotomayor claim deserved four Pinocchios

We suspect that Justice Sotomayor knew that her remark was unsupported and that she was not acting as a neutral Justice, attempting to elicit comment from the Advocate for the Government and the advocate for Missouri, but was herself operating as an Advocate for the Government.

This behavior on the part of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice is not only shameful, but it is also dangerous to the well-being of the Republic and the Constitution. A decision, in this case, will be forthcoming, but there are other High Court decisions expected in the weeks and months ahead.

Any decision of the High Court involving an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution has major repercussions for the Nation. No decision is more important to the well-being of the Republic than those involving the Bill of Rights.

A decision, sure to affect our 2nd Amendment, in the Bruen case is expected early Summer if not sooner. The Bruen case is the most important case on the Second Amendment since the Heller case of 2008 and the McDonald case of 2010.

Given the nature of the issue before the Court, constricted and restricted as the Roberts’ Court made it, the Bruen case is unlikely to have an impact beyond the jurisdiction of New York. Nonetheless, the American people can expect that Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor will take the opportunity to draft opinions that hearken back to the Stevens and Breyer dissenting opinions in Heller, in a shameless attempt not only to denigrate Bruen but to weaken Heller.

Likely the outcome of Bruen will be supportive of the Second Amendment, but it won’t be as far-reaching as it could have been in support of the Second Amendment—as far-reaching as the issue in Petitioner’s Brief sought: whether the right of the people to keep and bear arms extends beyond the domain of one’s home.

The three Liberal-wing Justices will likely reassert their false argument that the right codified in the Second Amendment is always subject to Government restraint and constraint and that, notwithstanding Heller and McDonald, the Government has the lawful authority to place stringent checks on the exercise of the right as it sees fit.

For activist Justices like Sonia Sotomayor and others, the American citizen’s ownership, possession, and utilization of the right codified in the Second Amendment is more akin to a glorified “privilege,” than a fundamental, immutable, inalienable right.


About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

Arbalest Quarrel

43 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Duane

It is not about being misinformed.

It is about being willfully trying to destroy the constitution and the American way of life.

hoss

These Commie Rat Bastards are so used to telling lies that the weak minded whose lips are permanently attached to their asses, they don’t think twice before they speak

Green Mtn. Boy

Sonia Sotomayor isn’t dumb. She
isn’t ignorant. She’s a communist activist
pretending to be a SCOTUS justice. She
knows full well what she said was a lie.
But communists are not held back by the
truth or shame because they have no moral
grounding outside of communism.

Laddyboy

Sir, you have just stated how the adherers of i-lam work!!

Roland T. Gunner

I would assert that she is, in fact, dumb and ignorant as well.

Last edited 1 year ago by Roland T. Gunner
Cam

Maybe proof positive that choosing someone because of their sex and race is not a good idea

Terry

Well, if it was an ugly contest she won hands down!

Deplorable Bill

I doubt the woman was misinformed as to the stats, she has all manor of ability to research even more so than most people in the U.S. No, she —- they have made their choice to lie and disavow their oath to the people, the nation and the constitution they are SUPPOSED TO SERVE. That is treason. When government lies to you it’s not for your benefit, it’s for theirs. Know the truth and the truth will set you free still works. The supreme court is supposed to judge law as or not constitutional. What this woman has done shows… Read more »

WI Patriot

She’s not “misinformed”, she’s just pushing the liberal narrative by lying…

Montana454Casull

Typical liberal lips are moving lies are coming out of the mouth . They just can’t stop themselves from lying to the American people on a daily basis . Sotomayor has proven she does not belong on any court due to her inability to tell the truth !

Wild Bill

Roberts thinks that he is fooling people by constricting the Bruen issue so that it does not impact the rest of the states. All he did was reveal himself to be an enemy of the Constitution.
I bet that he was a guest of Epstein, too.

Last edited 1 year ago by Wild Bill
Wild Bill

Good quote. Thanks for sharing.

Russn8r

The inside joke is, Wild Bill is TEX’s organ grinder.

musicman44mag

What more evidence do you need that some of our judges don’t think for themselves making decisions based on fact and laws. Instead, they support the political agenda of their political party leaving common sense, laws, rules and morals out of their decision. In short, some of our Supreme Court has become politized. The fact that the left feels we need more justices to change the outcome of Supreme Court decisions shows that it is true. I can say some of our supreme court because not all judges vote party line only and usually it is the republican appointee that… Read more »

Cruiser

Legislating from the bench is the most dispicable thing any Judge at any level can do.

Laddyboy

Agreed! This act of “creating laws” by “judges” IS WAY BEYOND their authority! For working AGAINST America and thus the American People, SHE MUST be DISBARRED and REMOVED for ABDECATING her OATH-of-OFFICE!!!
The J O B of the SCOTUS IS to make sure laws FOLLOW the edicts of the CONSTITUTION!! Then the SCOTUS ONLY GIVES AN OPINION. Then that law is sent BACK to Congress — Since 2016 forward most of these “representatives” are in CONgress!!!!

JMacZ

Sure we believe the “wise Latina”. And this after having a candle light dinner with Joe, Nan and Chuckie. Could that be considered colluding?

Last edited 1 year ago by JMacZ
Nanashi

A not-so-wise Latina woman.

Winchester1873

This incompetent and poorly prepared woman was only appointed because of a checklist: liberal – checked, woman – checked, and Latina – checked. Real qualifications? They did not matter.

DDS

Sounds about like President, I mean Vice President, Harris.

DIYinSTL

The bigger story was the statements and leading questions Justice Kagan put forth that left nothing to the imagination where she stood on the unbridled and justified powers of the federal government.

PAF145

The not so wise Latina hates America

Jonesy

Yup. Just like the other one and her squad b…..s! Can I write” Female Dog” ?

Green Mtn. Boy

SOP for Marxist’s

Ray

Judge Sodamizer is living proof, that there are some people that look stupid, and really are.

Ram

Review the nominating hearings for both Sotomayor and Kegan.
When questioned about the 2A, there was a definite wink and a nod
moment, then each one said “That’s settled law”.
A bit later in Chicago vs. Brown both jurists attacked our constitutionally
acknowledged rights, in their dissent.

Boz

Please stop calling that thing “justice”.

Happy Everafter

I recall her first big lie response, when during her appointment interviews was questioned about RKBA she said “It’s settled law.”
So we must be worrying about nothing….
😉

Idaho Bob

The bigger they lie the better, and the more often it’s told the more likely that it is to be believed. If you haven’t figured it out yet, the communist don’t care when they lie. They only care when someone who opposes them speaks the truth!

Green Mtn. Boy

Supreme Court Halts Biden COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Businesses

https://www.newsmax.com/us/biden-vaccine-mandate-block/2022/01/13/id/1052316/?ns_mail_uid=5e50901e-2a2d-4f37-b1ff-a1b22cf61599&ns_mail_job=DM293105_01132022&s=acs&dkt_nbr=010102vl9vho

Even so the court got it wrong as it will allow medical staff to receive the jab, which is un Constitutional.
All powers not granted to the federal government is reserved to the several states.

Wild Bill

Das ist fantastisch!!!

Russn8r

What’s so fantastic about doctors & nurses being forced to take kill shots?

Batch

How disappointingly ignorant this SCOTUS judge is? She sounds like she gets her “facts” from Media Matters or HuffPo. I wonder if she is even embarrassed by her actions?

Wildman

The “wise Latina”…

Wild Bill

Hey, AQ nice subtle dig at the Harris-Biden Administration!!! I notice that the government’s response expressly avoids the issue whether the government’s action impacts a fundamental and pre-political civil right. The government’s retort skips that question because that would require a S. Ct. strict scrutiny review. Then the government would lose.
Plaintiffs better figure out how to insert the fundamental right issue.

Last edited 1 year ago by Wild Bill
JH1961

What’s the process for removing a Supreme Court justice? Can she be empeached?

Wild Bill

Yes, impeachment is the process of removing a federal judge, but I don’t think that she has committed any high crimes or misdemeanors.

Roland T. Gunner

All my life I have been a fan of Charles Harrison.

Wild Bill

Charles Harrison the designer?

Tank

Have have yet to find, read or know a Liberal/Progressive minded person who can actually hold a conversation of factual non-emotional, non limbic brained charged discussion. I simply haven’t ever witnessed one speak & articulate with factual accuracy or lexicon eloquence yet. That’s not to say one does not exist, just haven’t found or read any philosophy, theology or scientific literacy works yet. Kinda like a Sasquatch of sorts. Kinda like tying half of your brain behind your own back just to make it fair. The other obvious issue is that our free society culture seems reticent about using “False… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Tank
Tank

Culture of ignorance integrated into sociocultural values that actually erode rights & work against freedoms. Headed for a planned societal collapse most likely meant to coincide with Great Reset of monetary system.

Russn8r

Thanks to “conservatives” Roberts and Kavanagh.

Russn8r

From their posts, I suspect TEX & Wild Bill “jab” each other.