Post by greyhound on Oct 3, 2021 23:37:16 GMT -5
I have serious concerns about what this EO-mandate means for the independence of ALJs. I would encourage every federal employee who has concerns to be proactive rather than to sit back and try to get an exception. If an ALJ were to make a similar challenge, I think that would highlight important issues. Millions of Americans do no want these shots and federal employees will be involved in their related legal claims. In some cases, federal employees will be adjudicating them. If the EO goes forward, those adjudicators will be unrepresentative in a very important way.
I am just putting this out there and won't be responding to comments.
File size of the complaint is too big too attach, but it can be found on pacer
www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/42058729/Foley_v_Biden
Part of the harm described:
46. The cleansing of viewpoint diversity from the ranks of the Federal government
will irreparably harm the public, including Plaintiff. Should institutions such as the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), the Merit
Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”), and the Department of Justice (“DoJ”), be cleansed of
those who dissent on this important question of our day, these agencies no longer draw from
“diverse perspective,” and the 62 million Americans, including Plaintiff, who choose not to
receive this medical intervention will no longer find advocates within the Federal bureaucracy.
Absent injunctive and/or declaratory relief, a final judgment entered after protracted litigation
cannot possibly remedy the harm faced by the public in the interim period. Such irreparable harm
is not limited to the public in general, but rather has a high likelihood of harming Plaintiff in a
predictable manner.
47. Assuming Plaintiff is discharged, he will contest his discharge at the “quasi-judicial”
forum of either the Merit Systems Protection Board32 or the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC)33. At that time, the MSPB and the EEOC that will have been cleansed of
like-minded or otherwise free-thinking advocates who oppose President Biden’s mRNA injection
mandate. Moreover, Plaintiff can expect that other similarly cleansed agencies such as the CDC
and FDA will provide Defendant with “scientific authority” to defend his case of unlawful
discharge that are even more biased, arbitrary, and capricious than what is currently
promulgated. Thus, Plaintiff can neither expect viewpoint diversity nor a fair shake when the
injection-as-condition-of-employment has deprived him of institutional allies throughout all
agencies of the Executive Branch.
I am just putting this out there and won't be responding to comments.
File size of the complaint is too big too attach, but it can be found on pacer
www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/42058729/Foley_v_Biden
Part of the harm described:
46. The cleansing of viewpoint diversity from the ranks of the Federal government
will irreparably harm the public, including Plaintiff. Should institutions such as the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), the Merit
Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”), and the Department of Justice (“DoJ”), be cleansed of
those who dissent on this important question of our day, these agencies no longer draw from
“diverse perspective,” and the 62 million Americans, including Plaintiff, who choose not to
receive this medical intervention will no longer find advocates within the Federal bureaucracy.
Absent injunctive and/or declaratory relief, a final judgment entered after protracted litigation
cannot possibly remedy the harm faced by the public in the interim period. Such irreparable harm
is not limited to the public in general, but rather has a high likelihood of harming Plaintiff in a
predictable manner.
47. Assuming Plaintiff is discharged, he will contest his discharge at the “quasi-judicial”
forum of either the Merit Systems Protection Board32 or the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC)33. At that time, the MSPB and the EEOC that will have been cleansed of
like-minded or otherwise free-thinking advocates who oppose President Biden’s mRNA injection
mandate. Moreover, Plaintiff can expect that other similarly cleansed agencies such as the CDC
and FDA will provide Defendant with “scientific authority” to defend his case of unlawful
discharge that are even more biased, arbitrary, and capricious than what is currently
promulgated. Thus, Plaintiff can neither expect viewpoint diversity nor a fair shake when the
injection-as-condition-of-employment has deprived him of institutional allies throughout all
agencies of the Executive Branch.
