
handle: 2434/931244
In NFIB v. OSHA, the US Supreme Court granted the application to stay the OSHA rule requiring that employers with at least 100 employees require covered workers to receive a COVID–19 vaccine or else wear a mask and be subject to weekly testing. Using the contested major question doctrine, the Supreme Court held that the challenged rule went well beyond the OSHA power to set workplace safety standard and was effectively a broad public health measure not expressly allowed by the Congress. The per curiam opinion as well as the concurring and the dissenting opinions provide significant guidance related to the principles of the separation of powers and of democratic legitimacy within the administrative state.
obblighi vaccinali; separazione dei poteri; chevron doctrine; major question doctrine
obblighi vaccinali; separazione dei poteri; chevron doctrine; major question doctrine
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
