House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is mulling over a ban on unmasked and unvaccinated representatives from the House floor, she said in a press conference last week.
Pelosi was responding to a question about certain GOP reps refusing to wear masks on the floor after the Centers for Disease Control said vaccinated individuals do not need to wear masks indoors.
The Representatives include Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia, and Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina.
“We have to wait for them to be vaccinated because they are selfishly [an] endangerment to other people, including staff people here,” Pelosi said. “An honor system as to whether somebody’s been vaccinated? Do you want them breathing in your face on the strength of their honor?”
She said it is possible that these Republicans will be told to stay away.
“We could come to a place where we say, ‘If you don’t want to wear a mask and you don’t want to—if you’re not vaccinated, don’t even come to the floor. We have facilities up above in the gallery where people can come to vote,” she added.
The Epoch Times reported that masks must be worn except for when one is speaking.
“This is about science and governance,” Pelosi said. “We have to make sure that the House of Representatives chamber is not a petri dish because of the selfishness of some not to be vaccinated because it requires us to wear a mask.”
You may like
Multiple states launch lawsuit against Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan
Breaking Thursday, the states of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, and South Carolina joined together to file a lawsuit against President Biden’s administration in order to stop the student loan-forgiveness program from taking effect.
“In addition to being economically unwise and downright unfair, the Biden Administration’s Mass Debt Cancellation is yet another example in a long line of unlawful regulatory actions,” argued the plaintiffs in their filing.
The attorneys general spearheading the legal challenge also submit that “no statute permits President Biden to unilaterally relieve millions of individuals from their obligation to pay loans they voluntarily assumed.”
Biden, however, has argued that he is able to unilaterally cancel student debt to mitigate the economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic. Specifically, writes National Review, a Department of Education memo released by his administration asserts that the HEROES Act, which passed in 2003 and allows the secretary of education to provide student-debt relief “in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency,” provides the legal basis for the cancellation.
But, National Review notes that the plaintiffs point out that Biden declared in a recent 60 Minutes interview that “the pandemic is over.”
The legal brief also adds:
“The [HEROES] Act requires ED [Education Department] to tailor any waiver or modification as necessary to address the actual financial harm suffered by a borrower due to the relevant military operation or emergency… This relief comes to every borrower regardless of whether her income rose or fell during the pandemic or whether she is in a better position today as to her student loans than before the pandemic.”
Moreover, they argue that the HEROES Act was designed to allow the secretary to provide relief in individual cases with proper justification.
The first lawsuit against Biden’s executive order came Tuesday from the Pacific Legal Foundation:
“The administration has created new problems for borrowers in at least six states that tax loan cancellation as income. People like Plaintiff Frank Garrison will actually be worse off because of the cancellation. Indeed, Mr. Garrison will face immediate tax liability from the state of Indiana because of the automatic cancellation of a portion of his debt,” wrote PLF in their own brief.
The state-led lawsuit was filed in a federal district court in Missouri, and asks that the court “temporarily restrain and preliminarily and permanently enjoin implementation and enforcement of the Mass Debt Cancellation,” and declare that it “violates the separation of powers established by the U.S. Constitution,” as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.
You may like
Immigration3 days ago
IG Audit shows nonprofit wasted $17 million taxpayer dollars on hotels to not house illegal foreign nationals
War on Drugs2 days ago
‘Mass poisoning:’ Officials seize 15,000 fentanyl pills disguised as candy
Nation2 days ago
MD nuclear scientist, wife, face life in prison after pleading guilty in nuclear secrets case
Immigration4 days ago
Texas has raised over $55 million from private donations to secure border, build a wall