Amid today's Supreme Court ruling, new data suggests the Omicron variant makes vaccine
mandates obsolete and unnecessary.
One America's chief White House correspondent, Chanel Rion, has more from Washington.
Phil Kirpin, president of American Commitment, thank you so much for joining us.
My pleasure.
You issued a very, very fascinating amicus brief before the Supreme Court this week.
And your fundamental argument against vaccine mandates is that vaccine mandates, considering
the science behind current vaccines, are irrelevant.
The point of our brief was to inform the court on how much the factual situation has changed
with the Omicron variant taking over.
And it's totally dominant now.
The CDC data has it up over 95 percent of all new cases being Omicron.
And we know two things about it that I think make the mandates a complete nonstarter.
And that's the argument, those are the arguments we make in this brief.
The first is that it is much, much milder than previous variants.
It's about an order of magnitude more mild.
And you know, remember, we were always saying COVID is about 10 times worse than the flu,
10 times more dangerous.
Well, if Omicron is 10 times less dangerous than the previous variants, it's right in
the same range with what we're used to.
Normal respiratory risk is not a grave danger.
Which is a key point that you make in this argument, that with the ocean mandates, the
argument is this is for the safety of all society, because COVID-19 is so transmissible,
we need to protect the workspace.
But you're saying that because the transmissibility of this virus has changed with the variant.
You can no longer say with Omicron and the data we have now from all countries all over
the world, that it reduces your risk of getting the virus and transmitting it to others.
In fact, it seems to have no effect on that at all.
And in some studies, it seems to actually have a reverse effect.
People who are vaccinated seem more likely to get the virus than people that are unvaccinated.
Kirpin bases this statement off two major studies out of Denmark and Canada.
The Danish study found that vaccinated were more likely than the unvaccinated to catch
Omicron after three months.
An Ontario study also found vaccines had a negative efficacy against the Omicron strain
after just 60 days.
Kirpin says another stunning study from Germany further renders Biden's OSHA vaccine mandate
irrelevant.
A German study found nearly 80% of positive Omicron cases were in those who were vaccinated.
Further suggesting the vaccines don't prevent transmission of Omicron, the now dominant
strain of COVID.
I think some of the Supreme Court justices are suffering from severe misinformation and
it likely came from mainstream media sources.
When Sotomayor says, for instance, that Omicron is deadlier than Delta, that is literally
misinformation.
There is no piece of data you could point to from anywhere in the world to support that
claim.
Some of the other things she said, about 100,000 children in the hospital when it's between
three and four thousand and probably more than half of them are just there for some
other reason.
And so she's just wildly disconnected from the hard data, the actual facts that are tracked
by HHS and CDC.
Grounding the amicus brief are two epidemiologists, one from Brown University and one from Stanford.
Is there anything that you wish you would have added at this point?
I think the biggest mistake we made was probably not filing a version of the brief in the CMS
health worker case, which was a separate case they heard on the same day.
Because I actually think it has even more relevance there, because the whole argument
there is, you know, in a healthcare setting you don't want someone who could potentially
infect someone else.
But if the vaccine doesn't reduce that risk, it undercuts the whole logic of that one.
And again, that takes us back to the central tenet of your argument, going against the
OSHA mandate, arguing that this is now a personal mandate.
This is not a public safety mandate.
This is the same thing as if the government were doing exactly what they said in the Obamacare
case they couldn't do, which is require you to eat broccoli for your health, or order
you to exercise, order you to lose weight.
There are lots of things the government, in theory, could do that could force you to do
that would improve your own health, but we've ruled those out of bounds beyond the government's
power to do.
You have a liberty interest in making those decisions for yourself, even if you're not
always making the healthiest decisions.
And I think that once we reach the point kind of where we are with what these vaccines actually
accomplish with Omicron, that you really can't make a good argument for a social benefit.
The benefit really is personal.
You can't justify a government mandate without opening the door to total health dictatorship.
Phil Kirpin from American Commitment, thank you so much.
My pleasure.
Want to see more videos like this?
Visit OANN.com for immediate access to all the clips you've been waiting to see.