Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

iapps.courts.state.ny.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 443 posts

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#91

Post by hash872 »

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #85
hash872 wrote: post #82

I've been thinking a lot about judicial review in common law democracies recently, and I tentatively think a better system would be to vastly expand the number of judges that are involved in making a decision. Example, you'd still have a tiered court system, and your case would still be heard in front of say a 3-9 panel appeals court- but after they write their decisions, a couple hundred other appeals judges at the…

I think you're just describing court packing because maybe you disagree with the outcome based on your partisan politics?

What? No. I'm not talking about adding tons of judges to the existing US system now. I'm describing a future potential system, likely for a new country

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#92

Post by midoridensha »

jrockway wrote: post #61
phpisthebest wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is confusing because NY likes to be confusing. Almost every other state the State Supreme Court, is the top court of the state, just like the federal court And the Court of Appeals is lower than the State Supreme Court. Why NY needs to needless complicate everything is beyond me

I guess it's because it's old. From the Wikipedia article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Supreme_Court ): > The New York Supreme Court is the oldest Supreme Court with general original jurisdiction. It was established as the Supreme Court of Judicature by the Province of New York on May 6, 1691. That court was continued by the State of New York after independence was declared in 1776. It became the New York…

There's nothing stopping the state from renaming the courts now to conform with established convention in the rest of the nation, in order to reduce confusion.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#93

Post by neither_color »

cantSpellSober wrote: post #50
bananapear wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it make sense to exempt those people but not, say, firefighters?

The argument at the time was that it was "creating a double standard that disadvantaged local artists and athletes" compared to performers that were not residents of NYC (but commuted in for work). https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/153-22/transcr...

Stuff like this and allowing certain events while vilifying others as "superspreader events" killed a lot of people's belief in mitigation strategies IMO. A virus is a virus and doesn't recognize human needs or wants. Either there are no exceptions for anyone or we shouldn't bother.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#94

Post by CobrastanJorji »

bananapear wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #20

This is a confusing headline. The judgement here is in NY state court, and pertains to employees of and in the City of New York, which enacted a vaccine requirement for employees of the city and later private employers in the city. Months later, Eric Adams was elected mayor of NYC, and he issued an executive order exempting athletes, performers, and artists from the mandate. Petitioners sued, saying that the mandate…

Why would it make sense to exempt those people but not, say, firefighters?

You could probably make a pretty good argument. A firefighter deals closely with the population in non-voluntary situations. An athlete or performer is likely quite a bit separated from the crowd watching them, and they're choosing to be there anyway. I don't know if there was actually an attempt to justify the decision, though.

And I imagine someone could also make a pretty good argument in the other direction. A firefighter is probably going to be wearing a mask. Performers by their nature are yelling into a crowded indoor space.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#95

Post by jmyeet »

tptacek wrote: post #20

This is a confusing headline. The judgement here is in NY state court, and pertains to employees of and in the City of New York, which enacted a vaccine requirement for employees of the city and later private employers in the city. Months later, Eric Adams was elected mayor of NYC, and he issued an executive order exempting athletes, performers, and artists from the mandate. Petitioners sued, saying that the mandate…

This is 100% correct [1]:

> Mayor Eric Adams plans to announce on Thursday that professional athletes and performers working in New York City will no longer be required to show proof of vaccination against Covid-19, according to a person familiar with his plans.

> This means that Kyrie Irving, the Nets’ star point guard who has refused to get vaccinated, will be able to take the floor at Barclays Center in Brooklyn for the first time this season.

Adams is awful. NYC mayors exist to further the interests of property developers, corporations and the police unions. If that means that a public health measure needs to be sabotaged so some anti-vaxxer can play for the Nets, so be it.

[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/sports/kyrie-irving-nyc-v...

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#96

Post by robocat »

throwoutway wrote: post #79
tptacek wrote: post #20

This is a confusing headline. The judgement here is in NY state court, and pertains to employees of and in the City of New York, which enacted a vaccine requirement for employees of the city and later private employers in the city. Months later, Eric Adams was elected mayor of NYC, and he issued an executive order exempting athletes, performers, and artists from the mandate. Petitioners sued, saying that the mandate…

Sabotaged is a politically biased way of describing the events here. The reality is different as my sibling comment pointed out

Confusing: you haven't written a sibling comment? What are you talking about? Did you use a second account?

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#97

Post by hash872 »

colechristensen wrote: post #83
hash872 wrote: post #82

I've been thinking a lot about judicial review in common law democracies recently, and I tentatively think a better system would be to vastly expand the number of judges that are involved in making a decision. Example, you'd still have a tiered court system, and your case would still be heard in front of say a 3-9 panel appeals court- but after they write their decisions, a couple hundred other appeals judges at the…

I have a feeling this would make things considerably more political. If you don’t like what judges decide, get people elected who will write things clearly into law. If they can’t do that, it sucks, go fix the political situation and stop trying to fix that dysfunction by making major systematic changes.

>get people elected who will write things clearly into law

You can pass whatever law you'd like now- the existing judiciary can simply decide that it doesn't apply or isn't 'constitutional', and their decisions aren't reviewable. It's awarding ultimate power in society to a very small group The vast majority of developed countries don't work this way, at all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty

At a minimum, calling a law 'unconstitutional' should require a supermajority out of a fairly large body

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#98

Post by nostromo »

jakogut wrote: post #10

Something I've been wondering in recent cases where courts are overturning recent government action, whether unconstitutional bills passed into law, or unconstitutional executive actions that overstep authority, is where's the penalty for committing those actions in the first place? The state of New York famously responded to the outcome of NYSRPA v. Bruen, which overturned the defacto ban on concealed carry, by decl…

You’re seeing this play out with student loan forgiveness.

Most legal scholars don’t believe it’s legal and will be overturned. But everyone also agrees any money given out will not be returned, so they’re rushing to get as much debt forgiven before it’s overturned.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#99

Post by seanmcdirmid »

muaytimbo wrote: post #65
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do courts declare certain executive orders unconstitutional, and yet the perpetrators, who took an oath to uphold and defend said rights and values, face no consequences? Isn't this like saying developers should suffer consequences if they allow bugs to get into their code? Because we are perpetrators of flawed code, like law makers are perpetrators of flawed laws? > Regardless of one's opinion of said rights,…

Don’t developers face consequences over bugs in their code? Too many and you might get shown the door.

> Don’t developers face consequences over bugs in their code?

If face significant consequences, there would be no developers left.

> Too many and you might get shown the door.

You are much more likely to get shown the door for being hard to work with, being crass, not showing up to work, not following process (that doesn't eliminate bugs but mitigates consequences), etc...

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#100

Post by ksherlock »

jakogut wrote: post #10

Something I've been wondering in recent cases where courts are overturning recent government action, whether unconstitutional bills passed into law, or unconstitutional executive actions that overstep authority, is where's the penalty for committing those actions in the first place? The state of New York famously responded to the outcome of NYSRPA v. Bruen, which overturned the defacto ban on concealed carry, by decl…

Ancient Athens -- birthplace of democracy -- had an answer [1]. The sponsor of a law that was later found to be, in modern parlance, unconstitutional, could be fined.

Also worth considering: ostracism [2].

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphe_paranomon

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

Post reply on HN