Available Soon: Request your printed copies of the Idaho Freedom Index mailed to you!
Request Your Copies

Idaho officials enforce the Biden mandate while crowing about their lawsuit against it

Idaho officials enforce the Biden mandate while crowing about their lawsuit against it

Wayne Hoffman
November 5, 2021
Wayne Hoffman
Author Image
November 5, 2021

Idaho state officials aren’t suing President Joe Biden to block his vaccine mandate. They’re doing it because taking the president to court is good politics — red meat for the masses. 

A phony legal challenge against Biden is the perfect tool for scoring political points and raising boatloads of campaign cash.

The latest proof of this political doublespeak came Tuesday from the Idaho State Board of Education. The board voted unanimously to both join a lawsuit against the Biden administration while also complying with the mandate’s requirements. Think of it as deciding to go to war while also agreeing to the enemy’s terms of surrender. 

The board's ginned up excuse for ordering vaccines for university employees and some students even as the legal drama plays out is that Boise State University, the University of Idaho, and Idaho State University are considered federal contractors doing federally-funded research. 

Contractors are affected by the Biden vaccine rule, and not complying could potentially result in the loss of money from Washington, D.C. The Biden rule is so awful that anyone with a modicum of clout should want to keep the feds at bay. But even after the Biden mandate was pushed back to Jan. 4, the Idaho State Board of Education stuck to its decision to enforce the D.C. dictator’s mandate. 

Board spokesman Mike Keckler told me in an email that there are no plans to reconsider compliance. He said that’s because the schools have to develop and implement their compliance plans in three weeks when holidays are factored in. I don’t know what calendar they’re using in state government these days, but mine says January is eight weeks away, not three. The board is evidently misunderstanding the point of the chant “Let’s go, Brandon.” 

In other words, there’s plenty of time to sue and stand firm in defense of university employees and students. State officials just don’t really seem to want to. What they really want is mass vaccination while giving the appearance of trying to defend liberty and state sovereignty. 

This is what passes for normal among the so-called leadership of Idaho. Recall that in September, Boise State University announced that a proof of vaccination or negative covid test would be required to attend a Bronco football game. 

Gov. Brad Little, House Speaker Scott Bedke, and Senate Pro Tem Chuck Winder all sat on the sidelines when the school’s COVID-19 mandate was announced. They did nothing and said nothing to block the school’s effort. BSU later reversed course, citing a shortage of covid tests, not because anyone ordered the school to stand down. 

Little also blocked Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin’s executive order which would have stopped any state agency from also implementing similar protocols. So while everyone is able to bluster about Biden’s vaccine mandates, Little, Bedke, and Winder couldn’t muster a single word about a state agency they oversee implementing its own brand of medical tyranny. 

And then there’s the Nov. 15 special legislative session. Bedke wants to reconvene lawmakers to discuss the Biden vaccine mandate, but the only bill that’s expected to be on the docket is one that really doesn’t do anything to prevent the mandate from taking effect; it would only stop state agencies from helping to implement it. Other bills, which might actually stop enforcement of vaccine mandates or protect medical privacy, have been kicked aside so far. The Senate is even threatening not to do anything to help pass any kind of anti-mandate legislation. 

Such is the state of affairs in Idaho. Biden, Pelosi, and Obama help raise money and build political bonafides. But don’t count on state officials to do anything else unless the public sees past the circus act and demands actual, tangible action from Idaho state officials.

View Comments
  • Mrs D says:

    I really was looking to move to north Idaho but there seems to be a inside war
    Is that true
    I want out of Washington State because of Insleez
    Is Idaho better or waste of time?
    Born and Grew up Spokane then moved W Wa for work but visited Idaho throughout my life
    Just curious 🤔

    • Brad Gee says:

      If you feel like the things you read here on the IFF page line up with your values, you will fit in perfectly in Northern Idaho, however if you oppose racism and bigotry you may feel like an outcast in Northern Idaho.

  • Freedom says:

    Thank you for writing this. It is absolute madness what is going on in this state. The State Board of Education made the decision to terminate every non-vaccinated university worker in a 6 minute meeting. This decision impacts hundreds, if not thousands, of university workers across the state that have chosen to not get vaccinated. This current government is an embarrassment to freedom.

  • Lori says:

    Exactly! The Bible days you can’t serve two masters. Idaho gov servants want to have their cake and eat it too.

  • Marilyn says:

    Precisely written perspective of Idaho’s state of affairs. These infiltrated political “leaders”, including our state senate and board of education, have never represented the citizens of Idaho. They might as well be affiliated with the FDA and CDC, none of which have an ethical bone in their body.

  • Mickmont says:

    Great piece, Wayne! The duplicity is appalling and the lack of pushback needs to be called for what it is: the mere facade or pretense of protection for our Civil Liberties. When will any Idaho office holder other the dozen or so State legislators led by Rep. Barbieri, Scott, and Giddings actually stand up for individual and family rights?!?

  • Barry C Schultz Sr says:

    To: Idaho politicians. Stop being wishy washy. Grow some. One minute you are sueing the feds on mandates, then Idaho wants to enforcing the same mandates. Sorry But me personally, you all should be recalled or better than that FIRED. The people who voted you into office deserves better than what they are getting. Can I do better? well lets see..... I read everything I can find on this PLandemic. Interesting to see what is being released with the science paper trail that the state and feds do not want to read. Data, Data, Data. Attention........ its going against what the media and Feds want to shove down the American people. Somebody is being lied too. Plane and simple. Follow that money trail !!!!! What happen to my Idaho? Oh I just said it follow the money. Forget the common since, and doing the right thing ! The lies are going to catch up to you politicians believe me. Give the money back, start telling the truth and start representing the people of Idaho ! Sorry to say there is only a hand full of Idaho politicians that are not on that money trail. They are the ones fighting for the people of Idaho.I am shamed of our state and the politicians that have decided money was more important than its people.

  • KJ says:

    We have 'sheeple' leading us to the slaughter.

    The problem with these people is that they never created anything of worth in their lives. They found their niche in feeding off the people. You know, parasites.

  • A_Merican says:

    A few quick thoughts about the Biden administration's recent legal argument in the Fifth Circuit (link below), in defense of the OSHA vaccine mandate.

    In short, it's...unconvincing.

    Statutorily, OSHA can issue an "emergency temporary standard" if it determines that "employees are exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful."

    The key words here are "employees" (i.e., plural) and "grave danger."

    The use of "employees" indicates Congress had in mind the sort of ubiquitous workplace hazards that affect, well, everyone. Think of asbestos, lead in water pipes, that sort of thing.

    The point is the statute does not say, "some high-risk employees." It simply says "employees."

    But we know COVID does not equally affect all "employees." First, mitigating the risk of getting COVID and mitigating the effects of COVID even if getting it is the entire point of the vax. Second, we know COVID disproportionately affects the elderly, the immunocompromised, etc.

    It defies both basic logic and basic reading comprehension to pretend that all workplace "employees," in the abstract, are equally affected by the risk of catching COVID as they are by asbestos or lead in water pipes. That is nonsense.

    The Biden administration tries to get around this, in part, by ignoring that basic linguistic point and instead focusing on the "grave danger" COVID allegedly poses to unvaccinated workers, specifically.

    This is also problematic.

    It is problematic for the very simple reason that we can *conservatively* estimate the national survival rate for COVID to be 98-99%.

    (It is orders of magnitude higher for those who are vaccinated.) https://t.co/QxQgt6xXhO

    But even holding aside the vaxxed and focusing simply on the unvaxxed, as the Biden administration purports to do, implementing a sweeping policy of this nature to address an alleged "grave danger" with a 98-99% survival rate simply does not pass the laugh test.

    The overarching idea here is to unilaterally implement a national policy, affecting all large-employer "employees," to mitigate what is truly a "grave danger" for a fractionally tiny proportion of the populace.

    To make a crass torts law analogy, it's treating everyone as an "eggshell skull" plaintiff. It's massively over-inclusive. https://t.co/1qsTyuZPO1

    Most people for whom COVID truly is a "grave danger"—i.e., the elderly, the immunocompromised, etc.—have the self-awareness to know that it is a danger to them. They take prudent and reasonable risk-mitigation measures, accordingly—as they should.

    We can analogize to a peanut allergy (mixed data, but roughly 1-2% of U.S. population), which can also be deadly. Those with peanut allergies also take prudent risk-mitigation measures: They avoid peanuts, they carry EpiPens, etc.

    Should OSHA ban all peanuts from the workplace?

    In summary, the Fifth Circuit's staying of the OSHA mandate was correct. And the Biden administration's legal logic here should unnerve us all.

  • Idaho Freedom Foundation
    802 W. Bannock Street, Suite 405, Boise, Idaho 83702
    p 208.258.2280 | e [email protected]
    COPYRIGHT © 2022 Idaho freedom Foundation
    linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram