A statement from Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, both conservatives, says that if New York tries to ration health care based on race like it did with Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) "treatments" in 2021, then the Supreme Court will have no choice but to vote to mount a case challenging the policy on an emergency basis.
Especially because the "circumstances underlying the dispute ... have long since come and gone," the two justices wrote, referring to the covid "emergency" now being over, there is no more excuse for the state of New York to take an anti-white approach in its distribution of medical care.
The joint statement from Justices Alito and Thomas comes as a response to a petition for certiorari, or review, in Roberts v. McDonald (court file 22-757). The Supreme Court turned it down in an unsigned order on June 30, though at least four of the nine justices voted to grant a petition for it to move forward to the oral argument stage.
(Related: Last fall, the state of New York launched a myocarditis awareness campaign to address all the heart disease now appearing in residents who got jabbed for covid.)
The petition's denial came just one day after the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, ruling that racial discrimination in the college admissions process, also known as affirmative action, is unconstitutional.
Petitioners Jonathan Roberts and Charles Vavruska, both residents of New York state, filed a lawsuit on Feb. 8, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the New York State Department of Health and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York.
The crux of the suit deals with the way New York officials tried to ration distribution of Paxlovid, a "dressed up" version of ivermectin that is much more dangerous and much less effective – but that stood to generate lots of new profits for Merck & Co., its manufacturer.
Supplies of Paxlovid were limited, as were supplies of monoclonal antibody treatments, which the state of New York also tried to ration by giving most of it to people with darker skin will discriminating against those with lighter skin.
Plaintiffs Roberts and Vavruska objected to the policy of both the state of New York and the New York City ordering health care providers to distribute Paxlovid and monoclonal antibodies to residents based on the color of their skin.
"The directives require providers to prioritize treatment to individuals based on age, vaccination status, and a number of risk factors," the suit states. "Risk factors include medical conditions such as cancer, chronic disease, diabetes, and obesity."
"The directives also state that, apart from any medical condition, non-white race or Hispanic / Latino ethnicity must be considered as an independent risk factor."
One example presented involves an unvaccinated, 64-year-old black man with diabetes who would receive priority over an unvaccinated, 64-year-old white man with diabetes. Another is a vaccinated, 64-year-old Hispanic man who would receive priority over a vaccinated, 64-year-old non-Hispanic man.
"New York's designation of race as an independent risk factor has no basis in science," the petition reads. "Although race may be associated with different risk factors, New York has cited no evidence that race – on its own – makes an individual more susceptible to suffering adverse effects from COVID-19."
Any policies crafted based on race are racist. Learn more at Wokies.news.
Sources for this article include: