The nine justices heard more than three and a half hours of arguments in two cases that test presidential powers to combat a public health crisis that has left more than 830,000 Americans dead.
The challengers argued that the federal government exceeded its authority by imposing requirements not specifically authorised by Congress and failed to follow the proper administrative processes for issuing emergency regulations. "I would find it would be unbelievable to be in the public interest to stop these vaccinations," liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said.
"Why doesn't Congress have a say in this ... and why isn't this the primary responsibility of the states?" Mr Roberts asked. Conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh both wondered if the OSHA rule could be held as invalid under a legal doctrine that says Congress must provide a clear statement on a specific issue in order for a federal agency to be able to issue broad regulations on it.
"What if I think some of the provisions might support you but others don't?" Ms Barrett asked, adding that the administration's strongest case is to require vaccines in long-term-care facilities.
Of course they did (Mr Trump)
I think the Justices are possibly out of line and not sitting in the seat of emergency, I'm not understand it in the USA, we in Europe, Japan, China, Russia have faced this kind of employment before and been able to pause and deal with the issue at hand first.