Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MtnClimber

MtnClimber wrote: “Do you support forced mRNA shots?”
Irrelevant.

Do you support the rule of law?

Supreme Court’s decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) remains the law of the land.

Do you agree that the Ninth Circuit did not rule against forced vaccinations?


16 posted on 06/09/2024 5:59:53 AM PDT by DugwayDuke (Most pick the expert who says the things they agree with.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: DugwayDuke

And you oh should remain ashamed of yourself for shilling for the Mengela wannabees bent n killing Americans.


17 posted on 06/09/2024 8:01:12 AM PDT by cyclotic (Don’t be part of the problem. Be the entire problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: DugwayDuke

stop lying:

this is what the court found:

The majority’s ruling holds that Jacobson only applied to measures to prevent the spread of disease, and that we had credibly pled that the COVID vaccines were not designed or intended to prevent disease spread, but were only designed to reduce the severity of illness in infected persons. Therefore, the majority held that Jacobson does not apply. [emphasis supplied.]

In a concurring opinion, Judge Collins wrote that measures to protect an individual from getting sick, as opposed to preventing disease spread, fell under a separate line of authority for the proposition that each person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment. That was exactly our theory of the case.


21 posted on 06/09/2024 12:47:15 PM PDT by markman46 (engage brain before using keyboard!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson