Skip to comments.
Legal Earthquake at the Supreme Court, which just called on the State of Oregon to answer the question below.
Twitter / X / ^
| June 18, 2026
| Brian Ward
Posted on 06/18/2026 9:15:07 PM PDT by Red Badger
Legal Earthquake at the Supreme Court, which just called on the State of Oregon to answer the question below. The state never argued for a right to mandate such drugs; only the 9th Circuit granted it such a right, in violation of federal law. This question PROVES all C-19 mandates were unlawful. Notice the second half... can a state mandate a liability-shielded product? This is FAR BIGGER than anyone can possibly imagine.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-1280.html
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Health/Medicine; Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuit; oregon; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
To: Red Badger
2
posted on
06/18/2026 9:19:46 PM PDT
by
lastchance
(Cognovit Dominus qui sunt eius.)
To: Red Badger
In laymen’s terms please?
3
posted on
06/18/2026 9:19:55 PM PDT
by
Magnum44
(...against all enemies, foreign and domestic... )
To: Red Badger
4
posted on
06/18/2026 9:20:04 PM PDT
by
Enterprise
(The homeless don't want housing. They want fentanyl and meth. - Spencer Pratt.)
To: Red Badger
Oh my, this will get very interesting.
To: Magnum44
I’ll try:
Can a state require a licensed person, doctor for instance, to take an experimental drug and then not allow him to sue for damages if there are any.
I may be wrong............
6
posted on
06/18/2026 9:23:00 PM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Iryna Zarutska, May 22, 2002 Kyiv, Ukraine – August 22, 2025 Charlotte, North Carolina Say her name)
To: Red Badger
Thanks, the whole premise with that seems wrong, but 🤷🏻♂️
7
posted on
06/18/2026 9:29:40 PM PDT
by
Magnum44
(...against all enemies, foreign and domestic... )
To: Red Badger
This is not an earthquake. What you present is not a decision but the “Petition for a writ of certiorari filed”
What is posted is an introduction to that petition. The latest action was on June 17, 2026 and was as follows.
Response Requested. (Due July 17, 2026) .
I doubt many here will get that distinction. Since the appeal is based on a decision by the Ninth Circuit we can be optimistic that decision will be overturned. But that has not happened yet.
8
posted on
06/18/2026 9:31:26 PM PDT
by
lastchance
(Cognovit Dominus qui sunt eius.)
To: Red Badger
Whoa, an over-the-top headline that’s ... NOT over-the-top. A good 5.6 shaker at least!
9
posted on
06/18/2026 9:33:54 PM PDT
by
Tellurian
(Any cleverness from a DemonicRat is quickly invested in deception. Ds are world class deceivers.)
To: Red Badger
Vaxx papers, please! No vaxxie, no workie!
10
posted on
06/18/2026 9:47:51 PM PDT
by
coloradan
(They're not the mainstream media, they're the gaslight media. It's what they do. )
To: Red Badger
Ridiculously tendentious headline.
11
posted on
06/18/2026 9:52:30 PM PDT
by
nwrep
To: Red Badger
Ridiculously tendentious headline.
12
posted on
06/18/2026 9:52:30 PM PDT
by
nwrep
To: coloradan
Yes! My son in law firefighter in California was forced to take Covid vax or lose his job of over 30 years. He is completely MAGA… hope that he does not develop complications.
He feels they violated his rights and used his job as leverage. The county that did this needs to be sued in a class action.
13
posted on
06/18/2026 9:54:00 PM PDT
by
antceecee
( )
To: antceecee
My employer tried to coerce the mRNA shot (or risk losing government contracts). My "do or die" date occurred during the open enrollement for healthcare. I secured a medical exemption from my doctor and forwarded it to HR. My terms were simple. If my exemption is accepted, I'll remain with the company and sign up for the healthcare. If rejected, I will initiate retirement (my 401k was well funded and I was old enough) and I would not signup for healthcare. The pending cutoff to sign-up for healthcare was the time sensitive element. The exception was granted. Since I work 100% remote, it was a simple decision. I never set foot on company property again after the exemption and worked another 5 years.
14
posted on
06/18/2026 10:12:27 PM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: Myrddin
Good for you! Glad you were able to escape the vax.
15
posted on
06/18/2026 10:17:54 PM PDT
by
antceecee
( )
To: Red Badger
Could the ruling of this eventually be applied to strike down the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986?
16
posted on
06/19/2026 5:08:27 AM PDT
by
OldCountryBoy
(You can't make this stuff up!)
To: OldCountryBoy
I don’t see how..........
17
posted on
06/19/2026 5:09:09 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Iryna Zarutska, May 22, 2002 Kyiv, Ukraine – August 22, 2025 Charlotte, North Carolina Say her name)
To: lastchance
The Ninth Circuit court??? Isn’t that that the one famous for so many overturned decisions? Looks like something more lasting could done about them by now.
18
posted on
06/19/2026 6:42:25 AM PDT
by
oldtech
(oltech)
To: oldtech
I do believe you are correct.
19
posted on
06/19/2026 12:35:10 PM PDT
by
lastchance
(Cognovit Dominus qui sunt eius.)
To: Magnum44
Seems to refer to vaxx mandates.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson