Posted on 07/29/2021 8:06:54 AM PDT by Enlightened1
A lot of people opining, not a lot of lawsuits flying. The left doesn’t live by their own rules, so I have no doubt this is all just yelling at the ocean. There’s insufficient pain being felt by a majority of the population to really evince any change.
The rush for approval starts in 3..2..1..
I can’t imagine the pressure being brought to bear on the FDA to go ahead and approve these vaccines so they can be mandated.
I’m surprised they haven’t caved....yet
https://www.lawandtheworkplace.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2021/07/DOJ-Vaccine-Memo.pdf
DOJ isn’t going to help you. This is the legal guidance that they just sent out to employers just before the mandates started dropping.
Another utterly unconstitutional and, thus, invalid federal law. Any unjust or invalid law is NO law, according to William Blackstone (the renowned English jurist from whom derived much of the thinking regarding today’s common law and Judeo-Christin Judicial System).
“Law” does not matter.
“Force” does.
I can. Approval is slated for September.
The requirement is attempting to side step the law by allowing “options”. Either get the vaccine or do this ....
The courts SHOULD be quashing this. But I have lost so much faith in our system that I doubt that will happen.
I’ve see trials until 2023.
P4L
My thoughts exactly.
If they approve it though, doesn’t that mean lawsuits get to go out for any malpractice?
I can see no ballots or entry to polling places for the unvaccinated.
Just another bad dream....
Law doesn’t matter here:
FLASH FLOOD WARNING! The tort bar is beginning to salivate. Roll up the pant legs; too late to save the shoes.
I had previously searched something similar to "mandatory CV19 vaccine law" and arrived at the following link, same one in OP.
21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 - Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies
Below is what I understand to be the key language in the law, and there is a problem with 3rd party explanations of the law imo.
The good news is that part (II) of the law effectively gives citizens the right to be informed about the pros and cons of the vaccine, which is not happening where problems are concerned imo, and to choose to refuse vaccine.
The bad news is that part (III) suggests that employers indoctrinated with pro-vaccine propaganda can still fire you for refusing the vaccine.
"(e) Conditions of authorization(1) Unapproved product(A) Required conditions(ii) Appropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed—(I) that the Secretary [Secretary of Health and Human Services] has authorized the emergency use of the product;(II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and
(III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks."
VIDEO: Rand Paul Addresses the Delta Variant and Covid Misinformation (7.28.21)
Corrections, insights welcome.
Moreover,
Any mandates or coercion to make people take a vaccine is in violation of about 12 different international treaties and agreements.
Not that this matters in the US today. Every administration merely interprets the laws the way they see fit and enforces them selectively... so yeah we’re definitely like any other lawless banana republic.
But, technically speaking all of these treaties are being violated with all this mandate/mandatory crap:
-—Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of December 10, 1948.
-—American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Bogotá, 1948.
-—American Convention on Human Rights, San José (Costa Rica), from November 7 to 22, 1969.
-—International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of December 16, 1966.
-—The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms Rome of November 4, 1950.
-—International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of December 16, 1966.
-—Convention for the protection of human rights and the dignity of the human being with respect to the applications of Biology and Medicine of April 4, 1997, Oviedo Convention.
-—Nuremberg Code of Ethics of August 19, 1947.
-—Geneva Declaration of 1948.
-—International Code of Medical Ethics of October 1949.
-—Declaration of Helsinki adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly, 1964.
-—Belmont Report of April 18, 1979.
-—1981 WMA Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of the Patient.
-—Declaration of the WMA on the Independence and Professional Freedom of the Physician of 1986.
-—Madrid Declaration of the AMM on Professional Autonomy and Self-Regulation of 1987.
-—WMA Seoul Declaration on Professional Autonomy and Clinical Independence 2008.
-—Madrid Declaration of the AMM on Professional Regulation of 2009.
-—WMA Declaration on the Relationship between Law and Ethics 2003.
-—UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights of 2005.
-—International Health Regulations 2005
You see, after WWII, with the experience of WWII and human testing, people back then made rules to PREVENT exactly those things we are trying to do today. It is considered illegal, unethical... But again, it’s the USA 2021 and not even the US Constitution matters anymore.
I’m sure that those companies that are making vaccinations a condition of employment have lawyers and are aware of the law, yet they go ahead and implement the requirement. Courts have upheld such requirements for hospitals in Texas. Maybe the law doesn’t say what people thinks it says?
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.