Posted on 07/12/2024 2:11:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The COVID shot was put on trial in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and coming from California the result might surprise you. Three of four judges agree it was never a “traditional vaccine” and therefore could not legally be mandated.
The case was against the Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) that “required employees to get the COVID-19 vaccination or lose their jobs.” While this case was making its way thru the courts, LAUSD was playing Hokey-Pokey with their policy on “vaccination” which didn’t play well in their litigation strategy, as it allowed the case to be kept alive rather than becoming moot.
Plaintiffs argued that in “Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), in concluding that the Policy survived rational basis review. Jacobson held that mandatory vaccinations were rationally related to preventing the spread of smallpox. Here, however, plaintiffs allege that the vaccine does not effectively prevent spread but only mitigates symptoms for the recipient and therefore is akin to a medical treatment, not a “traditional” vaccine. Taking plaintiffs’ allegations as true at this stage of litigation, plaintiffs plausibly alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine does not effectively “prevent the spread” of COVID-19. Thus, Jacobson does not apply.”
Further, the Ninth Circuit Court observed “Pursuant to more recent Supreme Court authority, compulsory treatment for the health benefit of the person treated -- as opposed to compulsory treatment for the health benefit of others -- implicates the fundamental right to refuse medical treatment.”
LAUSD argued, basically, (my words) “we didn’t know any better so” (their words) “[t]he science [on vaccines] has not changed” and they are still “safe and effective.”
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Another article I saw- sorry I can’t remember where- implied that this is not actually what 9th court ruled- that they really just found a reason to pass the case on and not hear the case. So I have to wonder which story is correct?! Did ruling really happen that said no case because don’t prevent transmission? I don’t know if such a ruling really happened but I surely do hope so
My understanding (FR articles) is some people are still being denied transplant or other medical procedures unless they get the clot shot.
“At this stage” was key ... the court said that their ruling was specific only to the appeal at hand based solely on the limited information at hand, and further said that a definitive ruling on the issue of traditional-vaccine-or-not would have to be adjudicated based on a complete presentation of ALL of the evidence both pro and con ...
Yeesh, I hope not!! But wouldn’t surprise me
Except when it came to exempting illegal alien invaders from mandates. Then, all of sudden, the tyrants claimed that they couldn't legally mandate it for illegal aliens invaders.
The cHickens are coming home to roost. I was just talking to a military friend of mine today and he expressed his regret over getting the jab. He got the J&J but still regrets ever getting it. Another friend of mine was “injured” by the jab and lost his job. The military refuses to compensate him. Every single person and organization that mandated that poison needs to go to jail.
My boss asked me to if this was the hill I want to die on. I said yes I do not do vaccinations for anything and I will not let the statists in WDC force me into this. She told me I would lose my job. My reply was “I was looking for a job when I found this one.
So the EUA is cancelled right?
Unfortunaly one of the most overruled courts
This will not stop the diehard lefties from getting annual boosters.
When out and about it’s easy to spot a lefty simply because they are wearing those stupid masks.
And many in society were trained to and still social distance when in a line.
If my memory is correct, a few months back Fauci admitted he just made up the social distancing and mask wearing crap.
Siegfried, we never knew ye! Funny, his last name is an apt description of the Mengelites under that little shrew today.
There is no proof whatsoever that these jabs mitigate symptoms.
That was just a made up excuse by the criminals at Big Pharma and in our government to keep buying and jabbing people.
They wanted this poison in people and they have lied about why.
And to think they were revoking medical licenses to doctors who wouldn’t tow the line on the ‘vaccine’? Beware of govts because govts always F’ things up and destroy freedom.
Good story.
I don’t feel bad for people who willingly got the shot to feel morally superior. I do feel bad for the people who had to get the shot or they would lose their job. Millions of people were forced to get the shot so they could continue to feed their family and keep a roof over their heads.
What happened after you told your boss that you “were looking for a job when I found this one”?
Opinion by Judge R. Nelson; Concurrence by Judge R. Nelson; Concurrence by Judge Collins; Dissent by Judge Hawkins
In its final ruling, the court decided “At this stage, we must accept Plaintiffs’ allegations that the vaccine does not prevent the spread of COVID-19 as true…”
The question before the court was the claim the issue was moot. The court ruled it was not. It assumed plaintiffs allegation were true. That assumption has yet to be litigated.
Always stated without any actual studies or other evidence.
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.