I don’t get this. The stupidity of allowing government coercion of a medical treatment even if it causes harm and doesn’t work is shocking and could easily lead down a dark and dangerous road - particularly with the climate alarmist pro depopulation lunatics in charge right now. But more than that, only the EUA shots were actually available until summer 2022. There were no FDA approved vials. This court case essentially says the government or private employers can coerce experimental medical procedures so long as they can craft a persuasive, even if completely dishonest, narrative. This is insane. Mengele could only dream if that kind of power. Sad crazy world we live in.
This is incredibly disappointing but it's great to hear you're "just warming up." You have a lot of support and I suspect more on the way. Team Reality grows stronger & bigger all the time. We're very lucky to have you fighting for us in all the ways you do.
Dec 2, 2022·edited Dec 2, 2022Liked by Aaron Kheriaty, MD
It is very sad news. Sadly, it's not unexpected. The federal courts, including the Supreme Court in Buck v. Bell (as you note) have repeatedly cited Jacobson to uphold more tyrannical invasions of bodily autonomy than the Cambridge, Maskachusetts, smallpox mandate at issue in Jacobson.
It's also not clear how to overturn Jacobsen legislatively. For if Congress does it, which itself would be a miracle, the Supreme Court will overturn the law by saying that the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to remove states' police powers. At the federal level, probably the only route is through a constitutional amendment.
At the state level, legislatures can tie their own hands (as Florida's has done). But a legislature could always untie its own hands: I think that only contracts or constitutional provisions can bind a state legislature. Thus, we would need state-by-state constitutional amendments to entrench bodily autonomy.
The problem with your case, in my view and as I have said from the beginning, is that it fundamentally misses the point by taking the position of natural immunity as THE viable excuse for refusing an experimental injection. You didn't need any other excuse except this one: "I don't want it."
1) There has been zero precedent set allowing any govt to legally inject their citizenry with an experimental anything without their consent.
2) The free nature of mankind, his very Constitution, is what protects him from govt imposed injection mandates EVEN if injections have passed through an experimental phase (which in your case they had not). Any laws which disagree with this statement must be sought to be overturned INCLUDING laws mandating vaccination of any substance as a condition for attending public school.
The precedent you cited needs to be overturned at the Supreme Court Level. Citizens need to stand up broadly for bodily autonomy, not for bodily autonomy with conditions, which is unfortunately all your lawsuit would have achieved and which, in my opinion, misses the point that we are free by our nature, not by our immunity status and which, had it been successful, could have set a terrible precedent for Californians where we must submit to invasive testing and prodding and proving that our health status in someone's idea of proper order to lawfully prevent ourselves from becoming an unwilling govt experiment or an unwilling recipient of medical treatments WE DO NOT WANT.
Thank you for fighting the good fight. It makes me sick that these Pharma creeps can mandate these blood clotting products to university students and faculty. Of course, you are right in your fight. Now Pharma is using its EUA authorization to create a whole new line of experimental, unresearched products to put on the people of California--our children and students. Gavin Newsom, fresh off his win of 59% approval could follow the dictates of Pharma (deep state) and push flu/RSV/Covid shots on our kids and young students. So, keep fighting but eventually you have to wonder who would ever send their kids and pay for a university that cares so little as to push and mandate these risky, untested products.
Disappointing result for sure, but battles are lost in wars. It doesn’t determine the ultimate victor. Courts can be wrong, so take comfort in that. I agree with your hesitation to appeal to the Supreme Court; if, as initially filed, your case isn’t unimpeachable from every angle, then perhaps wait for another opportunity. You may even consider re-filing. Also remember- not all lawyers are created equal. You need one (or some) who sees the constellation that is the case, and who can anticipate what questions the judges are sure to ask. I have always felt the biggest failings of lawyers is to be myopic with their argument and neglect to put themselves in the judges shoes. Don’t underestimate your own perspicacity here either; share all your ideas with them and don’t presume that they have everything covered.
My support for you is unwavering, regardless of what the courts opine. Our hearts and consciences can rest easy knowing what the ethical, moral choice is. I’m praying for the endurance of your spirit, and thanking God that he has blessed us with your talent, logic, and intellect. Keep fighting the good fight!
The 9th circuit, of course. They are considered one of the most liberal of the circuit courts and between 2010 and 2015, 79% of their cases that went to the Supreme court were reversed. It is important that other lawyer and plaintiffs see how they ruled in this case. It's a chess match in a way. So sorry that you lost this case, but not surprising unfortunately.
"court was under no obligation to weigh or adjudicate the scientific evidence submitted"
Pairs nicely w excluding scientific evidence on gov't policy side.. balance the scales of justice w blinders narrower than a race horse... bummer to see this round to UC by default but it does not change how wrong they are by so many legal & moral measures.. history will show how hard they fought to do what got Nuremberg doctors hanged.
Truth always wins.. looking forward to the wicked elf case being better than the Rockettes Christmas Spectacular w stunning feats of timing and coordination to keep their audience riveted for the performance!
Science even in the obvious almost never carries the day. Common sense doesn't either. Disappointing. If gorging people to get a shot that for all intensive purposes was useless, where does government tyranny end? Nowhere.
I don’t get this. The stupidity of allowing government coercion of a medical treatment even if it causes harm and doesn’t work is shocking and could easily lead down a dark and dangerous road - particularly with the climate alarmist pro depopulation lunatics in charge right now. But more than that, only the EUA shots were actually available until summer 2022. There were no FDA approved vials. This court case essentially says the government or private employers can coerce experimental medical procedures so long as they can craft a persuasive, even if completely dishonest, narrative. This is insane. Mengele could only dream if that kind of power. Sad crazy world we live in.
Very disappointing... I still pray and have faith that you will be vindicated. 🙏🏻
Rational Basis review has become a tool for tyranny. It's also the reason biz closures were considered justified. It needs rethinking, like Plessy
Not a huge shock from the 9th Circuit, but still terribly disappointing. It’s clear as day that this is injustice.
This is incredibly disappointing but it's great to hear you're "just warming up." You have a lot of support and I suspect more on the way. Team Reality grows stronger & bigger all the time. We're very lucky to have you fighting for us in all the ways you do.
It is very sad news. Sadly, it's not unexpected. The federal courts, including the Supreme Court in Buck v. Bell (as you note) have repeatedly cited Jacobson to uphold more tyrannical invasions of bodily autonomy than the Cambridge, Maskachusetts, smallpox mandate at issue in Jacobson.
It's also not clear how to overturn Jacobsen legislatively. For if Congress does it, which itself would be a miracle, the Supreme Court will overturn the law by saying that the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to remove states' police powers. At the federal level, probably the only route is through a constitutional amendment.
At the state level, legislatures can tie their own hands (as Florida's has done). But a legislature could always untie its own hands: I think that only contracts or constitutional provisions can bind a state legislature. Thus, we would need state-by-state constitutional amendments to entrench bodily autonomy.
The problem with your case, in my view and as I have said from the beginning, is that it fundamentally misses the point by taking the position of natural immunity as THE viable excuse for refusing an experimental injection. You didn't need any other excuse except this one: "I don't want it."
1) There has been zero precedent set allowing any govt to legally inject their citizenry with an experimental anything without their consent.
2) The free nature of mankind, his very Constitution, is what protects him from govt imposed injection mandates EVEN if injections have passed through an experimental phase (which in your case they had not). Any laws which disagree with this statement must be sought to be overturned INCLUDING laws mandating vaccination of any substance as a condition for attending public school.
The precedent you cited needs to be overturned at the Supreme Court Level. Citizens need to stand up broadly for bodily autonomy, not for bodily autonomy with conditions, which is unfortunately all your lawsuit would have achieved and which, in my opinion, misses the point that we are free by our nature, not by our immunity status and which, had it been successful, could have set a terrible precedent for Californians where we must submit to invasive testing and prodding and proving that our health status in someone's idea of proper order to lawfully prevent ourselves from becoming an unwilling govt experiment or an unwilling recipient of medical treatments WE DO NOT WANT.
The road to authoritarianism is paved by stupid judges.
Thank you for fighting the good fight. It makes me sick that these Pharma creeps can mandate these blood clotting products to university students and faculty. Of course, you are right in your fight. Now Pharma is using its EUA authorization to create a whole new line of experimental, unresearched products to put on the people of California--our children and students. Gavin Newsom, fresh off his win of 59% approval could follow the dictates of Pharma (deep state) and push flu/RSV/Covid shots on our kids and young students. So, keep fighting but eventually you have to wonder who would ever send their kids and pay for a university that cares so little as to push and mandate these risky, untested products.
Your reflections on this and how to proceed are wise and prudent, for which I am grateful. It all has to be carefully weighed and considered.
Disappointing result for sure, but battles are lost in wars. It doesn’t determine the ultimate victor. Courts can be wrong, so take comfort in that. I agree with your hesitation to appeal to the Supreme Court; if, as initially filed, your case isn’t unimpeachable from every angle, then perhaps wait for another opportunity. You may even consider re-filing. Also remember- not all lawyers are created equal. You need one (or some) who sees the constellation that is the case, and who can anticipate what questions the judges are sure to ask. I have always felt the biggest failings of lawyers is to be myopic with their argument and neglect to put themselves in the judges shoes. Don’t underestimate your own perspicacity here either; share all your ideas with them and don’t presume that they have everything covered.
My support for you is unwavering, regardless of what the courts opine. Our hearts and consciences can rest easy knowing what the ethical, moral choice is. I’m praying for the endurance of your spirit, and thanking God that he has blessed us with your talent, logic, and intellect. Keep fighting the good fight!
Thank you for all your efforts!
The 9th circuit, of course. They are considered one of the most liberal of the circuit courts and between 2010 and 2015, 79% of their cases that went to the Supreme court were reversed. It is important that other lawyer and plaintiffs see how they ruled in this case. It's a chess match in a way. So sorry that you lost this case, but not surprising unfortunately.
"court was under no obligation to weigh or adjudicate the scientific evidence submitted"
Pairs nicely w excluding scientific evidence on gov't policy side.. balance the scales of justice w blinders narrower than a race horse... bummer to see this round to UC by default but it does not change how wrong they are by so many legal & moral measures.. history will show how hard they fought to do what got Nuremberg doctors hanged.
Truth always wins.. looking forward to the wicked elf case being better than the Rockettes Christmas Spectacular w stunning feats of timing and coordination to keep their audience riveted for the performance!
I don't understand the Courts. Surely we all have the right to refuse to be forced to have something injected into us?
Science even in the obvious almost never carries the day. Common sense doesn't either. Disappointing. If gorging people to get a shot that for all intensive purposes was useless, where does government tyranny end? Nowhere.