September 9, 2021, in a expansive manager tell, 1 chairman Joe Biden mandated all U.S. business with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly measuring, or face federal fines of up to $ 14,000 per breach. Biden also ordered businesses to give time off to employees to receive the injections.

Biden is also require all federal employees and federal contractors to get the shots. For unspecified concludes, postal workers and members of Congress and their staff are exempt from the inoculation mandate. Biden did not make any exceptions for persons who have already had COVID and recovered, and therefore have antibodies to the virus.

Joe Biden told Americans when he was elected that he has not been able to impose inoculation mandates. He lied.~ Ronna McDaniel, GOP Chairwoman

He also said he’d use his “power as president” against any governor unwilling to follow the tell “to get them out of the way.”2 Biden may be biting off more than he can munch, nonetheless, because as of September 11, 2021, 28 commonwealths were already pushing back against federal inoculation authorizations. 3

Countless Nation Vow to Fight Back Unconstitutional Mandate

The backlash was swift. The Republican National Committee quickly announced they would sue the Biden administration for issuing an “unconstitutional mandate.” GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel problem a statement: 4

“Joe Biden told Americans when he was elected that he has not been able to prescribed vaccine mandatories. He lied. Now small businesses, works, and genealogies in different regions of the country will pay the price.

Like many Americans, I am pro-vaccine and anti-mandate. Many small businesses and workers do not have the money or law resources to fight Biden’s unconstitutional activities and authoritarian covenants, but when his act goes into effect, the RNC will litigate the administration to protect Americans and their liberties.”

Nebraska Republican Sen. Ben Sasse told the Daily Caller: 5

“President Biden is so desperate to agitate from his shameful, incapable Afghanistan exit that he is saying crazy things and pushing constitutionally shortcoming director orders.

This is a ironic attempt to pick a fight and confuse from the President’s morally deplorable decision to leave Americans behind Taliban arguments on the 20 th anniversary of 9/11. This isn’t how you beat COVID, but it is how you run a distraction expedition — it’s gross and the American beings shouldn’t fall for it.”

In a series of tweets, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem stated: 6,7

“South Dakota will stand up to defend free @JoeBiden see you in courtroom, ” and “My legal squad is standing by ready to file our lawsuit the hour Joe Biden documents his unconstitutional rule. This gross pattern of federal intrusion will not stand.”

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp also issued a statement saying he intends to “pursue every law alternative available” to halt Biden’s “blatantly prohibited overreach, ” as did Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, who in a tweet territory :8

“This is exactly the various kinds of big government overreach we have tried so hard to prevent in Arizona — now the Biden-Harris administration is hammering down on private businesses and individual freedoms in an unprecedented and dangerous way. This will never stand up in court.

This despotic coming is wrong, un-American and will do far more harm than good. How numerous proletarians will be dismissed? How many boys remained out of classrooms? How many businesses penalty? The vaccine is and should be a choice. We must and will push back.”

Florida Governments Face Fines if Following Biden’s Order

In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis countered Biden’s edict with one of his own. Any local government that originates COVID vaccination a requirement for employment will be fined $ 5,000 per misdemeanour. 9 During a September 13, 2021, press conference, DeSantis said 😛 TAGEND

“We are gonna stand for the men and women who are serving us. We are going to protect Florida hassles. We are not gonna to let people be fired because of a inoculation mandate.

You don’t just cast aside people who have been serve faithfully over this question, over what’s basically a personal choice on their individual state. We cannot let these folks be cast aside. We cannot grant their jobs to be destroyed.”

I was going to include DeSantis’ speech in this article, but it has since been deleted for “violating YouTube’s community guidelines.” Imagine that, that they would actually remove a legally elected governor’s opinion on this topic because it contravenes their autocratic tyranny.

Biden Is Clearly Out of Legal Bounds

Biden’s executive order is unlikely to stand up in courtroom, investigating how federal constitution proscribes the mandating of emergency use concoctions, which by definition are experimental. As are outlined in a May 2021 report by The Defender: 10

“The bottom line is this: mandating commodities authorized for Emergency Use Authorization status( EUA) flouts federal rule as detailed in the following legal notifications. 11

All COVID inoculations, COVID PCR and antigen tests, and disguises are purely EU-Aauthorized , not approved or licensed, by the federal government. Long-term safety and efficacy have not been proven.

EUA products are by definition experimental, who are in need of beings be given the right to refuse them. Under the Nuremberg Code, the foundation of ethical medicine , no person may be obligated involved in a medical venture. Consent of the individual is’ absolutely essential.’

Earlier this year, Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense president and general counsel, and lawyer Greg Glaser stated that federal regulation vetoes employers from mandating EUA COVID inoculations( or EUA COVID-1 9 experiments or masks ). Holland and Glaser wrote: 12

‘If a inoculation has been issued EUA by the FDA, it is not fully licensed and must be voluntary. A private defendant, such as an employer, school or hospital cannot bypas the EUA law, which prohibits mandates. Indeed, the EUA law preventing mandates is so explicit that there is only one precedent case seeing an attempt to mandate an EUA vaccine.’”

If you’re like most, you’re probably believing, “Well, Biden’s executive order came after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration demonstrated full approval to the Pfizer/ BioNTech COVID shot Comirnaty, so the vaccine is not under EUA.” You’d be partially right. But chiefly wrong.

The Difference Between Pfizer’s BNT1 62 b2 Shot and Comirnaty

The FDA did indeed give full approving to Comirnaty, but that make is not predicted to be available for over a year. The only Pfizer shot currently available, called BNT1 62 b2, remains under EUA. We have the FDA to thank for this unusual and befuddling place, but the key take-home is that while approval has been granted to Comirnaty, that produce is not obtainable.

The FDA demands BNT1 62 b2 to be viewed as interchangeable with Comirnaty, but from a law standpoint they clearly are not identical. BNT1 62 b2, being under EUA, is indemnified against fiscal liability, whereas Comirnaty, formerly it becomes available, will not have that liability shield( unless Pfizer/ BioNTech manage to get drawback shielding for that make before its liberation ).

In other texts, if you’re disabled by the BNT1 62 b2, your simply recourse is to apply for compensation from the Countermeasure Injury Compensation Act( CICP ). 13 Compensation from CICP is very limited and hard to get. In its 15 -year history, it has paid out time 29 contends, fewer than 1 in 10. 14,15, 16

You simply qualify if your trauma necessitates hospitalization and arises in substantial disability and/ or fatality, and even if you meet the eligibility criteria, it requires you to use up your private health insurance before it knocks in to pay the difference.

There’s no refund for sorenes and woe, exclusively lost compensations and unpaid medical legislations. This wants a retired person cannot qualify even if they die or be brought to an end in a wheelchair. Salary compensation is of limited duration, and covered at $50,000 a year, and the CICP’s decision cannot be appealed.

If regular occasions apply to Comirnaty, were you to be injured by that injection, you’d be able to sue for injures under the national Vaccine Injury Compensation Plan( VICP ), 17 so from a legal attitude, there’s a preferably significant difference between these two products.

Legal Notifications You Can Use

If your employer or school requires you to get a COVID shot, consider using the legal notifications provided by the Children’s Health Defense law crew. The notices inform employers and educational institutions that they are violating federal law.

Three separate notices are available for download from the Children’s Health Defense Legal Resource page; 18 one for mask commissions, one for PCR testing and a third for vaccines. There, you can also find information on how to request a religious exemption for COVID-1 9 vaccine edicts in the workplace.

Vaccine Mandate Heralds Communist Style Social Credit System

In a September 13, 2021, episode of Fox News’ Fox& Friends, co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy warned that vaccine mandates are “the beginning of the communist-style social recognition plan, ” adding: 19

“Dr. Anthony Fauci is now saying that if you don’t have the vaccine, you shouldn’t be able to have air travel. I want, this happens in China. In China … if you don’t agree with the government, you can’t get on a set. They block you. They have a way to do that, and this is the beginning of that organization where if you’re a dissident, if you don’t agree with the party in superpower, you will be punished.”

Are we hastening toward a social ascribe system where behavior is either rewarded or punished based on the fancies of those who are responsible of the system? Biden’s refusal to make exceptions for those with natural immunity, who by no stretch of the imagination actually need or are to enjoy a COVID shot, seems to indicate we’re unquestionably leader that way.

Giving parties with natural exemption a state passport won’t work for the technocratic nobility because the naturally immune aren’t on a vaccine due. The entire level of having a vaccine passport is that you lose your freedom every time a brand-new booster buns out. You either get the booster or lose your freedom.

People with natural immunity can’t be roped into this control scheme. What are they going to force the naturally immune to do in order to keep a legitimate passport? They can’t make money off natural exemption, and they can’t use it to control.

In a September 13, 2021, letter to Biden, Consumer Brands Association CEO Geoff Freeman registered 19 of 50 questions received from its member business. 20 Among those questions is whether Biden’s executive order includes religious or medical exceptions, including exemption due to natural immunity.

As reported by Newsweek, 21 details of Biden’s plan will be ironed out by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration( OSHA ), but in the meantime, Freeman announced on the Biden administration to address some of the most pressing questions.

OSHA Lets Employers Off the Hook for Vaccine Trauma

Speaking of OSHA, in May 2021, the agency humbly revoked2 2 the requirement2 3 for supervisors who mandate the vaccine to record side effects as a work-related event. By doing so, OSHA alleviated itself and boss from having to pay out workers’ comp if an employee is injured by a mandated COVID shot. OSHA tried to justify its decision, territory 😛 TAGEND

“OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of depressing works from receiving COVID-1 9 vaccination, and too does not wish to disincentivize employers’ vaccination efforts.

As a answer, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904 ’s register requirements to require any employers to record laborer side effects from COVID-1 9 vaccination through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s primacy at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.”

People With Natural Immunity Turn to the Law

In the days ahead, our justice system is bound to clog up with disputes against boss, schools and governments alike. Law professor Todd Zywicki recently sued2 4 George Mason University in Virginia over their vaccine mandate, as he has natural immunity. Zywicki discussed his litigation in an August 6, 2021, Wall Street Journal commentary. 25

His lawsuit pointed out that beings with natural immunity have an increased risk of adverse reactions to the COVID shot — distributed according to one study2 6 up to 4.4 ages the health risks of clinically significant side effects — and that the requirement contravenes due process liberties, the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, and is noncompliant with the Emergency Use Authorization. 27

August 17, 2021, George Mason University caved before the client went to trial and awarded Zywicki a medical exemption. 28 Unfortunately, the school did not revise its general policy.

A number of other lawsuits have also been entered, including one by more than a dozen students and Children’s Health Defense against Rutgers University in New Jersey, 29 and one by six Oregon workers who are suing the mood on dirts that they already have natural immunity. 30 The plaintiffs include two corrections officers, an EMT, a medical part director, local schools bus driver and a special agent in charge of an Oregon Department of Justice investigatory unit.

Jason Dudash, head of the Oregon chapter of the Freedom Foundation, which is representing the state employees, alleged Oregon Gov. Kate Brown of becoming “power-hungry amid the pandemic.” “The courtrooms needs to determine a most logical, science-based approach, ” he said. 31

Military Service Members Sue Over Vaccine Mandate

Military service members with natural exemption are also suing the Department of Defense, the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Business. As reported by The Defender: 32

“The lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Staff Sergeant Daniel Robert and Staff Sergeant Holli Mulvihill, allege U.S. Sec. of Defense Lloyd Austin dismissed the DOD’s own regulations and composed an entirely new definition of’ full immunity’ as being achievable exclusively by vaccination.

According to the lawsuit, the military’s existing laws and regulations unequivocally render the exemption the plaintiffs strive under Army Regulation 40 -5 62 (‘ AR 40 -5 62 ’ ), which provides documented survivors of an infection a presumptive medical exception from vaccination because of the natural immunity acquired as a result of having survived the infection …

Dr. Admiral Brett Giroir, HHS assistant secretary, stated in an interrogation Aug. 24 with Fox News:’ So natural immunity, it’s very important … There were no data to suggest vaccine immunity is better than natural immunity. I belief both are highly protective.’

Yet on the same day, Austin published a memoranda mandating the part Armed Forces be vaccinated, in which he wrote:’ Those with previous COVID-1 9 infection shall not be regarded as amply vaccinated.’

In that memo, plaintiffs allege Austin created a brand-new period and thought, which rebuts the plain language of DOD’s own regulations, long-standing immunology practice, medical ethics codes and the overwhelming value of technical evidence regarding this specific virus.

Plaintiffs claim Austin, who is not a doctor, varied the DOD’s own regulation without specifying’ a scintilla of indication to subsistence it.’ They too allege Austin offset the regulation change without going through the required rulemaking process, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act review.”

The lawsuit also points out that Pfizer’s Phase 3 contests, which is the phase in which long-term side effects are identified, won’t be completed until 2023. Moreover, the lawsuit highlights the fact that Pfizer unblinded the two cohorts in the midst of the experiment and eliminated the self-control group by offering the real “vaccine” to all controls.

In so doing, Pfizer turned the study from a placebo-controlled blinded experiment into an open observational study, and the FDA allowed it. Observational studies carry nowhere near the same weight as placebo-controlled experiments, as you don’t have anything to compare the treatment group against. It’s very easy to ignore even severe hurts when you have no control group.

Fauci Warns There Will Be’ Many More Vaccine Mandates’

As we approach the two-year distinguish of this pandemic, it’s time for our judicial system to kick down and protect the public. The emergency capabilities granted to governors are not supposed to last forever, and the rights yielded us by the U.S. Constitution were never intended to be suspended and tossed aside in times of medical dilemmas. It’s time this rampant lawlessness got reined in.

Whether or not that will happen remains to be seen. What we can be sure of is that if our legal method fails to do its duty, the lighthouse of liberty in this world will be lost. As reported by CNN, 33 Fauci is out there warning that “if more parties aren’t persuaded to get vaccinated by messaging from state public officials and’ relied political messengers, ’ added mandates from schools and occupations may be necessary.”

The technocratic upper-clas will take it all the way because they are fighting for the Great Reset. And the Great Reset won’t work if parties are free. They need leveraging over the population, which is precisely what vaccine passports are all about.

Jacobson v. Massachusetts: A Ruling With Tragic Consequences

In closing, those who support the mandating of experimental COVID shots will typically point to the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts case, which is often interpreted as impart government the right to force vaccinate everyone for the interests of all. However, as noted by Alex Berenson in a recent blog post, 34 we ought to really look at the time at which that decision was given.

In the years bordering the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts verdict, the U.S. Supreme court also governed in favor of racial discrimination, corporate monopoly, child labor and becoming questioning authority a jailable pique. That same time, in 1905, they governed proletarians have no rights. In 1923, they ruled minimum wages laws are illegal and in 1927 they OK’d forced sterilization based on the Jacobson ruling.

Most of these rulings have all along been been moved, and for obvious rationales. Most people don’t agree with racial discrimination, monopolies and child labor anymore. Most agree that minimum wage regulations are a good thing, and that questioning government is an unassailable freedom that is necessary for democracy to work. The 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts case is no different. It was done in and for a different season, when individual and human rights were routinely quashed.

As noted by National Vaccine Information Center president Barbara Loe Fisher in “How Fear of a Virus Changed Our World”: 35

“Using bad logic and bad science while resting heavily on the pseudo-ethic of utilitarianism, state governments were given the green light to legally necessary vaccination based on a’ common belief’ that vaccination is safe and effective, rather than proven information.

Piously waving the greater good pennant to justify throwing civil liberties out the door, the court majority ruled that citizens do not have a legal right to be free at all times because there are’ manifold imprisonments to which every person is necessarily subjected for the common good’ …

But the justices likewise warned that mandatory vaccination regulations should not be forced on a person whose physical problem would procreate vaccination’ remorseles and inhuman to the last degree.’ They said 😛 TAGEND

‘We are not to be understood as holding that the statute was intended to be applied in such a case or, if it was so intended, that the judiciary would not be competent to interfere and safeguard the health and life of the individual concerned.’ All principles, ’ this Court has said,’ should receive a sensible construction’ …

During this time of horror and jumble, the Jacobson ruling likewise reminds us that it is democratically elected representatives in mood parliaments who make public health laws governing people living in different states. That is because what is not defined in the U.S. Constitution as a federal pleasure is reserved for the states, which is an important check on federal government power.

Elected lawmakers in your regime can choose to mandate a few or numerous inoculations with or without exceptions, while the federal government has the authority to commission vaccinations for parties participating the U.S. or sweeping nation borders.”

Read more: