Judge REJECTS Natural Immunity Is an Exception from Vaccine Mandate

16

A federal judge on Oct. 8 denied a request to block Michigan State University’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on the basis of natural immunity, reports The Epoch Times.

George W. Bush appointee, U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney, rejected a teacher’s lawsuit claiming her previous COV infection protected her and she didn’t need the shot. The mandate, Maloney said, didn’t violate her fundamental rights and pointed to a 1905 Supreme Court ruling.

“This Court must apply the law from the Supreme Court: Jacobson essentially applied rational basis review and found that the vaccine mandate was rational in ‘protect[ing] the public health and public safety,’” Maloney said in his order. “The Court cannot ignore this binding precedent.”

“In 1905, the Supreme Court ruled that Massachusetts could fine people who would not take a smallpox vaccine,” the Boston Globe recently reported. “That case established a precedent for a 1922 case, Zucht v. King, that allowed San Antonio to mandate vaccines for all public and private school students. More recently, the Supreme Court cited the Jacobson case in its decisions about whether to permit governors in California and New York to place occupancy limits on religious services during a pandemic.”

“The Jacobson ruling gives the state nearly unchecked power to decide how to handle a public health emergency,” the report continued. “But that decision, old enough to have been written by a Civil War veteran, is jarring today because of the rights revolution in 20th-century American law. In cases decided after Jacobson, the Supreme Court has maintained that the Constitution — particularly the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment — limits the power of the state to touch the body. These Supreme Court cases concerning bodily integrity apply to every level of government, and they have also shaped public norms about individuals’ right to make crucial decisions about their own bodies.”


PowerInbox

16 COMMENTS

  1. I look forward to an appeal considering the far different tacts of this case. Unlike the Jaconson precedent the plaintiff has established suficient immunity to make the jab of no use and liklihood of being of greater threat than not having a vaccination. In other words,it is NOT rational to force the jab on this specific person and persons in a similar situation.

  2. What a sad little society, relegating power to what? “Lawyers”. It is not a coincidence they wear black robes, just like when the church ruled in the middle ages.
    Get rid of rulers and replace with a TRUE DEMOCRACY
    If everyone could propose and vote using smart phones, on legislation applying only to their county or state, there would be no one for the wealthy to bribe and every state could live as they see fit. Our country is a govt of, by, and for the rich. With smart phone voting, we could have true democracies of localized tyranny of the majorities. Then, progressives and conservatives could make and live in their own versions of their hells and keavens and not have to pretend to stand each other or share anything in common. Ideological opposites can’t and shouldn’t live with each other.Get 8% of voters in 38 states to put constitutional referendum on ballot to replace our govt that represents money to a TRUE DEMOCRACY. Eliminate all elected officials, the judiciary, and corruption.

    • True democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. That is why we have a Republic, not a democracy.

    • Some where in our history the word ‘democracy’ became something that represents liberty, which was a magnificent word that our Founders used and represents that all rights come from God, not man.

      Democracy is one form of governance and is the metaphor regarding sheep and wolves is accurate, i. e. two wolves and a sheep that will take a vote on what’s for dinner.

    • The founders specifically avoided “Democracy” because Democracy doesn’t work. Democracy is 51% voting to hang you for doing nothing wrong or to take all of your possessions – essentially mob rule. That’s why we have a REPUBLIC, which puts the law above the mob. The problem we have here is that judges use whatever precedent they chose from previous rulings to decide their case. Since there are usually rulings in either direction, supposedly based on the facts of their particular case, it is easy to cherry pick which one they want to use to justify what would be obviously wrong to any casual, objective observer. The Constitution should be the starting point for every case, not a ruling from over 100 years ago, which may or may not apply. Harvard Law school is responsible for the use of precedents over the use of the Constitution.

  3. Well, the courts are as globalist, elite commie stupid and useless as our government as a whole has become. We the people have a constitutional right to reform our government into one that does obey our laws.

  4. Is there natural immunity from unelected anointed nomenklatura apparatchiks?
    Muh constitution isn’t working anymore now that the rule of law is deleted.
    The poison pill lawfarers existed before Chicago Jesus Soetoro but hat tips to El Rushbo and Trump for making them come out in the open.
    Everything to do with Satangov is about EVIL and it is just that simple.
    We were warned and that time is now.

  5. Another leftist politician appointed by RINO Bush doesn’t care if people are murdered with zero civil and criminal liability. Americans are going to have to get rid of every leftist (criminal) in and out of office.

  6. This is what happens when we allow bad law to make precedence. We need people in the Courts with a brain who can actually see how bad law can violate fundamental God given rights. The Jacobson case violated basic Individual Rights enshrined in the Constitution in order to further “States” rights. Now we see a move by the Federal Government to strip both the States and the People of Rights.

    The only silver lining I see is that to get rid of bad law or precedence is to enforce it. No Government at any level should have a Right to make any citizen put anything into their body without due process and that due process must be on an individual basis. Natural Immunity does not create a public health issue, and even if it did, Government must balance ALL aspects of the public good when when dealing with issues of health, commerce, and confinement. While illness may affect people’s lives, the Government MUST balance that issue with over all societal issues. What we have seen with Government’s response to Covid is policies that created a cure worse than the illness. The long term effects of Covid will not be as detrimental to society as the Government Mandates. Government at all levels needs to be stripped of Mandate Power. Legislatures must be the only body who creates law, not Executive Branch Politicians, The Courts, and most of all unelected Bureaucrats.

Leave a Reply