A group of Indiana University students asked the lower courts for help as the university was requiring COVID vaccinations as a condition of returning to school. The federal district court in Indiana and 7th Circuit court refused to block the vaccination mandate while the students sued the school. That lead to the students requesting emergency relief from the United States Supreme Court.
This track became the first test of COVID-19 vaccination requirements to reach the Supreme Court. Justice Amy Coney Barrett handles the region; however, she has rejected the student’s request and will not pass it along to the full court. [CASE Details Here]
Obviously Justice Barrett is not as conservative as many supporters believed she was.
Drain the swamp – The best is yet to come. Still a believer? Its bad, REALLY bad, I’m in Australia, Victoria, currently on our 6th lockdown. 23 hours a day home confinement. 1 hour shopping or exercise, not both, no further that 5kms (3 miles) from home allowed. Millions of people confined to flats and apartments, no visitors, everyone outside masked and asked to stay meters apart. Police helicopters constantly crisscrossing the sky, day and night. Nothing to do but go online or watch TV being fed a 24/7 diet of fear and vaccine pushing.
I am still a believer!
I still believe America will not fail this challenge before the world. I still believe there are more good people in this world than bad. But most importantly I believe God will intervene no matter how hopeless it looks all around. 6th lockdown or the 10th I don’t care. Through God I am blessed with a sound mind and I do not have a spirit of fear, no matter how much they propagandize.
These judges have sworn an oath before man and God almighty, and they will give an account. As will they all.
As I was writing this the Prime Minister just gave an announcement on TV that Australia “will be going full speed with Operation Covid Shield” as a police helicopter does the 10th flyby my home today ….
LOL talk about being tested what you say. So. Operation Covid Shield huh. You can read all about it here: https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/operation-covid-shield
Basically in a nutshell its about having every Australian vaccinated asap. So here we go. Many many people were extremely worried about Operation Covid Shield and wondered if the Prime Minister would ever actually implement it. He has now, officially.
I still believe in miracles 🙂
So many people are ruled by fear. They claim to believe in God yet they turn and run at every stumbling block. I agree with you. I am still a believer. The wicked WILL fail.
I did not realize things had come to that in Australia; I am so sorry. We all need to pray for our planet.
In that case you must be happy with your vote for chyna’s dementia patient.
You voted for someone you don’t “believe in” and NOW you criticize them? Says a lot about YOUR judgement does it not?
Catholic, lived and worked in Dc, supported by swamp…this is no supise
Now that we know they are spying on conservatives makes you wonder what they have on them. The Rep need to start doing the same to the Dems. Either that or they were threatened to end up like Scalia.
As I keep saying., Republican does not equal conservative. The party isn’t confused, their supporters are.
I left the party after the Patriot Act… So much has improved since then.
Sometimes I find these headlines misleading. Barret did not “approve forced vaccinations” on students, she merely declined to send the case to SCOTUS for injunctive relief. There is a big difference. SCOTUS has a limited number of things to hear and generally handle cases that have made their way through the system and have opposing rulings. SCOTUS is there to break ties many times. When the case is litigated and winds its way through the system, then SCOTUS can/will and should hear the case as to whether these vaccination mandates are legal.
To expand on this: There is no ‘force’ here. No one is being held down and vaccinated without consent. Students have a choice.
The issue of whether the school will prevail is the underlying question and while I disagree with these mandates, history proves they most likely will. All 50 states require vaccinations in both public and private schools. and things like measles and mumps have a lower death rate than covid but are still required and legal.
Yeah, keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. Those of us with our eyes wide open can see for ourselves what’s going on here.
Amazing, isn’t it, that leftists rely on feelings sometimes, and the “law” other times. The only consistency in their logic is that the path chosen invariably leads to the desired Marxist outcome.
That might be a better statement were I actually a leftist.
Then wake up to what is before you. You seem to favor America’s slide into Marxist hell as long as you can explain it.
I’m not telling myself anything to make myself “feel better.” I merely pointed out correctly that the headline is not only incorrect, the reasoning for Barrett is sound. Like her or not.
Many states had exemptions to the vaccine mandates. But your point is well taken and I have been warning against this for a long time, mostly to deaf ears but honestly I saw something like this coming a long time ago, obviously not the whole COVID scenario but a scenario where so many people were so brainwashed on vaccines and Big Pharma being so powerful and the corrupt Big Pharma $$$ influencing politicians to require more and more vaccines all the time. Just look at the vaccine schedule since its inception. It has grown exponentially since its inception. The unholy alliance of big Pharma and politicians was never a good idea. Apparently, most people don’t even think we have an immune system that can fight off anything anymore. The alarm bells went off for me when they started jabbing every new born baby with the Hep B vaccine, a virus transmitted through illicit drugs and multiple sexual partners (i.e. prostitution).
There us a biological difference between vaccines for diseases with “Animal Reservoir Ability” vs Diseases that DO NOT have the at ability. See Dr. Don Strock’s video on CTH from 2 days ago. There is a reason to draw a line of distinction between when a mandate is justified or NOT.
Diseases like measles, mumps, small pox DO NOT have “Animal Reservoir Ability” thus the vaccines actually are a preventive and stops the disease. That is why there have been no issues mandating these types of vaccines.
Diseases like China Virus, Colds, Flu, etc. are NOT stopped by a vaccine and are not preventative. These types of disease will always be with us. That is why until this point in time FLU SHOTS have not been mandated. There were a few folks left at CDC and NIH with some integrity who knew the futility of such a mandate.
There is medically and technically FORCE involved if science is allowed to be argued. Becuase the science is being abused to apply force.
You are correct.
Well said!
The “choice” you speak of is quickly turning into the “choice” to participate freely in society (including being able to buy food) if “jabbed” or be publicly shunned.
This “jab” (EUA) is not scheduled to be out of clinical trials until until 2023, which will now be impossible since the trial groups have been DESTROYED (with the approval of the FDA) by the manufactures. What are they hiding?
The vaccines you mention (MMR) is completely different technology, has DECADES of data, and have had great consequences (autism spectrum diseases) for mostly the young male population.
If you went to the pharmacy to pick up a prescription and the package insert said “INTENTIONALLY BLANK”, would you take that drug? That is EXACTLY what the Moderna insert says. BY LAW, all food and drugs sold in the US have to tell you what the ingredients are, why do these “jab” manufactures get a pass on legal requirements?
NOT true!
What exactly are the ingredients in ANY of the drugs you take? Where can you find them? They are proprietary and not made public. There is NO law requiring otherwise.
No, all 50 states do not require vaccinations in public and private schools. You’re uninformed. And yes, the headline is misleading about Barrett, but the point is that a violation of constitutional rights should take priority and not have to wait to go through a series of court cases to get to SCOTUS. NOTHING is more important than our constitutional rights and any violation or threat to them should be addressed immediately. This is far different than just another case.
Regarding Barrett herself, many of us saw that she wasn’t what she was thought to be and were concerned about her being appointed. Sadly, too many fell for it and supported her. In fact, it turns out that numerous judges, not just on SCOTUS, that Trump appointed are turning out to be poor choices. That’s probably because the only ones Trump could get through Senate approval had to meet Mitch McConnell’s requirements and you can be that included being a satisfactory RINO.
Attorney Robert Barnes was one of the few warning about Barrett. He actually looked at many of her prior court rulings and found them to be decidedly anti-constitutional. Barnes also noted that the Federalist Society holds a near monopoly on choosing/recommending all “constitutional judges” and he also warned that this was not a good practice, in retrospect I would have to agree.
Dear Jack Crabb,
Yes, your post is correct in the legalistic sense. However, here is a question I pose to you: What are your remaining choices when there are no longer any schools, jobs, restaurants or food stores that you can go to when they will all hide under the “cover umbrella” just provided by Justice Barrett? Where will you draw the line?
Here is what Justice Barrett and you apparently overlook in your legalisms– it is against federal and international law to force or coerce anyone into taking an experimental drug, treatment or vaccine. The following are the chapters and verse on that subject matter:
First, federal law prohibits any mandate of the Covid-19 vaccines as unlicensed, emergency-use-authorization-only vaccines. Subsection bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) of section 360 of Title 21 of the United States Code, otherwise known as the Emergency Use Authorization section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, demands that everyone give employees the “option to accept or refuse administration” of the Covid-19 vaccine. ( …
u/uscode/text/21/360bbb-3″ target=”_blank” class=”link” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/360bbb-3 ) This right to refuse emergency, experimental vaccines, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. ( https://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/ ). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must “be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision” for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is. The Nuremberg Code prohibited even the military from requiring such experimental vaccines. (Doe #1 v. Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (D.D.C. 2003).
There’s a big difference between covid19 vaccines and measles and mumps. Covid vaccines are as of this moment NOT FDA approved. They have emergency use authorization only! They are not safe nor are they effective. BOOM!
Lower than statistical zero, which is what CoVid is?
One school somewhere in Texas closed down because most of the kids got measles. 100 percent vaccinated against measles.
Oklahoma has no mandates for school vaxs.
Thank you for this comment; I overreacted as I typically do and had to have a talk with myself. I agree with your position and the status of the Constitution and of the liberty of students at Indiana University is not in jeopardy.
You’re kidding, right? Just because vaccinations have been mandated in the past does not automatically make those mandates constitutional under today’s circumstances. In this case, Indiana University is restricting the rights of presumably healthy students merely on the basis of whether they have received a highly controversial, experimental shot. Nonsense! Coney Barrett had better include this sin in her weekly confessional.
Maybe I’m wrong, but my take is the university is requiring the shot for admission. Is that the same as restricting rights, since admission is voluntary?
I am no believer in this foolish vaccine and I distrust any information coming from any agency but I don’t see restriction of rights here.
Thanks
This is exactly why I view libertardians as worse than liberals.
They feign a love for liberty and freedom but are fine with it being denied to anyone as long as it isn’t the “gubment” doing it.
It won’t matter. The Bible teaches that no human, priest or otherwise, has the power to forgive sin. Barrett’s real issue is with God and she’ll face that one day.
Thank you for setting this ridiculous headline corrected!!!!!
When people’s health and safety is on the line there is no time to let cases wind there way through courts. And please stop calling this a vaccine. Its not. What ACB was tasked to answer is, can this treatment, this medical procedure be “required” as a condition to attend public school or work.
I think it’s well past time for answers and clarification.
There’s a system to get an exception for medical, religious, or ethical reasons. The university notes “Approved exemptions will be extremely limited”. There’s also an exception for online programs, but it’s program-based. If you’re in a traditional program, but taking 100% online classes, you still must be vaccinated.
They’re also going to
harassnudge you into compliance. If you’re not vaccinated, you must be tested regularly.Jack, declining is just as bad as bad and just the same as approval. There is word for that.
Correct. At that point, what difference will it make? It’ll likely be 2023 before this case makes it to the head of the SCOTUS docket. By then, tens of thousands of students will have been jabbed against their will. Kinda like Mike Lindell’s election fraud investigation. No do-over there, either
Jack,
Lawyer here. Imagine if IU had instead imposed a rule that excludes black Americans from the school. And the initial motions for an injunction were rejected by the Appellate Circuit, as here. Do you think ACB or the court takes up that case on an emergency basis?
The question answers itself. These are political decisions and frankly the vax mandate is more imminently harmful and deals with more fundamental rights that just race exclusion.
I know Amy. She was my professor twice. I expected this kind of “law nerd, I want to be viewed as independent and respected by regime people”, even though the only way to do that is act like the regime and serve it. She is capable of heroic behavior and I pray for that. But that wasn’t quite her personality back in the day. She was more the law is a puzzle, how exciting, whiz kid turned technocrat professor. Let’s pray for better.
Please explain the rationale for ACB’s decision a bit more. I realize I’m probably over-simplifying this, but was her justification that religious and other exemptions are available? Therefore, emergency injunctive relief is not necessary at this point?
Good example of why whenever GOPe opening or position in need of appointment while GOP control such as speaker of the house, Supreme Court, AG…. I never trust the first name that comes up since they were already picked by the uni-party.
Trey Gowdy, Barr, ACB, Kavanaugh, Wray, Paul Ryan, McCarthy, Elise Stephanick (however you spell her last name)…..
Get the point? Shall I continue?
No one with a staunch Christian faith would rule to force vaccination while the WHO and experts are regularly contradicting themselves.
so it’s not about pro choice anymore.
WATCH THIS:
https://usawatchdog.com/biden-desperate-as-vax-narrative-falls-apart-clif-high/
The Appeal Case was not blocked. The plaintiffs in the case vs The University of Indiana had filed for temporary injunction, to stop implementation of the mandate until the case was heard before the Supreme Court.
The devastating part of this ruling is that; school will start, 1,000’s of dollars sent to the university to enroll, shots required to attend the first days of class (and practice for athletes) and classes as well as practices missed. Miss enough class work and one risks an incomplete or worse grade, while athletes missing practices “violate” rules that get them kicked off the program. Withdraw and one looses part or all of their tuition money depending small print in enrollment rules.
So, in all likelihood these scum bags are hoping the kids do not enroll or withdraw, which would allow cover for the scum bag Supreme Court to declare the case moot because the plaintiffs have no STANDING. It is a dirty tactic attempting to kill the case before it reaches the courts. If the plaintiffs do get shots to start school, then the scum bags on the court could still declare no standing because plaintiffs complied (a massive catch 22).
This situation also more than meets the standard of material or financial damage cited by Federal Courts when considering cases. That is unless they say…no damage yet….so no standing…school has to start first.
CATCH 22.
The way I see it, as there are reports coming in that these spike proteins are being injected into people, they are damaging all kinds of cells in the body including and especially reproductive organ cells. The earliest reports I heart were specifically about placenta cells and more recently, I have heard both male and female reproductive organ cells.
So… no more need for abortions when pregnancies will happen far less often among those injected with spike proteins.
Also, there is no “forced schooling” and therefore the vaccines are not forced.
I think the best course of action is to file a civil rights complaint specifically directed at all those who have made this decision. Almost all of these schools have ties to local state and federal government funding.
People are fond of making the argument about “we already require certain vaccines!” And I don’t presently know, but have these been challenged in court in a general sense? I suspect they may have been but I don’t know this to be true. And I’m fairly certain people have won on the basis of religious (which is feelings, beliefs and opinions!) faith.
I don’t personally trust any of this and I should not be required to do something I don’t trust. And if I am fired for it? That’s wrongful termination.
Well Daniel, the precedent of 7 current settled cases says you CAN be terminated, 3 Federal Cases and 4 State Court Cases. There is an 8th State Level case that says, governors cannot prohibit mandates from being put in place.
Our legal system that used to protect your belief is being used in an attempt to beat us into submission and legitimize the draconian actions being taken.
The current precedent used to Justify Barrett’s decision has been recently proven flawed, medically and scientifically. There is a real line that can be drawn between when mandates can be justified or NOT. As with all legal precedents, they can and should be updated and/or discarded as knowledge improves vs the underlying rationale of the precedent.
She is a ruthless careerist. She is neither liberal nor conservative. She does what she thinks is best for her and the institutions that support her career and give her life some resemblance of meaning.
I have people in my family who are just like her. Petty tyrants who are obsessed with their public image and perception. These poor characters always think they’re smart when they abuse the game and get a payout. Well, jokes on them – soul is worth more.
Move to Texas.
There’s a Who Can be Worse Than John Robert contest at the SCOTUS right now, and Amy Coney Barrett just took the lead…
Barrett and Kavanaugh join Roberts as “Government Men”. This is exactly the same problem Wisconsin now has with its “conservative” Supreme Court judge Hagedorn. All of them can be counted on to find WITH the Government in all cases which matter, and some which don’t.
Don’t be surprised. McConnell pushed all of them (except Hagedorn) into Trump’s face, after all.
Not co-incidence: Hagedorn served as Gov. Scott Walker’s in-house counsel.
See the pattern?
In her nomination hearing, red flags went up when she said that she huddled with her 2 black adopted children and cried over the George Floyd video. She didn’t huddle with her white children. She didn’t tell her black children that if you behave in a civilized manner, no one has to worry. She didn’t tell them that if they behaved like George she’d kick their asses. She cried.
They cannot force you to attend there.
Cop out. Just like SCOTUS refusing to take on the election integrity issues despite an avalanche of evidence. The 4th branch of our government, “IC” Intelligence Community has taken over. Obama was the useful idiot to allow this all to happen. Biden represents Obama’s 3rd term in office. The elections did not or may not even have been so-called hacked by the CCP. Our Intelligence community (with no oversite since Obama came to office) can pretty much do whatever they want with no accountability. The President (except perhaps Obama) doesn’t even know what goes on in his daily briefings. We as citizens can’t unelect people that aren’t elected. The problem is systemic on both sides of the political divide.
Amy Coney-Barrett has finally shown herself for who and what she really is! When it comes down to a case of true life or death involving a drug that is NOT approved for a pandemic that does not exist except for those selling the narrative – then it should be heard – not dismissed.
The science does NOT back up the claims – the flu has been disregarded as even existing and even the CDC has had to post the issues and deaths from these vaccines on their Vaccine Adverse Reaction Event Site (VAERS).
If you advocate for a dangerous drug then you should be held accountable and liable for doing so – and the court must make that decision.
To turn a blind eye is no different than what went on in Auschwitz or any other Nazi camp – and we all know how that turned out for those just claiming to be “just following orders” – she is a coward and a disgrace not to stand up for the truth and the Constitution
Gut feeling from the beginning was we do not need a young woman on the court. Ends up she’s probably no worse than the other two. Our universities are turning out traitors at a record pace.
She adopted two children from the Clinton’s favorite child harvesting island Haiti. That’s very strange behavior. Also, Jovenel Moïse was just murdered for refusing lipid wrapped Spike Protein MRNA Shots for Haiti.
Does anyone know who recommended Barrett to Trump?
Amy Comey Barrett-Lord Jesus says “You shall know a tree by it’s fruit. A good tree bears good fruit, but a rotten tree bears bad fruit. ” She’s a rotten tree. Sad that she leaves such a stinking legacy behind her. She has no good works to be remembered by, it will be a legacy of destruction, a name forgotten, not worth remembering.