An interesting development has been brought to light. The LAUSD finally and reluctantly rescinds their v a c c i n e mandate, pressured by judges’ repeatedly expressed concerns about rationale since the shots don’t work to prevent infection or transmission.
Watch the judges express their disbelief in LAUSD attorney’s argument 14 minutes into this video.
As reported by Teachers for Choice, Leslie Manookian of Health Freedom Defense Fund was a guest with Michael Kane hosting CHD TVs “Good morning CHD“. She noted that likely LAUSD attorney Connie Michaels advised her clients to rescind the mandate and then argue the case is moot, to avoid losing the case. Same as we are seeing in New York in state and federal cases in support of medical and religious freedom.
None of these cases are moot, as teachers, healthcare workers and NYC workers are still facing discrimination, and a multitude of obstacles from getting their jobs, seniority and employment benefits back, not to mention lost income.
Leslie laid out the importance of the LAUSD case as follows:
The SCOTUS Jacobson v. Massachusetts case 197 U.S. 11 (1905) has been wildly misconstrued to justify authoritarian overreach.
In Jacobson, SCOTUS held that in extreme circumstances, such as a smallpox outbreak with a death rate of 30- 40%, a jurisdiction might mandate a safe and effective v a c c i n e or allow a fine to be paid by those who declined the v a c c i n e.
Jacobson never imposed you could plunge a needle in the arm of anyone who was opposed to being v a c c i nated, or use such a mandate as a condition of employment.
Case law that says you have the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment:
Washington v. Harper
494 U.S. 210 (1990) case on behalf of prisoners who didn’t want to take psychiatric drugs. SCOTUS: “You have a liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment”.
There is a growing body of case law supporting the right to refuse medical treatment that might extend or save your life, that you have a zone of privacy around you in which the state cannot intrude.
More recent case law says you have the right to bodily autonomy and the right to decide what you put in your body, and to decide whether or not to accept life saving or life extending medical treatment. This stuff cannot be forced upon you, nor can the state intrude into your privacy.
“It seems to us that [attorney] Connie Michaels and LAUSD got it backwards. HFDF asserts the right to bodily autonomy for any and all medical treatments. Surely, then, the state must prove that a vaccine works if it seeks to justify mandating its use. Otherwise, where is the limit on state power?”
Leslie Manookian
President, Health Freedom Defense Fund
(Jacobson at the time was ordered to pay a $5 fine for his refusal to vaccinate his son. With an inflation rate of 31.09 in 2023, that amounts to $155.45).
elxroflife 