Government mandated COVID vaccination and the rule of law . . . strict scrutiny

[johnwk]

One-size-fits-all COVID vaccine jabbers get slapped down again under strict scrutiny


.
There is another victory for those who support and defend the rule of law as opposed to the rule of tyrants. More and more of these vaccine jabber, one-size-fits-all tyrants, are now being required to observe the protections afforded under “strict scrutiny”.

A one-size-fits-all COVID vaccine mandate which is not “narrowly tailored” to achieve the government’s compelling purpose, and does not use the “least restrictive means” to achieve the purpose, fails under strict scrutiny.

See: Judge blocks Western Michigan’s vaccine mandate for athletes (religionnews.com)

“WMU’s vaccination requirement for student athletes is not justified by a compelling interest and is not narrowly tailored,” Maloney wrote.

JWK

“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story

 

[JusticeHammer]

Can you show me where the government mandated a vaccine?

The military? You are either stupid or really ignorant. Probably both. Demscum.

 

[johnwk]

Crepitus said:
Can you show me where the government mandated a vaccine?

The military? You are either stupid or really ignorant. Probably both. Demscum.

Maybe just an adolescent troll?

JWK

The Democrat Party Leadership, once an advocate for hard working American citizens and their families, is now their worst nightmare.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Biden is a commie retard. Any demscum who thinks what he is doing is constitutional is stupid.

 

[johnwk]

Sotomayor rejects New York Teachers' request to be heard on vaccine mandate



I just saw that Sotomayor rejected the New York teachers request to put the vaccine mandate on hold, and did not say why, nor did she refer the matter to the full court for a vote. It appears our Supreme Court is ignoring the people's right to petition their government for a redress of grievances . . . the United States is looking more and more like Cuba, Venezuela, China, and other such governments where the people only have those rights the government assigns as a privilege.

Is it not time for patriotic, freedom loving American Citizens, to take a page from the black lives matter playbook and energetically demonstrate in the streets?

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Ron Johnson is trying to find out the truth about the vax. He's got health care workers telling some pretty hair raising stories. On Mandates

 

[johnwk]

Ron Johnson is trying to find out the truth about the vax. He's got health care workers telling some pretty hair raising stories. On Mandates

In regard to COVID vaccine mandates

.

It has long been settled law that a legislative act which “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution is presumptively unconstitutional.” See: Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980) Also see City of Mobile v. Bolden, 466 U.S. 55, 76, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980)

Also see, “The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty on its exercise is patently unconstitutional.” Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618

And in Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990) we find “The forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty."

And, specifically related to a government vaccine mandate see: COMMONWEALTH vs. ALBERT M. PEAR. SAME vs. HENNING JACOBSON

Henning Jacobson refused the vaccination saying he and his son had had bad reactions to earlier vaccinations. In response the court stated:

“If a person should deem it important that vaccination should not be performed in his case, and the authorities should think otherwise, it is not in their power to vaccinate him by force, and the worst that could happen to him under the statute would be the payment of the penalty of $5.”

And this is why observing and applying the protections of strict scrutiny is essential in the ongoing controversy over government mandates with respect to the COVID outbreak.

We are a government controlled and restrained by the rule of law, and not by mandates imposed by folks in government. And when fundamental rights hang in the balance, as they are when folks in government impose mandates upon the people, as is currently being done, it is the Supreme Courts’ job to step in and judge those mandates within the confines of the protections offered under “strict scrutiny”.

Folks in government are not authorized to impose their personal whims and fancies as the rule of law, but rather, are restricted by the rule of law.

JWK

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

 

[EvilCat Breath]

In regard to COVID vaccine mandates

.

It has long been settled law that a legislative act which “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution is presumptively unconstitutional.” See: Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980) Also see City of Mobile v. Bolden, 466 U.S. 55, 76, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980)

Also see, “The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty on its exercise is patently unconstitutional.” Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618

And in Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990) we find “The forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty."

And, specifically related to a government vaccine mandate see: COMMONWEALTH vs. ALBERT M. PEAR. SAME vs. HENNING JACOBSON

Henning Jacobson refused the vaccination saying he and his son had had bad reactions to earlier vaccinations. In response the court stated:

“If a person should deem it important that vaccination should not be performed in his case, and the authorities should think otherwise, it is not in their power to vaccinate him by force, and the worst that could happen to him under the statute would be the payment of the penalty of $5.”

And this is why observing and applying the protections of strict scrutiny is essential in the ongoing controversy over government mandates with respect to the COVID outbreak.

We are a government controlled and restrained by the rule of law, and not by mandates imposed by folks in government. And when fundamental rights hang in the balance, as they are when folks in government impose mandates upon the people, as is currently being done, it is the Supreme Courts’ job to step in and judge those mandates within the confines of the protections offered under “strict scrutiny”.

Folks in government are not authorized to impose their personal whims and fancies as the rule of law, but rather, are restricted by the rule of law.

JWK

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

Nice. Sounds like a nice little country there.
The constitution is being ignored. Where it is not ignored it is perverted. We are governed by law, unfortunately the law is whatever communists in charge say it is.

 

[johnwk]

Nice. Sounds like a nice little country there.
The constitution is being ignored. Where it is not ignored it is perverted. We are governed by law, unfortunately the law is whatever communists in charge say it is.

.
Who was it that said COVID is God's gift to the left?

.

.
.
Now, keep in mind, in order to successfully subjugate America's system and control the American people, an important step is replacing our police departments, National Guard and military personal with foreigners who are not familiar with our love affair with liberty and individual rights protected by our constitutions, state and federal. Is this not now happening under vaccine mandates?

Do you recall the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989? What is not common knowledge is that a couple of divisions of the People’s Liberation Army were brought in from remote provinces to deal with the protestors because it was thought local divisions would not fire upon the protestors and could actually be supporters of the uprising.

There is a notoriously evil object behind the mass immigration at our southern border, and COVID vaccine mandates used in replacing our police departments, National Guard and military personal with people not dedicated to preserving our system of government, and who would have no problem following a command to disarm the American People which is necessary to establish the kind of government found in Cuba, Venezuela, China, etc. .


Forewarned is forearmed!


JWK


As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of darkness. ___ Supreme Court Justice William Douglas

 

[Iamartiewhitefox]

Jay Inslee, King of WA, mandated masks and we told him that mandates weren't laws and we don't mask. Simple.

We need what I speak of. People need it a lot more than they think. It is not Core or ABC or Gonstead or any technique that twists the head. Find out before anyone touches you. The Activator is not a precision upper cervical spesific only adjusting tool.

 

[Concerned American]

We need what I speak of. People need it a lot more than they think. It is not Core or ABC or Gonstead or any technique that twists the head. Find out before anyone touches you. The Activator is not a precision upper cervical spesific only adjusting tool.

I am a believer in upper cervical chiropractic. I have been treated with it for almost 50 years. That said, I don't believe in NUCCA, I am a Palmer specific follower. Chiropractic keeps the whole body healthy, however, it is NOT a cureall. Are you a chiropractor? Sounds like you're drumming up business for the industry.

 

[johnwk]

We need what I speak of. People need it a lot more than they think. It is not Core or ABC or Gonstead or any technique that twists the head. Find out before anyone touches you. The Activator is not a precision upper cervical spesific only adjusting tool.

What on earth does that have to do with the subject of the thread?


JWK

 

[Aletheia4u]

 

[johnwk]

The irrefutable fact is, Justice Sotomayor has ignored a fundamental right of NYC teachers in the COVID case

What is unforgivable in this COVID mandate crap is our judicial system poking its finger in the American People's eye by ignoring the rule of law!

Justice Sotomayor, by rejecting the NYC teachers emergency request for an injunction and to be heard, she embraced NYC trashing and stomping upon a fundamental right of NYC teachers.


Keep in mind when fundamental rights are being infringed upon, as is the case with mandated COVID vaccine jabs, they are presumptively unconstitutional.

See: Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990) we find “The forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty."

And when a person's liberty is infringed upon by government we find:

A government imposed act which “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution is presumptively unconstitutional.” See: Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980) Also see City of Mobile v. Bolden, 466 U.S. 55, 76, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980)

But according to Justice Sotomayor, the teachers emergency request for an injunction on the forced vaccine jab and to be heard, must be without merit and why she rejected the request with no comment. And so, the door is left open for NYC to move forward and impinge upon the teachers fundamental right or they must suffer the consequences . . . loss of job, loss of pay, for not surrendering a fundamental right.

But what has the court stated with regard to that scenario?

“The mere chilling of a Constitutional right by a penalty on its exercise is patently unconstitutional.” Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618


JWK

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.