Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court After Vermont Courts Ruled Schools Can Vaccinate Kids Against Parents’ Wishes

[1srelluc]

Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court Over Forced Covid Vaccine

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was forced to get a Covid-19 vaccination against the family’s wishes has appealed to the Supreme Court.

thefederalist.com

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was vaccinated with an experimental Covid-19 intervention against the family’s wishes has appealed a Vermont Supreme Court ruling. The Vermont court had ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) prohibits such claims, granting immunity to school and government personnel when they mandate vaccinations.

Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent. But the PREP Act is not above the Constitution’s supremacy clause; it’s the other way around.


Parents’ rights are being chiseled away rapidly. In Vermont, minor children may obtain transgender hormones and birth control without parental consent, and a 2024 law bars parents from seeing which library books are checked out by their children 12 years and older. Yet these are examples where the child wants something against his parents’ wishes. In Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccination case, the child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway.

Another mark against public schools.

Police can't question a minor without a parent present, but school officials can jab one?

Jabbing kids against their parents' wishes can have bad outcomes. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Montrovant]

Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court Over Forced Covid Vaccine

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was forced to get a Covid-19 vaccination against the family’s wishes has appealed to the Supreme Court.

thefederalist.com

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was vaccinated with an experimental Covid-19 intervention against the family’s wishes has appealed a Vermont Supreme Court ruling. The Vermont court had ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) prohibits such claims, granting immunity to school and government personnel when they mandate vaccinations.

Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent. But the PREP Act is not above the Constitution’s supremacy clause; it’s the other way around.


Parents’ rights are being chiseled away rapidly. In Vermont, minor children may obtain transgender hormones and birth control without parental consent, and a 2024 law bars parents from seeing which library books are checked out by their children 12 years and older. Yet these are examples where the child wants something against his parents’ wishes. In Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccination case, the child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway.

Another mark against public schools.

Police can't question a minor without a parent present, but school officials can jab one?

Jabbing kids against their parents' wishes can have bad outcomes. I'll leave it at that.

Based on the ruling, this appears to be nothing new. They cited a number of other, similar cases regarding the PREP act. It sounds like the act itself should be clarified/reworked. The ruling said that suing under state law was at issue, but perhaps they will have better luck at the federal level.

 

[Polishprince]

Vermont is run by a totalitarian based cabal. Its like a hermit kingdom in the north east US, just watch your p's and q's up there.

 

[Foxfyre]

Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court Over Forced Covid Vaccine

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was forced to get a Covid-19 vaccination against the family’s wishes has appealed to the Supreme Court.

thefederalist.com

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was vaccinated with an experimental Covid-19 intervention against the family’s wishes has appealed a Vermont Supreme Court ruling. The Vermont court had ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) prohibits such claims, granting immunity to school and government personnel when they mandate vaccinations.

Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent. But the PREP Act is not above the Constitution’s supremacy clause; it’s the other way around.


Parents’ rights are being chiseled away rapidly. In Vermont, minor children may obtain transgender hormones and birth control without parental consent, and a 2024 law bars parents from seeing which library books are checked out by their children 12 years and older. Yet these are examples where the child wants something against his parents’ wishes. In Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccination case, the child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway.

Another mark against public schools.

Police can't question a minor without a parent present, but school officials can jab one?

Jabbing kids against their parents' wishes can have bad outcomes. I'll leave it at that.

Vaccinations were not mandatory in the 40s, 50s, 60s but no child who had not been vaccinated for whooping cough and diptheria--tetanus was usually included with those vaxxes--and small pox would not be eligible to attend public school and the parents were required to make other arrangements for the kids' education. I don't know of any kids who that became necessary. The schools did administer the polio vaccination when it blessedly become available but it was with the parents' full knowledge and consent.

I think the state should require students to have necessary vaccinations to attend public school now, but if the parents do not want that, then they should home school or make other arrangements for their childrens' education.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Families with children should not be in any blue state.

 

[Darkwind]

Vaccinations were not mandatory in the 40s, 50s, 60s but no child who had not been vaccinated for whooping cough and diptheria--tetanus was usually included with those vaxxes--and small pox would not be eligible to attend public school and the parents were required to make other arrangements for the kids' education. I don't know of any kids who that became necessary. The schools did administer the polio vaccination when it blessedly become available but it was with the parents' full knowledge and consent.

I think the state should require students to have necessary vaccinations to attend public school now, but if the parents do not want that, then they should home school or make other arrangements for their childrens' education.

I think that it is not unreasonable to ensure that all safety testing is accomplished for any vaccine. Not the 'political' safety nonsense that passed for drug administration to our children.

Today, 90% of vaccines have had the proper safety vetting and 99% of all parents are comfortable with their children being vaccinated from some of these terrible diseases.

The problem with today's concept of vaccines is that regardless of the proper safety methodologies, the standard for enforcing vaccines is political, not scientific.

 

[sparky]

Vermont is run by a totalitarian based cabal. Its like a hermit kingdom in the north east US, just watch your p's and q's up there.

tell me about it...... ~S~

 

[sparky]

Yes , they are actively keeping parents uniformed in our public schools here

VT's educational contingent has VT's legislature covering their agenda

Think on that, WHY would they want to exclude you as a parent, the customer and tax payer, from anything imparted to your child?

~S~

 

[Foxfyre]

I think that it is not unreasonable to ensure that all safety testing is accomplished for any vaccine. Not the 'political' safety nonsense that passed for drug administration to our children.

Today, 90% of vaccines have had the proper safety vetting and 99% of all parents are comfortable with their children being vaccinated from some of these terrible diseases.

The problem with today's concept of vaccines is that regardless of the proper safety methodologies, the standard for enforcing vaccines is political, not scientific.

Yes. There is no such thing as a 100% safe vaccine but we can be certain that the risk is as low as it can be made before we agree for our children to have it.

I am reminded though of the mother who brought her child in for a routine vaccination. A split second before the needle pierced the skin, the child had his first ever seizure. Had that seizure occurred during or immediately after the vaccination was given, there is no force on Earth that would have convinced that mother that the vaccine did not cause that seizure.

A certain amount of trust in the medical community is always necessary any time we take medicine in any form or undergo other medical procedures. COVID was a special thing that warranted a vaccine that prevented most of the worst effects of it even though the requisite testing period was omitted. I am convinced the vaccine saved millions of lives and I don't doubt it also took some lives along the way.

But we're not dealing with a world wide pandemic now. I am happy that will we have a person heading HHS that doesn't believe government should override the parents except in very extreme circumstances and who is committed to getting the unnecessary crap, including toxins, out of our food and medicines.

 

[SweetSue92]

Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court Over Forced Covid Vaccine

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was forced to get a Covid-19 vaccination against the family’s wishes has appealed to the Supreme Court.

thefederalist.com

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was vaccinated with an experimental Covid-19 intervention against the family’s wishes has appealed a Vermont Supreme Court ruling. The Vermont court had ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) prohibits such claims, granting immunity to school and government personnel when they mandate vaccinations.

Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent. But the PREP Act is not above the Constitution’s supremacy clause; it’s the other way around.


Parents’ rights are being chiseled away rapidly. In Vermont, minor children may obtain transgender hormones and birth control without parental consent, and a 2024 law bars parents from seeing which library books are checked out by their children 12 years and older. Yet these are examples where the child wants something against his parents’ wishes. In Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccination case, the child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway.

Another mark against public schools.

Police can't question a minor without a parent present, but school officials can jab one?

Jabbing kids against their parents' wishes can have bad outcomes. I'll leave it at that.

If this was NOT a terrible mistake by the school--and that would be bad enough--then I don't even have words. Parents have the right not to vaccinate their children. This is terrible.

 

[Captain Caveman]

In the UK, BOTH parents must agree for the child to be vaccinated; schools, just one parent etc.. cannot authorise the vaccination. The parent who wants their child vaccinated can apply to the court to consider the case.

Nursery, primary, and secondary schools cannot apply a plaster (band aid) to a child until they get permission from a parent.

 

[Unkotare]

In the UK, BOTH parents must agree for the child to be vaccinated; schools, just one parent etc.. cannot authorise [sic] the vaccination. ...

And if two - or no - parents are in the picture?

 

[HikerGuy83]

Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court Over Forced Covid Vaccine

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was forced to get a Covid-19 vaccination against the family’s wishes has appealed to the Supreme Court.

thefederalist.com

A Vermont family whose 6-year-old son was vaccinated with an experimental Covid-19 intervention against the family’s wishes has appealed a Vermont Supreme Court ruling. The Vermont court had ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) prohibits such claims, granting immunity to school and government personnel when they mandate vaccinations.

Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent. But the PREP Act is not above the Constitution’s supremacy clause; it’s the other way around.


Parents’ rights are being chiseled away rapidly. In Vermont, minor children may obtain transgender hormones and birth control without parental consent, and a 2024 law bars parents from seeing which library books are checked out by their children 12 years and older. Yet these are examples where the child wants something against his parents’ wishes. In Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccination case, the child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway.

Another mark against public schools.

Police can't question a minor without a parent present, but school officials can jab one?

Jabbing kids against their parents' wishes can have bad outcomes. I'll leave it at that.

What a f**ked up state.