But SCOTUS Invites Further State-Knocking of the Vax
by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB
The US government tried to mandate a Covid vax for workers in companies that had 100 or more employees. What a ridiculous request, no matter its unconstitutionality. Wouldn't five bakers in a tiny little bakery "need" the vax just as much? Anyway, on January 13, 2022, SCOTUS said "Get lost" to that case, so I'll concentrate on the other one.
Call it "the Health Care Workers' Vax Case," which first arose at a US District Court in Missouri and at a US District Court in Louisiana. Yes, two separate cases, but SCOTUS chose to combine them into one, as is its wont.
Media have been misreporting it (so what's new?) leaving out a crucial point, namely, that SCOTUS did not give a "finished' ruling. It is still open for states to have a comeback. I will let Attorney William Sumner Scott explain. He has no involvement in the matter; his article appeared at GumshoeNews.com on January 16, 2022. I now quote it in full, with his permission:
"As the World knows, mandatory vaccination has become an issue for those who wish to remain unvaccinated. The Supreme Court of the United States at 595 U. S. ____ (2022) issued a 5 to 4 decision on January 13, 2022. It applies to the combined cases of President Biden, et al, v Missouri, et al, and Becerra, et al v Louisiana, et al, to require 10,000,000 health care workers, who do not qualify for a medical or religious or other permitted exception, to either be vaccinated or face loss of their job.
"Although the employer could elect to withdraw from reimbursement under Medicare and Medicaid programs, that is not likely to happen.
"The decision is interlocutory, i.e., preliminary to reaching the merits on the question Should the vaccination be required. But its effect is immediate because the employee must be vaccinated by the final date set by the Defendants which is expected to be February 13, 2022, or lose his or her job or the employer lose reimbursement for patients covered under Medicare and Medicaid.
"Governor Ron DeSantis has announced that health care workers in Florida will not be required to comply with the rule. It is unclear how he will avoid compliance should the employer allow unvaccinated workers to continue to be employed and the Federal Government elect to cut off funds to the employer. Doubt any employers will be able to withstand the financial squeeze.
"The States (Missouri and Louisiana, joined by many others in the 'et al') filed to contend that a Federal Government agency, the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), lacked the authority or the medical justification to issue an emergency rule to require health care workers to be vaccinated.
"Because the collection of evidence on the merits of their objections to the vaccinations would take time to complete, and the acquiescence by the health care worker to be vaccinated is permanent, the States sought, and the trial courts granted, an injunction to prevent the vaccinations while the trial on the merits of their objections proceeded.
"The Appellate courts [for Missouri, the US Eighth Circuit, and for Louisiana, the US Fifth Circuit] affirmed the injunctions and the US Supreme Court agreed to accept an appeal.
"The scope of the Supreme Court review included 'Did CMS have the authority to determine the existence of an emergency and, without public notice or comment, issue the rule?' As mentioned above, by a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that CMS had the authority to determine that an emergency exists, that no public comment period is necessary, and can require that health care workers to be vaccinated.
"The cases before the Appellate Courts are limited to the question of 'Is the vaccination necessary and effective based upon information received after the Supreme Court Decision?' SCOTUS took no action to remand the cases to the trial courts. Instead, they vacated the injunctions that stopped enforcement of the rule — with guidance that the CMS authority to issue an emergency rule under the circumstances, without public notice and hearing, cannot be questioned.
"It remains to be determined if the Appellate Courts will allow additional factual evidence. The States could elect to seek additional review by the CMS. Absent public outcry, review by the CMS under the Biden Administration is unlikely.
"Twitter has reference to @joerogan podcast of interviews of @P_McCulloughMD and @robertmalonemd to assert that Ivermectin and other drugs are more effective cure with less risk of side effects than the experimental vaccinations. Those persons further assert that the vaccines do not prevent Covid-19 infections. Also, the variants may present issues not considered by the courts.
"The podcasts are by subscription. Go to Joe Rogan website for terms to view them. The free viewing posted to YouTube and Facebook have been taken down. They may be reuploaded, so keep checking.
"These assertions by the two doctors, concerning the change in the disease, and identification of side effects over time, present material questions of fact. The States are expected to ask the Appellate Courts to consider this new evidence with the request that the cases be remanded to the District Courts for trial.
"Should the Appellate Court enter a decision favorable to the States, the Government can ask the US Supreme Court for further review.
"In the interim, health care employees must be vaccinated or have a medical or religious exemption or lose their job. This applies at all Medicare and Medicaid Facilities, which pretty much encompasses the universe of health care facilities in the United States.
"Note: Strong dissents were filed by Justice Thomas and Justice Alito.
-- end of GumshoeNews article by William Sumner Scott, JD. He is a member of the New Jersey Bar.
I [Maxwell] add that Justice Amy Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch also dissented, but, contrary to expectations, Brett Kavanaugh joined Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Steven Breyer, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in signing the opinion.
It is a major relief to know that evidence of material facts can now be brought -- and I hope those US Courts of Appeal will remand the whole thing to the district court for trial. Why not? To date, such a vital case has not enjoyed even a hearing!
When SCOTUS entertained "oral argument" last week, the central issue was whether the wording of the law at 86 Federal Regulation 61555 (2021) is sufficient authority on which CMS (part of DHHS) can order workers to be vaccinated. It states that Medicare funding might cease for a facility that is derelict in, say, good hygiene.
Sounds reasonable at first -- you don't want your grandpa to be in a nursing home with rats running around the bed. And you don't want a nurse with a contagious disease to be sneezing on grandpa. But who says this particular vax is good hygiene?
(Note: I am suppressing my desire here to point out that the feds should never be involved in health care. It is not one of the grants of power that we-the-people gave Congress in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution. I say, when Congress and LBJ wanted to create Medicare, in 1965, we should have floated a Constitutional amendment for it).
The big news is that on January 13, 2021, the nine justices of the US Supreme Court gave a ruling that was interim and partial. They RECOGNIZED that the plaintiffs, Missouri and Louisiana, have still not had their chance to argue against the worth of the vaccine. They can still get that chance, at the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, but we all need to jump up and down to make it happen.
I note that Scott's article, above, mentioned two of the cautions against vaccination for Covid that were spelled out by Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Robert Malone, but there are plenty more.
Scott did not refer to the dangers of the vaccine, but great danger has now been confirmed by VAERS. Thousands of people have died. More than a hundred persons died from certain batches of BioNtech/Pfizer and Moderna which have been specifically identified. (I provide the video link below.)
Further, Dr Erik Enby of Sweden has found mysterious particles in the Pfizer vaccine and also in a Covid test administered by gargling. The South Korean Veritas group also found living creatures in the Pfizer vaccine once they heated it to body temperature.
Such outrages require not only a firm halt to vaccination and testing, but prosecution of the miscreants. Please do not say "Ho hum. That's how it is. They will go scot free." Your action is badly needed.
I will list below all the states who joined Missouri and Louisiana in the two cases which, as described, SCOTUS has sent back for further work. See if your state is there.
A major point you can make is: This vaccine is not a vaccine. Repeating, repeating: this vaccine is not a vaccine. It is "gene therapy," as acknowledged by all sides. It does not give immunity. And it does not even claim to control transmissibility. (My nurse-sneezing-on-grandpa example is irrelevant.)
Another arrow for your quiver: The government has cheated with the statistics. It counts a person who is double vaxxed, but not yet booster'd, as an "Unvaccinated" person. So if government says, for example "874 unvaccinated people in Vermont are hospitalized with Covid," you'll think "Gee, they should have taken the shot." But most of them did take the shot.
i pass over the fact that the way of knowing who has "Covid," is a PCR test whose Nobel Prize winning inventor, Kary Mullis,said "This can't be used for diagnosis."
Help! America is drowning in lies! Help!
My Case -- Maxwell v Secretary of Defense et al
In 2020, I filed for an injunction to restrain the government from vaccinating me. I am not in the military; the choice of Defense as a defendant had to do with President Trump saying he would use the military to roll out his Warpspeed'd vaccination. Another of my defendants is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. My case is now in appeal at the First Circuit.
My pitch relies on the Fourth Amendment. You cannot invade my body, O Government, as is crystal clear in the Constitution.
When I ran for US Senate in a special election in 2017, my campaign motto was "You either have the Constitution or you don't." Since three days ago, we have less of it -- and therefore we don't have it at all, really -- thanks to the wrong decision about the authority of "CMS."
God help us, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid telling all doctors and nurses they have to accept a dangerous (and I say, malicious) injection. And many of them nodding to it. Eeeks!
List of 22 States That Joined Missouri or Louisiana:
In Biden v Missouri, the plaintiffs-appellees, besides MO, are: Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
In Becerra v Louisiana, the plaintiffs-appellees, besides LA, are: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia.
If you live in one of them, you need to contact your state politician; it is the executive branch, usually the Attorney General, of a state, that filed those two lawsuits or joined up with them.
The link below is to my article about the children's gargle test. It was analyzed in Sweden, but Canada's province of British Columbia also uses a gargle test for children. Please see it.
But first, here is Dr Yeadon, giving the downlow on the bad batches, with Zoom questions from pulmonologist Dr Wodarg of Germany and attorney Reiner Feullmich. I suggest you begin at 40 minutes:
https://www.brighteon.com/edea2926-f2c8-429f-aceb-ff6b9662c631
