COVID Legal USA
Last updated July 3, 2023
Most recent case law:
U.S. Supreme Court issues several landmark rulings, including unanimous decision that makes it harder for employers to deny “vaccine” religious exemptions (July 3, 2023)
Illinois administrative judge rules that former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot exceeded statutory power by unilaterally implementing vaccine mandate for unionized workers (April 26, 2023)
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released guidance on its new policy permitting mandatory vaccines by employershttps://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/eeoc-approves-mandatory-vaccination-in-66300/. It left open two exceptions to the rule: disabilities and religious beliefs. Americans are continually seeing the extremely harmful effects of the experimental vaccines. Further, both the World Health Organization and Dr. Anthony Fauci, the most celebrated physician on COVID in the USA, have both acknowledged that there’s no proof that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines prevent infection or transmission of COVID https://www.who.int/multi-media/details/who-daily-press-conference-on-novel-coronavirus—28-december-2020https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-anthony-fauci-covid-vaccine-passport-mandatory-vaccinations-travel-1558303.
The good news for American workers is that the EEOC is not a legislative body and has no power to make laws. It is an administrative agency of government that can be and has been challenged in the courts. The most infamous case against the EEOC was in the 1980s. The EEOC accused Sears, Roebuck & Co. of discrimination against female workers. It argued that Sears was systematically passing women up for high-paying commission and management positions in favor of men. A federal judge in Illinois ruled against the EEOC because it failed to produce any witnesses of the alleged discrimination. It also failed to identify a Sears policy that discriminated against womenhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/628/1264/2595936/.
Each case of Americans refusing mandatory vaccines in the workplace and/or public accommodations is unique and specific to the situation and locale. But the foundation thereof is clear from federal precedent.
The U.S. Supreme Court on mandatory vaccines
The controlling case in U.S. jurisprudence governing mandatory vaccines by state agencies is Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905)https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/. The Fourteenth Amendment mandates that no state or government agency “shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Pastor Henning Jacobson endured mandatory vaccines in Sweden as a child before immigrating to the USA. The long-term effects turned him against the idea of ever taking another vaccine. A small pox outbreak occurred in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1902. The city government made vaccines mandatory to slow the spread. Those who refused received a $5 fine (about $150 in 2021). Jacobsen was prosecuted and fined for refusing to take the vaccine. The case ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court.
The Court ruled that mandatory vaccines do not violate the Fourteenth Amendment because “in every well ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand.” Emphasis added. The Court continued, “[r]eal liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own [liberty], whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others.”
The decision is not absolute, as the Court noted, “[in] extreme cases…in a particular condition of … health, mandatory vaccines would be cruel and inhumane. The Court would then have the power to stop the mandate.”
There are three glaring differences between small pox vaccines and COVID vaccines. Small pox variola major, the most common strain, had a mortality rate of 30% https://www.who.int/biologicals/vaccines/smallpox/en/. COVID-19 not only is tricky to diagnosehttps://freewestmedia.com/2020/12/20/who-finally-admits-that-pcr-tests-are-unreliable/, but has a mortality rate of less than 1% for anyone under age 70https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html. Further, recent data from Norway shows that at least 15 people over the age of 70 died within two weeks of getting COVID vaccines. Norway is now reconsidering vaccinating the elderly.
Secondly, the substantive due process doctrine was not recognized by the Supreme Court when Jacobsen was decided. Substantive due process encompasses implied rights that are not specifically enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. Americans have the right to choose their own medical treatment options from any legal, effective treatments available. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) is perhaps the most famous substantive due process case.
Third, Pfizer and Moderna shots are not by legal or otherwise definition “vaccines”https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/qa/what-is-the-definition-of-vaccine. They are molecular medical devices that do nothing to stop transmission of disease. Pfizer and Moderna shots contain no weakened pathogens that cause an immune response. Thus, the Jacobsen case does not technically apply to these experimental treatments.
Moderna does not even refer to its shot as a “vaccine” anywhere on the respective page of its website. In fact, Moderna refers to its shot as a “platform” and “an operating system.” According to Moderna, its shot, “is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the ‘program’ or ‘app’ is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein”https://www.modernatx.com/mrna-technology/mrna-platform-enabling-drug-discovery-developmenthttp://web.archive.org/web/20200407034535/https://www.modernatx.com/mrna-technology/mrna-platform-enabling-drug-discovery-development.
“In determining the scope of a statute, we look first to its language, giving the words used their ordinary meaning.” Moskal v. United States, 498 U.S. 103, 108 (1990).
Remembering the 1937 Elixir Sulfanilamide tragedy
Streptococcal infections were rampant across the USA in 1937. A highly effective drug called sulfanilamide was a common treatment option. It came in both powder and tablet form. S.E. Massengill Co. (today part of Prestige Brands) manufactured the drug. The company’s salesmen reported that several clients were demanding a liquid form of sulfanilamide to make it easier for kids to ingest. S.E. Massengill chemists mixed the powdered form of sulfanilamide with liquid diethylene glycol. They did a few flavor and color tests in a matter of weeks before packaging up the liquid form and selling it to patients. No toxicity tests were performed. The results were catastrophic.
Patients immediately experienced severe adverse effects, including stoppage of urine, severe abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, stupor, and convulsions. The exact number is unclear. But at least 100 people, mostly children, died within 21 days of taking the drughttps://www.fda.gov/files/about%20fda/published/The-Sulfanilamide-Disaster.pdf. S.E. Massengill claimed ignorance, saying it did not know about the dangers of diethylene glycol. There were several studies available at the time showing the dangers of diethylene glycol. Despite clear criminal negligence by the company, nobody was ever prosecuted.
Congress passed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act the following year. The new law gave the Food and Drug Administration power to oversee the safety and effectiveness of all drugs released on the market. The FDA has not thoroughly vetted any of today’s COVID-19 vaccines. Instead the agency exercised its Emergency Use Authorization power to allow Pfizer, Moderna and other vaccines to be used in the USA without completing necessary clinical trials.
There have already been countless extreme adverse effects from COVID-19 vaccines, including deaths. But mainstream media and social media giants either censor or fail to cover them. The messaging and marketing around vaccines remains consistent – “be patriotic, vaccines are safe, do not kill grandma.” Remember, the following happened on live television 15 minutes after this nurse in Chattanooga, Tenn. took the vaccine.
COVID did not kill life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
All 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia recognize at-will employment. That means employers can fire you for any reason as long as the law isn’t broken in the process. Each state has different exceptions, such as public policy exemptions, implied contract exemptions, and the covenant of good faith. Most employers, particularly small businesses, do not want messy, public legal battles related to a controversial issue like COVID-19 and vaccines. Thus, your first move in preserving your right to refuse mandatory vaccines is the most important.
COVID Legal USA assists you with representing yourself against these harmful vaccine mandates. We are a team of paralegals, researchers and legal writers that help you navigate the complex U.S. judicial system to ensure the fastest, most direct and effective remedy*. Every case and every individual is unique. We listen to your concerns, prepare the necessary documents, and provide instructions for you to articulate your claims and execute your case.
Representing yourself with COVID Legal USA costs a fraction of what attorneys charge; and there are never any hidden fees. Your best advocate for maximum effectiveness is yourself. Read more here about COVID Legal USA.
Contact us today and a representative will get back to you within 24 hours.
**The use of our services and information on this website is acknowledgement that you understand and agree that COVID Legal USA is not a law firm or an attorney and is in no way forming an attorney-client relationship with you. You understand that you are representing yourself in a legal matter. COVID Legal USA is a paralegal, legal writing and technology firm that utilizes state-of-the-art databases and algorithms to assist pro se litigants with document preparation, navigational instructions through the complex U.S. legal system, and legal research.