Follow

Despite the fact that it is known to be illegal to require or mandate anyone take an unapproved and experimental vaccine, the idiots at Rutgers are doing it anyway.

people.com/health/rutgers-requ

@Johncdvorak What’s more horrifying is that few people are fighting it. Few are joining any of the lawyers looking for cases to take to court.

@djsumdog @Johncdvorak

Class Action Lawsuits are powerful. Plaintiffs with damages are required first.

@BigSkyRider @Johncdvorak There will be an uphill battle in this case. First they’re going to have to challenge any immunity that was granted by several nations and US States.

@djsumdog
The exception that is relevant is written into the emergency authorization. "Willful misconduct".

phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/pre

From my point of view the uphill battle is waiting for the damages, which means waiting for people to be injured enough at scale, with evidence provable of the cause.

@Johncdvorak

@Johncdvorak then it is not very well known to the plebs, nor conveyed that it is ilegal eh..

@Johncdvorak The law is selective these days: Ordinary people need to cower in fear of laws that aren't even legal or constitutional at times, while governments and the powerful can downright ignore existing laws as it suits them.

@Johncdvorak
My spiteful side hopes this decision leads to a severe reduction in applications and a loss of income from tuition.

@LadyButters @Johncdvorak That would be a natural reaction of the market but there are a lot of people who are not acting naturally.

@Johncdvorak I would really appreciate to get a copy of that mandate so its public. This is shameful.

@Johncdvorak The Civil Rights Act of 1964 may protect people who have a religious objection to a vaccine. An employer would have to make a reasonable accommodation as long as it’s not too costly for the business.

@Johncdvorak
[... That means that as part of granting an EUA, the Secretary has to directly address whether private businesses may impose mandates, and with what exceptions. ...
There is an argument that the Secretary does not have the discretion to allow mandates. But there is an argument, too, that the Secretary has the discretion to allow businesses to require vaccines and impose consequences for refusal...]
blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.ed
This doesn’t look very convincing. Ambiguous enough?

@Johncdvorak do these Universities have legal exposure to vaccine injuries? I would think so

@Johncdvorak I think their thinking may be that they are only requiring it if you wish to be a student there but it is the student's choice. I don't approve of this thinking. But "a private business can do as they wish" has been working for Twitter, Facebook, Amazon AWS, etc., and it will probably work here as well.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
No Agenda Social

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!