Coronavirus: Thread

[grarpamp]

You are property of the State for its own "Comfort, Health, and Prosperity"...

Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905)
“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.” States are allowed to
subject citizens to restraints to protect “general comfort, health,
and prosperity of the State.”

How does it feel to be OWNED.
Don't you think it's time for a SLAVE REVOLT.

Further, their forced vax logic is broken, they are vaxed
thus immune thus it doesn't matter whether or not anyone
else is. If half a country dies, that doesn't matter either
in the end, life will go on just the same.
Only a slaving warmongering State fears the freedom
and death of its slaves, as that means the State dies.
Notice how State refuses your freedom and or death.

Billions in history have willingly died, and will die, over
being forced to do things. Wars happen because of such force.


https://jonathanturley.org/2021/07/13/it-needs-to-be-hard-for-people-to-remain-unvaccinated-making-the-case-for-covid-challenges/
https://jonathanturley.org/2020/04/28/pandemic-passport-and-the-danger-of-immuno-discrimination/
https://jonathanturley.org/2020/11/18/twitter-ceo-admits-censoring-hunter-biden-story-was-wrong-democrats-call-for-more-censorship/

"It Needs To Be Hard For People To Remain Unvaccinated": Making The
Case For COVID Challenges

Dr. Leana Wen, CNN analyst and Distinguished Fellow at the Fitzhugh
Mullan Institute of Health Workforce Equity at George Washington
University, has caused a stir due to her recent declaration on CNN
that “it needs to be hard for people to remain unvaccinated.”

With France implementing a mandatory “health pass” and private
companies like Morgan Stanley requiring vaccinations for employees to
return to work, we can expect more protests and challenges around the
world. Those cases are likely to focus on whether mandatory
requirements are based on medical or political imperatives. Wen’s
comment is likely to be repeated in many filings as another case of
“saying the quiet part out loud.”

She appears to advocate measures defined to coerce people to take
vaccinations due to the continuing refusal of a sizable number of
people.

Wen is a well-known medical analyst and the former head of Planned
Parenthood. She is a visiting professor at George Washington
University.

Wen made clear that health measures should be used to make life hard
for people who refuse the vaccine so that they yield to public
demands: “[b]asically, we need to make getting vaccinated the easy
choice.” In the Washington Post, Wen also called for “Biden to make
the case for vaccine requirements.”

There is already open pressure from the White House on private
companies to require vaccinations. Morgan Stanley responded by doing
just that this week. They can likely do so. The most serious
challenges could come from those with religious objections. However,
even if they are allowed to work remotely, Morgan Stanley CEO James
Gorman stated in July that “If you want to get paid New York rates,
you work in New York. None of this, ‘I’m in Colorado…and getting paid
like I’m sitting in New York City. Sorry, that doesn’t work.” The
message could not be clearer that working remotely will come at a
penalty.

The Biden White House is clearly concerned that making vaccines
mandatory will cause not just court challenges but a public backlash.
However, such mandatory programs have been upheld. As I discussed in a
column last year, there is a 1905 case where the Supreme Court upheld
a state mandatory vaccination program of school children for small pox
in Massachusetts. In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the Court found
that such programs are the quintessential state power rather than a
federal power. It also held that “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.” States are allowed to subject citizens to
restraints to protect “general comfort, health, and prosperity of the
State.”

The fear is that, as with social media companies carrying out
censorship of political and social viewpoints, companies will now
serve as surrogates for the state on vaccinations. The Administration
would prefer to do precisely what Wen advocated: ratchet up the
private penalties and difficulties for anyone who wants to remain
unvaccinated.

The problem is when you have leading analysts arguing for such
measures as coercive devices. While there is considerable deference on
such matters, the courts could take note of such demands to make life
hard on those who are not “getting with the program.”

As of July 11, a total of 159,266,536 Americans have been fully
vaccinated. That is 48 percent of the country’s population. When you
consider the extremely high rate of vaccination for those over 65, the
percentage of adults under 65 is even smaller. Despite all of the
press and bizarre reward systems, the government is clearly hitting a
wall with many people declining the vaccines.  (For the record, I took
the vaccine and all of my family has been vaccinated).

That is a sizable number of voters and the Democrats are leery of
openly forcing vaccines before the 2022 election. That is why the push
is to make life more difficult through private companies. However, if
these measures are viewed as designed to coerce, courts may be more
scrutinizing of the public health necessity for the measures.