My husband and I have resolved not to get the Covid-19 Vaccine if and when it comes out. We figured that with all the lead up to the point of the whole Plannedemic, there will be repercussions for those who do not wish to receive the shot.
Possible exorbitant fines and possible jail time may be the punishment. I’ve spent so much time in FB jail; at least a real jail will supply food. But wait…..do I really know what is IN that food? Oh well…… I digress.
Anyway, I thought that the reader would like to know about the SCOTUS and their record on mandatory vaccinations. I rather expected this.
Assume that a COVID-19 vaccine is invented tomorrow and soon becomes widely available. Most Americans will undoubtedly line up eagerly for a dose, but a small number may refuse. Do state governments have the authority to compel such refusers to get vaccinated on threat of punishment?
In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court confronted a state law that allowed local governments to require smallpox vaccinations when the local health authorities deemed them necessary. Cambridge resident Henning Jacobson balked at his city’s vaccination requirement and was fined $5. He contested that penalty and took his case all the way up to the highest court in the land.
What was Jacobson’s legal argument? In the words of the Court, Jacobson “insists that his liberty is invaded when the State subjects him to fine or imprisonment for neglecting or refusing to submit to vaccination; that a compulsory vaccination law is unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive, and, therefore, hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best.”
The Supreme Court rejected that argument. The 7–2 majority opinion, written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, agreed that the “power of a local community to protect itself against an epidemic threatening the safety of all might be exercised in particular circumstances and in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public, as to authorize or compel the courts to interfere for the protection of such persons.” But this case, he concluded, did not rise to that standard. The law was ruled to be a reasonable regulation.
“Whatever may be thought of the expediency of this statute, it cannot be affirmed to be, beyond question, in palpable conflict with the Constitution,” Harlan held. “Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the State to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety.”
It would be one thing if Jacobson’s health or medical history put him at risk of severe injury or death from the vaccine. To force such an individual to be vaccinated “would be cruel and inhuman in the last degree,” Harlan acknowledged. But Jacobson “was himself in perfect health and a fit subject of vaccination.” The requirement was therefore constitutional as applied to him.
Justices David Brewer and Rufus Peckham dissented. They presumably believed that Jacobson’s liberty was violated by the compulsory vaccination law, but they kept their reasoning to themselves: They did not write an opinion. source
So, I am assuming that courts across America will view this vaccine as compulsory. I will still not allow it to be given to me – whatever the consequences.
I thought that perhaps the reader might be interested in two other diseases for which we did receive vaccines during the 20th Century. I will post the website addresses for those who are interested:
I was shocked to find that in the 20th Century, over 300 million people died from Smallpox!
I was also quite shocked that TB has not been eradicated and thousands die each day from this disease.
Perhaps Bill Gates should be working on that vaccine, but that’s not part of his narrative nor his agenda.