Judicial Disagreements

In late October, outgoing New York City mayor de Blasio mandated kill shots for city workers — in cahoots with the Biden regime’s aim to inflict maximum harm on maximum numbers of people.

Unjabbed ones were suspended without pay until able to show proof of having self-inflicted harm from jabs designed for this purpose.

Last August, de Blasio mandated kill shot passports for access to city restaurants, bars, indoor entertainment, and fitness centers.

On December 6, he mandated jabs for NYC private sector workers, more information to be released on December 15.

The mandate is effective on December 27, days before mayor-elect Eric Adams takes office on January 1.

Spokesman for Adams said he’ll address the issue at that time, as well as overall NYC flu/covid policies that are unlikely to change on his watch.

Attorney Ian Carleton Schaefer said the city’s private sector mandate will likely be structured along similar lines to the temporarily blocked Biden regime’s one for employers with 100 or more workers.

A number of state and federal court rulings went both ways on kill shots and health passports — some in favor, others against.

Last week, New York Supreme Court Justice Frank Nervo scheduled a December 14 hearing to decide whether to impose a temporary restraining order on de Blasio’s mandate for city workers to be jabbed.

Last week as well, US District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove struck down the Biden regime’s mandate for federal contractors to be jabbed by granting a temporary restraining order to plaintiffs Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee.

In October, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned a temporary restraining order that upheld the right of New York state healthcare workers to be exempt from toxic jabs for religious reasons.

A separate temporary federal judicial restraining order is in place against mandated jabs for employees of private businesses.

Going the other way, the US Supreme Court on Monday declined to block a New York regulation that requires healthcare workers to be jabbed, ruling out religious exemptions while litigation continues on the mandate’s constitutionality in lower courts.

Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch dissented, the latter saying:

“We do all this even though the state’s execu­tive decree clearly interferes with the free exercise of reli­gion—and does so seemingly based on nothing more than fear and anger at those who harbor unpopular religious be­liefs.” 

“We allow the state to insist on the dismissal of thou­sands of medical workers—the very same individuals New York has depended on and praised for their service on the…front lines over the last 21 months.”

“To add in­sult to injury, we allow the state to deny these individuals unemployment benefits too.” 

“One can only hope today’s rul­ing will not be the final chapter in this grim story.”

In late October, the US Supreme Court breached international and constitutional law by rejecting an emergency appeal by Maine healthcare workers at hospitals and nursing homes to be exempt from mandatory jabs on religious grounds.

Three previous times since August, the High Court breached the international and constitutional right of voluntary and informed consent on all things health related.

Five times in all this year through December 13, the US Supremes refused to rule against kill shots designed to destroy health.

International trial lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich stressed that “courts of law” will not end what’s going on, adding:

“The courts of law, maybe we can use them to clean things up, but I’m afraid they may not even be good for that because, they are so infiltrated by the other side that we’ll have to set up a whole new judicial system.”

(T)he only way to turn (things) around is (by) ris(ing) up and tell(ing) (all things flu/covid proponents) to go to hell.”

“Because that’s where they come from.”

Indeed, defeating what’s going on won’t happen judicially.

It’ll be in the streets and elsewhere by public rage enough to no longer tolerate what’s gone on since last year with worse ahead if not challenged and halted.

The alternative is state-sponsored mass-extermination, abolishment of freedom, tyrannical social control, and serfdom for survivors.

If that’s not enough to arouse public rage, what will be!

3 thoughts on “Judicial Disagreements

Add yours

  1. Mr Lendman,

    Excellent Question..
    In that you call the Question

    What will it take..?

    Perhaps only a Crash

    Banks closed.
    Grocery stores ransacked
    Utilities out.

    That’ll be a kick in the HEAD.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: