Another shocking decision by a US Court-Schools can administer vaccines to children against parental wishes
If you live in the US and your children are still in state-run schools, it's time to pull them out of there!
Immediately after sending my post about the State of Connecticut upholding forced vaccination for school children, this article came across my desktop. And the headline is terribly deceptive because the school did not administer the jab without parental consent - it administered it against the specific written instruction of the parents.
State Supreme Court Gives Big Win to School That Administered COVID Vaccine Without Parental Consent
A school district cannot be sued for administering a COVID-19 vaccine to a young child despite the parents’ explicit instructions against it.
The Vermont Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Windham Southeast School District and the Vermont Department of Health on Friday, saying the organizations are not legitimate targets of the family’s lawsuit and bringing an apparent end to a legal saga that has been in play since 2021.
The issue began in November of that year as a 6-year-old, named L.P. in court records, was given one dose of a Pfizer vaccine at a clinic hosted by the district and health department.
According to WPMI-TV, prior to the clinic the 6-year-old’s parents informed the school that their child was not to be vaccinated.
…Justices decided that all defendants in this case are protected from litigation under this law.
“We conclude that the PREP Act immunizes every defendant in this case and this fact alone is enough to dismiss the case,” the court’s ruling continues. “Plaintiffs’ arguments about preemption are misplaced, and therefore we need not decide today the extent of the PREP Act’s preemptive effect.
…“We conclude that when the federal PREP Act immunizes a defendant, the PREP Act bars all state-law claims against that defendant as a matter of law.”
The parents’ case, the court finally affirmed, cannot proceed on a matter of law.
So the PREP Act - legislation that was passed in order to enable untested, unsafe and ineffective injections to be used without any liability on the part of - anyone, really, has allowed this school to get away with potential murder.
That is not an exaggeration. This child could have died or been permanently injured by the jab and the only ones who would have paid for that crime would be the parents and the child itself.
Can you think of any other industry that has absolute and total protection from accountability for the harms they cause?
Once again, when the law shows that it is not capable of or willing to provide protection against criminals, people will start to take the law into their own hands. Those ‘in power’ should not be surprised when that happens.
Viva Venezuela! And may the American Republic be reborn from the ashes of the corporate dictatorship it has now become.
You can subscribe to Informed Choice using your credit card at the link above. If you would prefer to pay by internet banking or to leave a donation for my work, the details are below. If you pay for a subscription in this way, please send an email to admin at myinformedchoice dot com dot au so I can add your details to the list. Thanks so much!
Westpac Bank
Account name - M Dorey
BSB 732591
Account number 613872
So a child has a known anaphalactic reaction to vaccines, but given this ruling it's almost certain heartless and reckless school districts would ignore this and administer anyway....
There is everything wrong with this ruling....
I used to as analyze legislation for a living. Written legislation can be very difficult to interpret. When ambiguity exists, the reader must consider intent of the law. I believe the intent of the PREP Act is to hold harmless only vaccine manufacturers. These unfortunate parents probably needed a different type of attorney. I wouldn't be surprised if this went to the Supreme Court. Congress needs to make a legislative clarification immediately.