patrick.net

So, well supposedly Florida put in a law that for pedophiles they would be executed for their crime.

I think they passed it back in the summer. Well.....enough time has passed that some perps are bound to have been caught....but nothing but silence concerning this punishment.

I think the Florida prosecutors need to have this brought to their attention.

https://australiannationalreview.com/state-of-affairs/doctor-who-was-suspended-for-covid-19-vaccine-criticism-wins-lawsuit-against-medical-regulators/

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-sues-des-moines-register-top-pollster-brazen-election-interference-fraud-over-harris-poll

Trump sues Des Moines Register, top pollster for 'brazen election interference,' fraud over Harris poll

The Des Moines Register published pollster Ann Selzer's final poll showing Harris leading in Iowa by 3 points, despite Trump's eventual 13-point victory

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/university-of-california-covid-vaccine-lawsuit-moves-forward/

University of California COVID Vaccine Lawsuit Moves Forward, Despite Setback

A class action lawsuit against the University of California on behalf of employees affected by the university’s system-wide COVID-19 vaccine mandate will move forward, even though the California Supreme Court this week ruled against one of the plaintiffs’ key claims related to violations of the Nuremberg Code.

A class action lawsuit against the University of California (UC) on behalf of employees affected by the university’s system-wide COVID-19 vaccine mandate will move forward, despite a decision this week by the California Supreme Court that favored the defendant.

The Supreme Court declined to hear the plaintiffs’ request to compel a lower court to revisit its dismissal of one of their key legal claims — that when the university mandated COVID-19 vaccines it violated the Nuremberg Code and California law.

The Nuremberg Code, which is also codified in California law, prohibits experimenting on humans without their full and free informed consent.

The court’s decision applies only to that one claim, which is part of the larger class action lawsuit filed by a diverse group of employees who allege that UC’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate violated their rights to privacy and bodily autonomy — including their rights to make an informed decision to decline the shot.

According to the complaint, the university compounded those violations by withholding information the university had about the COVID-19 vaccines’ true risks and minimal benefits. The complaint noted that the UC system includes the largest hospital system in California and a massive research apparatus, where COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy studies took place.

“One of the interesting things about the case is that it addresses two sides of informed consent,” plaintiffs’ attorney Jeremy Friedman told The Defender.

It questions whether “consent” can be fully granted if someone’s job is under threat. But it also raises the question about what it means to be informed — because UC had access to a “treasure trove” of COVID-19 vaccine data that it never shared with students and faculty.

Some employees involved in the suit declined to take the shots and were terminated, denied hospital privileges or forcibly removed from campus. Others took the shots, unaware of the harm they could cause, and suffered serious vaccine injuries. Others took shots they didn’t want in order to keep their jobs.

All of them allege, on behalf of themselves and the class, that the mandate violated their rights. Those rights include the “jus cogens,” or compelling law claims based in international law, and also the constitutional- and state-guaranteed right to information and privacy in their medical decisions.

They also allege the university violated their state rights under the Fair Employment and Housing Act by making unnecessary medical inquiries about their vaccine status and by unlawfully retaliating against the employees who were terminated for refusing the shots.

Case that began with viral video could grow to include 200,000 plaintiffs

The case began when one of the plaintiffs, Dr. Christopher Rake, was escorted out of a UCLA Health medical center in 2021 after attempting to go to work without taking the shot.

In an X video of his expulsion that went viral, Rake explained what was happening and said he was willing to lose everything to stand up for the cause — to protect his and everyone’s rights to be fully informed of proposed medical interventions and to make their own decisions about whether to undergo treatment, according to the complaint.

The mandates obviously violated the Nuremberg Code's provision that no one may be forced to be part of a medical experiment.

https://slaynews.com/news/christian-teacher-wins-450k-settlement-ohio-school-district-fired-refusing-trans-pronouns/

Christian Teacher Wins $450K Settlement from Ohio School District After Being Fired for Refusing to Use Trans Pronouns

An Ohio school district has been ordered to pay $450,000 in compensation to a Christian teacher who was fired for refusing to use inaccurate pronouns for a “transgender” student.

26-year-old English teacher Vivian Geraghty lost her job when she said could not use the student’s new name and pronouns due to her Christian faith.

The former middle school teacher with Jackson Local Schools settled her lawsuit against the district for $450,000.

Geraghty said she was fired when she refused to address two students by names inconsistent with their real sex.

Patrick says

26-year-old English teacher Vivian Geraghty lost her job when she said could not use the student’s new name and pronouns due to her Christian faith.

Unfortunately, this makes the affair a "religious" issue when the matter is really an issue of compelled speech. What happens now when a devout Muslim refuses to have any female students in his class?

Patrick says

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-sues-des-moines-register-top-pollster-brazen-election-interference-fraud-over-harris-poll

Trump sues Des Moines Register, top pollster for 'brazen election interference,' fraud over Harris poll

The Des Moines Register published pollster Ann Selzer's final poll showing Harris leading in Iowa by 3 points, despite Trump's eventual 13-point victory

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/christmas-is-back-tuesday-december

Two days before the election, the uncannily accurate, “gold standard” Iowa pollster Ann Selzer published the poll that pulled the plug on her long and storied polling career. Her election-eve poll shockingly showed Trump clearly losing Iowa —which even in 2020 he’d easily won by +8 points. Literally within minutes of publication of Selzer’s poll, all the corporate media outlets laser focused on this one poll, and the talking heads chattered nonstop till the election about how Selzer’s poll proved Trump had already lost the election.

Specifically, mockingbird media’s talking heads instantaneously analyzed Selzer’s data and gushed that it evidenced a last-minute avalanche of support from America’s angry women that would inexorably clinch the election for cackling VP Kamala Harris.

Conservatives immediately smelled a rat. Selzer’s poll was an outlier. A big outlier. Like the other polls were in sitting in a Des Moines Starbucks and Selzer’s poll was trying to dock with the International Space Station. Corporate media’s instantaneous and homogenous narrative smacked of coordination. And get this: Selzer retired right after the election — a professional move she now calls “long-planned” but one which she’d never publicly mentioned even a single time.

As it turned out, Selzer’s poll was wrong. Not just a little wrong. She was way off, by double digits. Two weeks ago, she published a humiliating op-ed sort of apologizing for her ‘mistake.’ But not really apologizing. More like shrugging. These things happen sometimes. That’s science.

Selzer’s explanation answered nothing. If anything, it was insulting and infuriated her critics. Then last week, President Trump sued Selzer in Iowa. The suit also named Selzer’s employer, the far-left Des Moines Register, and the Register’s owner, Gannett News. Trump’s legal claims include consumer fraud and election interference, which the Democrats have taught us is literally a million times worse than whatever Benedict Arnold did.

Ibid:

Last year, far-left progressives giddily celebrated Douglass Mackey’s conviction. In 2021, Biden’s DOJ raided, arrested, and prosecuted the young man, who in 2016 had posted a sarcastic meme encouraging Hillary supporters to vote by text. His case is currently on appeal, but Mackey could be sentenced to up to ten years in federal prison for election interference via disinformation under a statute called “conspiracy against rights” (18 U.S.C. § 241).

Significantly, DOJ lawyers successfully argued that the effect of Mackey’s tweet didn’t matter. In other words, it was irrelevant whether anyone was actually stupid enough to try voting by text message. Mackey’s intent to ‘trick’ at least some voters was enough.

At the time, conservatives warned that Mackey’s conviction was a slippery slope to ever more “creative” claims of election interference, such as claims directed at campaign strategists, political activists, media outlets (like Gannett), and even pollsters (like Selzer).

In other words, Democrats laid down the election interference Slip-n-Slide and then poured vegetable oil all over it. Now they’re whining about being all greasy.

Before 2016, “election interference” only involved direct or physical vote manipulation. But thanks to Democrat linguistic terrorism, the term now lacks any solid definition. Trying to define election interference is like jello wrestling. Now, anybody can freely claim that election interference includes altogether new or “soft” forms of influence; if you can describe it, it can be interference.

Trump’s lawsuit leverages the Democrats’ spongy non-definition, where “election interference” can be anything that misleads or manipulates voters, including intentionally fraudulent polls. Trump’s lawyers have alleged that Selzer’s poll fraudulently influenced the election by creating a false narrative of inevitability for Kamala Harris.

In other words, Selzer’s fake poll was just as bad as, if not worse than, Mackey’s meme.

To be clear, the main legal thrust of Trump’s lawsuit is his claim under Iowa’s consumer protection law. But the definition of the alleged ‘fraud’ that occurred arises directly from the rhetorical Wild West of “election interference.”

Sooner or later, Democrats and their sold-out corporate media allies may learn to regret having re-defined “election interference.”

Tellingly, Trump’s spokesman Steven Cheung told reporters the President plans to focus on “blatantly false and dishonest reporting, which serves no public interest and only seeks to interfere in our elections on behalf of political partisans.”

See? It’s another Trump boomerang. He’s turned “election interference” around on them. Now, in hindsight, it seems obvious that the corporate media was always the most exposed to expansive claims of election interference. If poor Douglass Mackey committed a serious crime by reposting a meme, which the media roundly agreed, what should we make of a whole news organization that intentionally skews its coverage to support one candidate over the other?

Remember, winning these lawsuits isn’t even the most important goal. Now that Democrats and their mockingbird media allies have transformed nebulous “election interference” into a viable legal claim, discovery of the media is on the table. Discovery is a much more powerful threat than money. As the most recent example, the WaPo gave readers a little more information about why ABC settled its defamation case with Trump last week. Look:

When executives from Disney, ABC and their lawyers gathered last
Friday to discuss Trump's defamation suit, they faced a looming
deadline. The federal judge overseeing the case, Cecilia M. Altonaga, had
just rejected a new request to delay the case and demanded that Disney
hand over "all remaining documents" by Sunday.

In other words, Disney paid $15 million dollars to avoid giving Trump’s legal team ABC’s internal communications. Media companies have long enjoyed a generous freedom from discovery, since judges, following strict standards, routinely dismissed suits against media companies before the parties could take any discovery.

But it’s a new game now, and discovery is back on the menu.

Remember, sunlight is the best disinfectant. (Even better than injected bleach!) The threat posed to Ann Selzer and Gannett News is not the threat of money damages. It’s the terrifying possibility they may be forced to turn over their secret communications with the Harris campaign.

https://teachersforchoice.substack.com/p/en-banc-petition-filed-in-kane-and

En Banc Petition Filed in Kane & Keil Federal Court Cases for Unvaccinated Educators

What is an "En Banc" Petition, you ask?

Kane v. de Blasio was the first federal case filed for fired unvaccinated workers in NYC denied a religious exemption to vaccination. Those workers were all teachers and educators. Shortly after this case, Keil v. City of New York was filed for other educators denied religious exemptions, and now the two cases have been combined in the courts.

Recently after sitting on our appeal for over 20 months, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the cases for the majority of Kane plaintiffs and all of the Keil plaintiffs. (Two of the Kane plaintiffs had their petitions granted).

Now our attorneys have responded to this decision by calling for an “en banc” review of the case by the 2nd Circuit.

What does that mean?

Our case was just ruled on by three of the justices in the 2nd Circuit Court. Their ruling was so incredibly blind to the evidence that was presented in over 100 pages to the court, that we are now asking all of the judges in the 2nd Circuit to review the case and the decision (which is a total of thirteen judges).

That’s because the decision treated the majority of our plaintiffs who made the same factual allegations as those whose petitions were granted, as though we had not made the very same arguments, and no explanation was given as to why we should be treated differently. Our attorneys are asking an en banc court to grant the petitions from all our plaintiffs, resolve the multiple conflicts, and reverse the dismissals. ...

Because of this, our attorneys have asked every justice in the 2nd Circuit Court to review our petition. If this petition is not granted, it is highly likely we will be headed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

We have been fighting these cases for over 3 years now.

https://slaynews.com/news/japan-sounds-alarm-over-unprecedented-surge-deaths-covid-vaxxed/

Fukushima, who has 208 scholarly papers to his name on ResearchGate, warned that doctors who want to sound the alarm are being silenced.

In February 2023, he filed a lawsuit against the Japanese government for allegedly hiding vaccine harms.

“Japanese doctors are trying hard, but they face various obstructions,” Fukushima said.

Professor Yasufumi Murakami from the Tokyo University of Science is demanding that the administration of Covid mRNA shots be banned.

“It’s very clear what happens when you administer a toxic gene to a human,” he said before laying out long-term risks.

“There are cases that occur within one or two weeks after injection, but there are also many cases that appear after one or two years.

“Vaccines that have failed are still being administered and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare recognizes these failed vaccines.

“So I would like them to stop immediately,” he continued.

“And even though I speak out in various places, they don’t stop at all.

“So we will clearly present evidence and publish it as articles, one by one.”

https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/breaking-the-lawsuit-v-pfizer-by

The lawsuit v Pfizer by TX Attorney General, Ken Paxton is dismissed

PREP Act and EUA law pre-empt civil lawsuits. These suits are theater/political campaigning. AGs serious about prosecution should bring criminal charges, not civil complaints. ...

The AG Paxton’s (TX) case against Pfizer for deceptive marketing practices under TX law has been dismissed. The judge cited PREP Act as the reason for dismissal as it pre-empts state law and regulatory authority. ...

Both Katherine Watt and I have written extensively about Prep Act and EUA law, describing them as the wall of the legal kill box that must be dismantled before any justice and accountability can begin for the covid crimes. As HHS Scy, RFK Jr can terminate the PREP Act declarations for covid and other fake “pandemic” emergencies (now active until end of 2029), but the PREP Act itself must be nullified by legislators. States can nullify the federal law, and the US Congress can act, too. AGs of states have authority to bring criminal charges, instead of filing pointless civil complaints.

https://dee746.substack.com/p/legal-precedent-bodily-autonomy-14th

However, the ruling of the following case clearly establishes that a person could not be legally compelled to participate in medical treatment to save another person's life.

Definition of compelled: : to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure and esp. by authority or law
https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/compel.html

Constitutional Limits on Such Authority
Even if either the federal or a state government is acting within its authority to respond to COVID-19, a state of emergency does not give it free rein to violate constitutional rights.

https://www.akingump.com/en/insights/alerts/covid-19-emergency-powers-and-constitutional-limits

McFall v. Shimp and the Case for Bodily Autonomy
Written By Alexia Ingram

The case, McFall v. Shimp (1978), ruled that a person could not be legally compelled to participate in medical treatment to save another person's life. The holding of McFall v. Shimp extends beyond this narrow circumstance; Judge John P. Flaherty applied the ruling to the moral obligations of people and other living things, citing the duty of the court to protect the individual from being invaded and hurt by others. [1] McFall v. Shimp employs the physical body's rights and duties, consistent with the discussion of reproductive rights during pregnancy—given the ongoing discourse on the legality of abortion, a critical examination of bodily integrity is necessary to distinguish moral conflicts from legal obligations. McFall v. Shimp set a legal precedent that an individual is not under compulsion to aid another person at their mental or physical expense, upholding the right to bodily autonomy found at the center of the debate on the legality of abortion.

https://hulr.org/spring-2021/mcfall-v-shimp-and-the-case-for-bodily-autonomy

Press ReleasePublished: Jul 28, 2023

Hearing Wrap Up: COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Sacrificed Individual Freedoms for False Security
Key Takeaways

The Biden Administration forced a novel COVID-19 vaccine on millions of Americans without considering the health of the individual or natural immunity. Removing physicians from this medical decision was politically expedient in the short term but has had disastrous long-term consequences.

https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-sacrificed-individual-freedoms-for-false-security/

https://patientmaktpatientcv.substack.com/p/belgium-big-win-freedom-of-speech

In overturning a disciplinary decision of the Order of Physicians, the Court of Cassation stressed that a disciplinary authority such as the Order cannot impose its own interpretations to discredit value judgments. As the Court so aptly expressed: "In a debate of general interest, freedom of expression cannot be limited to the presentation of generally accepted ideas alone; it extends to the dissemination of information that offends, shocks or disturbs in areas where certainty is lacking." ...

These precedents confirm that, in complex debates such as those on health measures or vaccination, the plurality of voices is essential to guarantee a genuine democratic debate.

A very embarrassing case law for the Order

Concretely, the Order of Physicians has the possibility of reintroducing disciplinary proceedings against the practitioner concerned, but the arguments on which the procedure was based have been invalidated by the Court of Cassation, making any new action very unlikely.

This ruling also opens the way for other doctors sanctioned by the Order during the Covid crisis to assert this decision, in particular by invoking the cancellation of their own sanctions. In theory, this could also make it possible to claim compensation for the damages suffered, although the legal feasibility of such steps depends on specific cases and could require in-depth analysis. Furthermore, this decision strengthens the hope for the doctors concerned to restore their reputation and effectively contest the disciplinary measures taken against them. We are thinking in particular of Dr Alain Colignon, Dr Pascal Sacré, Dr Laurence Kayser, Dr David Bouillon, Dr Gaëtane Beeckaert, Dr Frédéric Goareguer, Dr Cécile Andri, Dr Stéphane Résimont and many others.

DOGEWontAmountToShit says

Literally the worst thing to happen to Catholic school boys ever. Wait...

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/court-upholds-78-million-verdict-transit-workers-fired-refusing-covid-19-vaccine

A federal judge in California has rejected an effort by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to overturn a jury verdict that awarded $7.8 million to six former employees who were fired for refusing to comply with the agency’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds.

It's not nearly enough. It should be $7.8 billion and to be paid by everyone who mandated those workers submit to the death jab.

Patrick says

A federal judge in California has rejected an effort by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to overturn a jury verdict that awarded $7.8 million to six former employees who were fired for refusing to comply with the agency’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds.

Jury verdicts should not be able to be overturned by judges. Juries are the only control the population has over government. It's the only thing with government authority that cannot be bought.