George Mason Law Professor Challenges School Vaccine Mandate [Updated]

George Mason University law professor Todd Zywicki is objecting to the school’s mandatory vaccine policy for faculty and students as a condition to returning to campus.  Zywicki is raising an issue that is largely being ignored by the Administration and the media in the push for mandatory vaccine rules by private companies: the millions with natural antibodies to the virus. Zywicki recovered from the virus and says that blood tests confirm that he has antibodies. Given that test, he does not want to expose himself to an unnecessary vaccine given the risk (albeit low) of complications or a negative reaction.

      Zywicki has taught at George Mason since 1998 and is being represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance.  The case could represent an important challenge. The Biden Administration has openly called on private companies to enforce an effective vaccine passport system. However, George Mason is a public institution. Even though it might be able to secure review under the low rational basis test, Zywicki and his supporting experts are saying that there is no rational basis to require him to be vaccinated against a virus that he already has antibodies to combat.
      Zywicki has relied on a letter from his physician who advised him not to get a vaccine.  He also has a joint statement from Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford and Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, saying that it makes no sense to require him to get vaccinated when he shows such natural antibodies. They note that “the existing clinical literature overwhelmingly indicates that the protection afforded to the individual and community from natural immunity is as effective and durable as the efficacy levels of the most effective vaccines to date.”
      His case highlights a glaring issue in the failure of the Administration and private businesses to distinguish between unvaccinated individuals and individuals who are unvaccinated but with antibodies.  I have not been able to find a clear answer on why people like Zywicki cannot show test on antibodies rather than proof of vaccinations. Studies indicate that recovered victims show the same level of antibodies. It seems like the issue should be antibodies whether produced naturally or through vaccinations. At a minimum, it is worth discussing.
      I was eager to receive the vaccine and my entire family took the first opportunity to become vaccinated. However, I would be interested in reading a full discussion of this issue. However, there are few places where such a discussion is occurring in an uncensored format.The media has portrayed anyone who does not get the vaccine as morons or even terrorists. However, millions have recovered from the virus and may be making the same decision as Zywicki. Part of the problem is that such debates are often banned by social media companies under their censorship policies. You are not allowed to discuss whether it is responsible for some like Zywicki to decline the vaccine due to natural antibodies.
     The university issued a statement that did not address Zywicki’s case directly or even the underlying question of requiring vaccinations for those with natural antibodies.  One possibility is that the university could argue that the risk of vaccinations is so low that there is no reasonable basis for declining vaccination. On the other hand, it could claim that the variation among natural antibodies and the administrative burden is very high in allowing such exceptions to be claimed. However, it would seem like the university could simply require a test showing a minimum level of antibodies. 
     It is an ironic fight in a school named after George Mason who was a fierce advocate for individual rights. Indeed, George Mason’s motto is “Freedom and Learning” and features the Declaration of Rights on its seal.  Mason was the principal drafter of the Declaration.
Update: It appears George Mason has granted an exception to Zywicki.

148 thoughts on “George Mason Law Professor Challenges School Vaccine Mandate [Updated]”

  1. Rosemarie says, “Well you don’t even have the guts to use your name.”

    I can’t explain why my name did not appear just then, but my name is Silberman, Jeffrey, and I’ll thank you not to forget it. You are new here so you are not aware that I take issue with pseudonyms. Were it up to me, all contributors to this blog would have to use their actual proven names because anonymity breeds inanity. I am not afraid to be held accountable for anything I have written just like Turley, but unlike him, I respond to criticism.

    You say, “Now go back to wallowing in your hate and negativity.”

    I don’t hate you, dear, I pity you. You’ve been duped by a consummate conman not unlike the students of Trump University. I have no reason to be negative about the future because I know that the anti-Trumpists will be vindicated in the end. You Trumpists will have the cross to bear of excusing all the damning facts that are now emerging evidencing Trump’s corruption. And you will witness Turley NOT defending Trump’s misdeeds. And you Trumpists will eventually turn on Turley. There has already been pushback by some on this blog about where Turley stands. It will only grow worse in the months to come. Mark my words.

    1. Rosemarie, take note how Jeff continuously talks about Trump’s lies and such, but never says what they are. He has been doing this since his first day on the blog along with complaining that Turley won’t answer his questions. He was given Turley’s email address and then had all sorts of excuses why he couldn’t write directly to Turley so he (Jeff) could tell him ‘man’ to man what he felt about his opinion pieces.

      1. So noted, thanks. I have yet to see anyone say what Trump lied about or why they hate him so much. They must believe all the lies on CNN or MSNBC & MSM. If they had anything specific or proof, I guess they would be able to say it.

        1. Rosemarie says,

          “I have yet to see anyone say what Trump lied about or why they hate him so much. They must believe all the lies on CNN or MSNBC & MSM. If they had anything specific or proof, I guess they would be able to say it.”

          When you deny that Trump is a chronic and habitual liar, I have to ask myself whether you are a liar or an idiot? I won’t insult you by thinking you an idiot. I well understand why you don’t want to admit that your leader is a liar, and so you will continue to lie upon his behalf.

          Were I to claim that Biden is mentally as competent as the man he was a few years ago, you would be correct in calling me a liar, but I DON’T deny that Biden has deteriorated. Biden’s deterioration is just as undeniable as Trump’s dishonesty. I will not waste my time prevaricating with you. And if you continue to lie to my face, I intend to give you a taste of your own medicine by lying that Biden is as sharp as a tack.

          I do concede that all politicians- all people for that matter- exaggerate and spin their narratives to bolster their arguments. Politicians on both sides of the aisle are often disingenuous, but Trump is sui generis. And until Trumpists finally admit *what they know to be true* that Trump has been and continues to be a flagrant liar, there can NEVER be peace. Without a modicum of good faith and trust between us, there is no hope.

          1. I am neither a liar or an idiot. I don’t need your insults and irrationality. Thank you very much. Your lunatic ramblings on this site are telling. Trump, Trump supporters or Nazis are not your problem. YOU are your own problem. You need professional counseling. I can’t take anything you say seriously until you get some much needed clinical help. God speed.

            1. Rosemarie,

              I don’t believe in gods. If you can believe in such nonsense as an article of faith against all scientific evidence, I am not surprised that you are prone to swallow Trump’s falsehoods despite the facts to the contrary. People of faith are vulnerable sadly to such conmen like Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart among many others. At least don’t throw away your hard-earned money buying Levin’s book. I’m sure you can find some Trumpist here to lend you his copy with all the good parts underlined. I wish that there was some way I could reach religious people, but I learned a long time ago that one cannot reason with the irrational. Like Trumpism, either you blindly have faith or you don’t.

              1. “I don’t believe in gods. If you can believe in such nonsense as an article of faith against all scientific evidence, “

                There is no more proof that God doesn’t exist than there is that he does. This demonstrates your personal stupidity that you exhibit almost every time you open your mouth. When I look at a person I look for morality. You have none that that is why “you are prone to swallow” the dictates of a new type of Hitler.

                Hitler loved followers that were blind and stupid. He would have loved you.

                SM

                1. May God have mercy on your miserable, nasty soul. Amen. I will keep you in my prayers so you can find Redemption. If I were you, I wouldn’t tell someone they have no morality. You clearly are demonstrating that you have neither morality or decency just like one of Hitler’s SS officers, Mr. Cowardly Anonymous. Like I said about Jeff, I will say about you: “The thing speaks for itself.” I will say no more. Neither you or Jeff are worth any thought, time or replies.

                  1. Rosemarie,

                    Get with the program. You are new here, so you can be forgiven. That comment was not directed at your kind sweet soul. When S.Meyer speaks, he is usually insulting me. I find it amusing, but I am let down when he repeats himself and won’t try harder to come up with new material with which to demean me. I mean you gotta keep it fresh, right?

                1. Just the response I would expect from a person of faith. Stamping of the foot and storming out of the room with hands covering your ears…

                  1. I will pray that God has mercy or your sorry excuse for a soul. I hope that makes you feel better. I wouldn’t want the devil to be waiting for you.

                    1. Rosemarie,

                      Thanks, but why would god want to have mercy on a nonbeliever? I think your prayers will be in vain, but let me know when you hear back from Him. In any case, unlike rational Trumpists who are scaredy-cats of Hell, I’m not afraid to burn for eternity in a pit of fire. So there!

                    2. You are truly evil. What’s ironic is when you denigrate others for what you find objectionable in them, you demonstrate similar negative qualities in yourself. YOU HAVE BECOME WHAT YOU HAVE FORESWORN.

                    3. Rosemarie,

                      You may well be right that I am truly evil. Since I don’t believe in evil, I defer to your expertise on the matter.

                      While the law prohibits my discriminating against you as a Christian person, the law does not prohibit my ridiculing your BELIEFS. Under our Constitution, no belief is sacrosanct. You are free to attack my secular beliefs, e.g., that life does NOT begin at inception but at viability. You are free to call me a “baby-killer.”

                      You would certainly mock the beliefs of the Heaven’s Gate cult as crazy would you not? But I would sooner believe the Heaven’s Gate followers than Christians. After all, Haley’s Comet is science fact. And man has made space ships. The only irrational bit about their theology is the transportation of their souls from earth to the mothership!

                      I don’t denigrate you as a person, dear. As a devout Christian, I know that you are a kind and caring person. So don’t take it too personally that I poke fun at your beliefs. Have a sense of humor. If I didn’t think there was any good in you, I would not waste my time writing to you.

          2. “When you deny that Trump is a chronic and habitual liar, I have to ask myself whether you are a liar or an idiot?”

            Another ignorant ploy by Jeff. His deal is if you lie about Trump, he will tell the truth about Biden.

            What a silly fellow Jeff is. He still doesn’t provide his list of significant lies Trump made during his presidency.

            Nothing more needs to be said about this malicious character. He’s an ideologue afflicted with TDS.

            SM

            1. Yes, SM. “The thing speaks for itself.” I have concluded Jeff is 4 cents short of a nickel when it comes to his ability to reason clearly & engage in civil dialogue.

              1. You are probably now on Jeff’s list of those not worthy of conversing with. Jeff can’t chat with anyone who has a brain. That is why Jeff shows so much affinity for the Bug (eb) and Anonymous the Stupid (who has pretend friends and uses other icons).

                When I talk to those guys, it is a worthless discussion. I generally don’t sign a name and use an anonymous icon indicating that my comment and the comment I am responding to are meant to be trashed. When I sign SM, it is because there is some content, but the poster on the other side has little to say or is loaded with BS. Svelaz is the most prolific of that type. If he says something that is correct, I look it up to make sure of my memory. He repeats his errors from one thread to the next.

                There is little said by the left that is worthwhile except to correct the misinformation.

                1. Oh good! That is the best news I have had all day–that Jeff will no longer converse with me. Thanks for the heads up. I will avoid the others as well. I am not a squirrel so I am not attracted to nuts. Take care and have a nice day.

                  1. Rosemarie,

                    In the old county, a person spat three times in reaction to something evil. Some scholars believe it originated from the miracles carried out through the saliva of Jesus.

                    Did you a spit me out?

  2. Near 70 – Took an antigen test, have the natural antibodies. Near 70, as such trust my own immune system which has no agenda far more than the vaccine pushers which do have an agenda . . .

  3. Jonathan: Todd Zywicki may have recovered from Covid and now has antibodies but that doesn’t mean he is out of the woods. The medical consensus is that such immunity is temporary–maybe 90 days and that such a person still needs to get vaccinated. George Mason’s decision to require all faculty and students at the law school to be vaccinated seems prudent under the circumstances. Under the pretext of wanting to defend a fellow law professor against “coercion” by his employer you have another unstated agenda. Let me explain.

    George Mason University has been the center of controversy for many years–long before the Zywicki case. Like many universities with funding problems due to state cutbacks GWU has had to turn to private donors to fund school programs. Stepping in to fill the gap are private donors for obvious reasons want to remain anonymous. Concerned with the undue influence of private money on faculty appointments and curricula in 2018 an FOIA lawsuit was filed to find out who the GWU donors were. The suit revealed that right-wing groups like the Koch Foundation and the Federalist Society had been making huge donations to the economics and law school schools. The quid pro quo was that these donors were given significant influence over faculty appointments and setting curricula. Koch and the Federalists were interested in promoting capitalism and limiting government regulations that might interfere with “free enterprise”. So Koch and company, through their donations to GMU, gained influence over selection of faculty to ensure only those who supported the capitalist enterprise were appointed. The Koch Foundation has donated $150 million to 300 universities around the country–$50 million alone to GMU to promote the “free market” agenda. Through 2009 Koch had pretty much veto power over faculty appointments at GWU’s Mercatus Center, an economics Koch funded think tank. In 2003 the Center received $900,000 from the Menlo F. Smith Trust. The gift was conditioned on the appointment of a professor who promoted “limited” government. So much for the “independence” of GMU!

    The law school at GMU has not been impervious to the influence of outside money. In 2016 the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyer group, made a $20 million anonymous donation to name the law school after conservative Justice Antonin Scalia–“”Antonin Scalia School of Law”. Someone pointed out the acronym is “ASSlaw”. The University quickly changed the name to “Antonin Scalia Law School”. Outside conservative groups have had an enormous adverse influence on the independence and integrity of GMU and its motto of “Freedom and Learning”. “Freedom”, if it means anything, is freedom from outside groups with an agenda.

    So what do we know about law professor Zywicki whose cause you are championing? Zywicki is on the Board at the Bill of Rights Institute that promotes a “conservative” view of the US Constitution–a view you also support. BRI was founded by the Kochs. No doubt you know Zywicki personally because he is also on the governing board of the “Financial Services Research Program” at George Washington University where you teach at the law school. Zywicki is also on the executive committee for the Federalist Society and a senior scholar at GMU’s Mercatus Center. A tight group of the like-minded don’t you think? Now do you think Zywicki got his appointment at the Scalia Law Scholl because of his sterling academic resume or could it be because of his views that support “free enterprise’ and opposition to government regulation of the financial industry that are identical to those of the Kochs and the Federalists? I dunno. But the “New Civil Liberties Alliance” that is defending Zywicki is a right-wing group that has filed amicus briefs supporting Koch-funded organizations. Boy, you and these guys are tight!

    I don’t want to rain on your parade to defend Zywicki and his cause to fight the vaccination requirement at GMU but it seems you have joined the Koch anti-regulation crowd that thinks “personal freedom” trumps public health even if it jeopardizes the fight against Covid and the Delta variant. In the interest of full disclosure don’t you think you should have mentioned your clear bias in the Zywicki matter? On a final note, you claim George Mason was a “fierce advocate for individual rights” without mentioning that Mason was also a slaveholder. Mason was a tobacco farmer who inherited over 300 slaves from his father. Although during his lifetime Mason expressed some opposition to slavery (not from a moral perspective) he, nevertheless, never freed any of his slaves because he didn’t want to jeopardize his family’s inherited “wealth”. For Mason “individual rights” were only for white planters! That’s the messy part of our racist past you never want to mention because you prefer the white sanitized version!

    1. Dennis, Turley is a civil libertarian, so his support for Zywicki in his column is consistent with his (Turley’s) longstanding beliefs. His only other choice would be not to support ideas he has championed for years.

      Based on the uninformed and erroneous notion that correlation is causation, you have concocted a long and detailed explanation to insult Turley and say his support was due to other reasons.

      It is impressive how far lefties will go to engage in character assassination to ensure everyone conforms to collectivist ideas.

    2. The statement that there is “medical consensus “that the antibodies in a human from a prior COVId 19 infection only lasts 90 days is total misinformation. SARS V1 victims have been shown overwhelmingly to have had antibodies 17 years later. And the CDC and others have confirmed natural immunity is as effective as any vaccine. After all, a vaccine is just to create you own antibodies. If you have them already, why should it ever be a requirement to be also vaccinated. Vaccines are not 100% effective protection as we already know.

    3. Dennis,

      Thanks for your long post. It was very illuminating. It is such a disservice for Turley to express his opinions without submitting himself to accountability by entertaining serious questions. His blog is not unlike Talk Radio wherein the host lectures his listeners without being challenged except when he or she fields a question which has been filtered by their call screener. All your facts are regrettably for naught since the Trumpists here will dismiss them out of hand because you are not one of them. You may only preach to their choir.

      With any luck, however, Turley may read your post and reflect upon what you have stated in hopes that he may become a little more circumspect as to where he stands and in giving his opinions. I wish I could ask Turley to defend his decision to create a blog in which he ignores all questions about his statements. Even a cursory review of the comments will demonstrate how many here misinterpret and misconstrue his opinions. I don’t exclude myself, but how are we to know exactly where he stands on an issue unless he clarifies his commentary by addressing fair-minded and legitimate questions? What purpose does it serve to have his opinions misrepresented? Does he not have an obligation as an academic to make sure that he is not misunderstood?

        1. Why would you be attacked? Everyone already knows who and what you are. Honesty is not your problem. The lack of honesty is.

          SM

      1. Jeff: You and I are in a distinct minority. Notice that many of Turley’s loyal followers don’t deal in rational debate. I have been variously called a “moron”, “insulting” Turley, a “lack of honesty” and resorting to “character assassination”. No reasoned argument–just personal attacks. Take the controversy over Covid. I don’t pretend to be a medical expert. But after reading some of the literature and the CDC guidelines it is clear even if you have recovered from the virus you still need to get vaccinated. I also have some anecdotal evidence. My brother-in-law came down with the virus last year along with several of my friends. Thankfully, they all recovered after several months of being sick. But all their doctors said they still needed to get vaccinated. That’s because the level of anti-bodies in Covid survivors varies and there is not enough data indicating how long you can remain immune. Natural immunities will not protect you–especially against the Delta variant. Over 90% of those now infected are unvaccinated. So it is counter intuitive to believe that if you are a Covid survivor you can count on your anti-bodies to protect you. But don’t tell this to the anti-vacs.

        You would think that Turley, who got his entire family vaccinated, would be following the science and would urge his followers to get the vaccines. He is proud he now has 52,000.000 of them. Does he urge his followers to get vaccinated? Nope. He is supporting the anti-vacs, like Todd Zywicki, at George Mason law school, who Turley bizarrely claims “has anti-bodies” and he should not be “coerced” by his law school. But the science indicates that Covid survivors can still pass the virus to others even though they might have a certain level of immunity themselves. George Mason is following the CDC guidelines. Zywicki doesn’t have the “right” to be unvaccinated if he wants to teach at the law school. Of course, Zywicki has a right to teach elsewhere but not to expose the faculty and students at George Mason to possible infection. Notice Turley doesn’t argue that Zywicki has a legal leg to stand on in his fight with George Mason.

        What I tried to point out is that neither Turley nor Zywicki are interested in trying to stop the spread of the virus. They have an agenda, backed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, to eliminate any government regulation they don’t like. They have piggy-backed on the anti-vac crowd to pursue their anti-government agenda–that “individual rights” trump government and university attempts to control the virus.

        Frankly, I doubt Turley reads any of our posts. He doesn’t want a serious debate over his false claims on subjects like Covid. That’s OK. You and I can continue to point out to his loyal followers the fallacies in many of his arguments. It drives them ballistic! So keep posting and I will too.

        1. “and resorting to “character assassination”

          Dennis, I was at least one of those who brought up character assassination. I provided an explanation and will provide it again.

          Dennis, Turley is a civil libertarian, so his support for Zywicki in his column is consistent with his (Turley’s) longstanding beliefs. His only other choice would be not to support ideas he has championed for years.

          Based on the uninformed and erroneous notion that correlation is causation, you have concocted a long and detailed explanation to insult Turley and say his support was due to other reasons.

        2. “What I tried to point out is that neither Turley nor Zywicki are interested in trying to stop the spread of the virus.”

          Based on what Turley has written this statement about Turley is totally untrue. Anyone with an open mind can see that he like most sane people are committed to stopping the virus and causing the least harm from it. Some think force, lying and cancelling individuals stops the virus. It doesn’t. Applying science which is what many on the right are doing fights Covid. Making up stories doesn’t.

          “He doesn’t want a serious debate over his false claims on subjects like Covid. “

          That is not true. He wants more speech not less.

        3. Dennis, I am an RN, a conservative and not anti-vax and have been vaccinated for COVID. I am admirer of Prof. Turley, but know nothing about Prof. Z. That being said, I would like to remind you that even conservatives, conservative groups, conservative universities and faculties have rights under our Constitution. Prof Turley is going to have to prove that there is risk to his client in getting the COVID vaccine just as the University will have to prove there is not as that is their assertion. No doubt countless studies will be cited. The COVID studies, it seems, are a very fluid situation with more info coming out daily–sometimes conflicting depending on the focus of the study. Many factors go into judging a study’s reliability. One must always consider in medical matters, the risk-benefit ratio. Professor Turley is going to have to prove that the risk to his client getting vaccinated is sufficient that is outweighs the risk to the public or common good if he does not get vaccinated. He will also have to provide evidence that his POV represents the “reasonable standard of care” medically. Again more studies will be cited. I don’t think this is a slam dunk for Professor Turley. A lot depends on the judge’s leanings and interpretation of the law. So who knows. Either way, I think bringing the case forward is a good thing as it will SET PRECEDENT one way or the other. I do know that many local unions for first responders and teachers are bringing forth suits to question a vaccine mandate for their members. Emeritus Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in an article gave the opinion that the Supreme Court would UPHOLD mandatory vaccinations in CERTAIN settings, such as, for health care workers and first responders. He said nothing about teachers or Universities or University faculty in his opinion. I do hope you are not so far Left that you do not consider George Mason U. or its faculty worthy of the court’s consideration because George Mason was a slaveholder. I am not sure why you would bring that up. Or what slavery has to so with COVID. I am confused by your closing statements in your original comment. We are ALL under the Constitution, Right or Left, Black, White, Brown or Yellow.

          1. Rosemarie: Thx for your thoughtful comments. I doubt Turley is representing Professor Zywicki. According Turley Zywicki is being represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Turley knows it is unlikely Zywicki could prevail in a lawsuit. Neither the medical evidence nor the case law supports him. As you probably know small pox has been eliminated in the US due to vast vaccination programs starting in the early 20th century. Massachusetts had a law requiring small pox vaccination for all adults. Those who refused could be criminally prosecuted. One person refused to be vaccinated and was prosecuted. He sued and the case ended up at the Supreme Court. In Jacobson v Massachusetts (197 US 11, 1905) the Court ruled against Jacobson saying the “police power” of the state included the ability to “enact a compulsory vaccination law”. Notice that in his column Turley doesn’t cite any case law or medical evidence to support Zywicki’s claim. If there was Turley would go into great detail. That’s telling. Don’t you think the faculty, students and staff at George Mason University also have “individual rights” to be protected from Covid? That Zywicki could pass on the virus because of his unvaccinated status. Should a minority of one be able to dictate university policy that is attempting to protect the entire university community? Now GMU’s policy does have religious and medical exemptions–the latter for those with underlying medical conditions that could be compromised by vaccination. Zywicki doesn’t fit into that category. He simply claims that as a Covid survivor he has antibodies that prevent HIM from being infected. Nobody knows how long Zywicki’s immunity will last and despite his antibodies he could still infect others. That’s why the medical consensus recommends even Covid survivors need to be vaccinated. Zywicki is selfish. He is not concerned about the health and safety of fellow faculty and students. He simply is pushing the conservative agenda, backed by Turley, to fight against government “coercion”.

            You are right slavery has nothing to do with Covid. I only raised the issue because Turley claims Gorge Mason was a “fierce advocate for individual rights”–implying Mason would object to his name sake violating the “individual rights” of Professor Zywicki. George Mason was a slaveholder who believed “individual rights” only applied to white tobacco farmers like him. The “individual rights” of slaves didn’t count. Notice again Turley only defends the rights of white conservative professors. Do you think that is just coincidental?

            1. Dennis, thanks for laying out your thoughtful opinion. Of course everyone at GMU has individual rights. But that is the question. Does anyone’s individual right for any reason supersede the common good? On the other hand, do we want governmental coercion? That is why regardless of who brings the legal case forward, it should be done to set precedent once and for all for this question. That is why I mentioned the other groups who are also thinking of mounting challenges to mandatory vaccination. Neither of us know if only white persons approached Turley to be represented. There are Black conservatives. With Turley, I think it is more a question of one’s political leanings than race though he is a Democrat. As I said, I don’t think this will be a slam dunk for Turley or this group. I appreciate your position on the contagion risk presented by Prof. Z. I am not saying it can’t happen. What I am saying is I believe it is unlikely to happen that he will be a one man contagion catastrophe. What I would do if I was President of GMU or Dean of the School of Law, is try to save everyone a lot of time, aggravation and money. I would offer Prof. Z the option of being tested for COVID several times a week or preferably becoming an online Professor who teaches only virtual classes. That would eliminate the risk. But I think Turley et al want a court case to be the ones to set precedent. I admit they might lose.
              What concerns me more than this situation is what risk illegal migrants are presenting at our Southern border just for the shear numbers. It is estimated that by the end of the year, 2 million migrants will have crossed over into the US, not counting thousands of the got aways. They are coming from all over the world from countries with little or non-existent health care and certainly no COVID vaccination programs. This presents a great risk of COVID to U.S. citizens. These people are not masked, tested or vaccinated for COVID. They are being transported to towns and communities by bus or plane all over the U.S. to locations where the local governments cannot possibly handle their essential needs. I am familiar with the health demands this can present and the cost and vigilance involved. I worked for over 30 years as a school nurse. The bulk of my experience was in what was essentially an ESL large urban high school with 2000 students from all over the world. Over 20 languages were spoken in the school. I can attest to the health care in many parts of the world epescially Haiti and Central and South America and several African nations. The students lacked the basic immunizations required for a U.S. student to be enrolled in school. They had to receive a provisional set of immunizations to be enrolled then followed up for a year to make sure they returned to the city public health centers to complete their immunizations. I can tell you that TB and hepatitis as well as other infectious diseases were a problem with these populations. Indeed, with the admission of so many unaccompanied minors to the U.S., TB is now on the rise and it is a drug-resistant TB. So with this frame of reference, I can’t go to the worse possible case scenario with one law professor who at least has had COVID and has some antibodies. He does not present nearly the danger that these unfortunate immigrants do who may actually be ill with COVID and are out and about. The U.S. Public Health Service should be at the border vaccinating people. So where are they and why isn’t the Surgeon General concerned about the southern border? I don’t know. It would seem the rights of U.S. citizens to be protected from contagion supersedes the right of people to enter the U.S. illegally. Thanks for addressing my questions and concerns. It has been a pleasure discussing these topics with you. I better get off of here before Turley charges me for writing so much on his Blog. All the best!

          2. Rosemary:

            “Professor Turley is going to have to prove that the risk to his client getting vaccinated is sufficient that is outweighs the risk to the public or common good if he does not get vaccinated.”
            *****************************************
            Marx would have said it better and did* bu the thought is the same – prove your right to your rights or lose them to the state who ALWAYS claim a good collectivist reason for trampling them! Oh and btw there is no proving such esoterics as “risk to the public or common good.” Every Maoist cultural warrior knows that and that’s why they reverently say it so often when confronted with their treachery.

            In America, it’s the government’s high burden to prove why taking your rights is absolutely required, not the other way ’round, my dear Florence Nightingale. The medical profession is chock full of collectivists, and it’s good to recall that the medical profession was enthusiastically bleeding folks with leeches to cure “consumption” (pulmonary tuberculosis) while those in my profession were writing the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

            * “Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand.” ~Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy, Karl Marx

        4. Dennis,

          I understand your frustration with the lack of reasoned debate with Trumpists; they take after their leader who is a liar and irrational. For this reason, like you, I address my comments to Turley directly, for what it is worth. I may reply to some Trumpists who react to my posts if their comments are intelligible, and there are a few who I ignore completely because they are troubled individuals.

          I confess that I have not and will not research the efficacy of the vaccinations. I am not qualified to do so. Turley’s immediate reliance upon the advice of the medical establishment is good enough for me! I trust his judgment unlike Trumpists. My only beef with him is his obvious *inconsistency* in rightly denouncing the rhetorical rage in the media across ALL cable platforms- Left and Right. Turley entirely ignores Fox, Newsmax, and One America Network. If Turley believes that these Rightwing networks are NOT journalistic endeavors (unlike CNN and MSNBC), he should simply say so. That would explain why he holds CNN and MSNBC to a higher standard. Even so, it is hypocritical of Turley not to point out the abuses on the Right, and I contend that he would do so were he not on Fox’s payroll.

          I have to differ with you on Turley’s motivation. I can’t believe that he is not interested in trying to stop the spread of the virus. He does raise Constitutional objections which is his responsibility to do as a legal expert, but the very fact that he never fails to mention his immediate and unqualified consent to get his entire family vaccinated indicates that he totally rejects the Trumpist vaccine conspiracy theories. Admittedly, his actions speak louder than his words.

          As for your claim that Turley has an agenda, backed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, to eliminate any government regulation he does not like, I confess I don’t know of what you speak. I will need more information on your allegation, but I am a bit skeptical without more evidence.

          There are times I can’t resist mocking and ridiculing some particularly unhinged Trumpist post, but that was not the purpose for my joining this blog. I was hoping that there would be logical, reasoned, factually and legally based arguments among actual attorneys, but judging from the commentary, there are very few lawyers on this blog. You would think that an academic like Turley would be interested in a forum of legal experts exclusively instead of the free-for-all which his blog has become. There is so much noise here that is it difficult to justify the time it takes to contribute. It’s only on account of the few anti-Trumpists here (on which I can count on no more than 2 hands) that I find solace. I look forward to your contributions.

          1. “I understand your frustration with the lack of reasoned debate with Trumpists; they take after their leader who is a liar and irrational.

            Jeff, you are talking about yourself. While saying you don’t hate anyone, those you hate are upfront and say what they believe. You accuse but are afraid to state your accusations. You are even afraid of writing to Turley. Your support comes from people ignorant like Anonymous the Stupid, who doesn’t recognize that you refuse to talk to those that won’t let you get away with your cr-p.

            “Turley’s immediate reliance upon the advice of the medical establishment is good enough for me! I trust his judgment unlike Trumpists. ”

            Those who support Trump vote for him. They stand with him even though they might disagree with some of his policies. Overall, like you, they trust his judgment. To think the opposite is the height of stupidity.

            “Turley entirely ignores ”

            One can’t help you. You don’t know what Turley stands for even though he writes it in almost every one of his columns. Turley is a voice of reason. The funny thing is that Turley’s political positions are on the other side of the aisle from those you hate. You can’t stand it when someone stands up for everyone’s right to speech, even if he disagrees with what they say. You want to fight those people you disagree with, so you run behind Turley, hoping he will defend you as if you were a child. Instead, you are a child who will not protect and stand behind his ideas requiring others to do it for him. You are not a man.

            “I was hoping that there would be logical, reasoned, factually and legally based arguments among actual attorneys”

            What intelligent lawyer or intelligent person would want to engage with a coward who accuses but cannot place his accusations into the light? You have supporters like Anonymous the Stupid and the Bug, who likes to tell tall tales. They agree with your politics, but like you know nothing and are unworthy of any intelligent discussion.

            Dennis, though brighter than the two you mention, doesn’t engage except in agreement with you. That is fine, but that is not what you say you are looking for.

            You are looking to debate one on the other side of the aisle as dumb as the two I have already mentioned. You want to be a predator, but you know you will be eaten alive in an honest debate.

            1. You are right. The more I read from Jeff and Dennis, I too realize the LEFT does not want debate, but praise for their superior intellects and agreement with them hook, line and sinker. They have no room for differing opinions. Their insults to people who don’t agree with them or support Trump are uncalled for. Neither of them have met every Trump supporter. I just ask them, are you better off now with rising inflation on the prices of food, gasoline and all kinds of goods? Are you pleased with our loss of energy independence. Are you happy with the chaos at the border. COVID is being spread throughout the US by hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants being released by bus and plane to all parts of the US. Our hospitals, health care systems, law enforcement and schools cannot bear this burden. Our Border Patrol has estimated that 2 million migrants will cross over the border by the end of this year, not counting the thousands of got aways. These people are not masked, not getting tested though many show symptoms of COVID. They are certainly not getting vaccinated, yet are gaining entry into the US. None of this was happening under the “evil” Trump. Now all you can worry about is one well and recuperated, non-contagious law professor because he is a conservative from a conservative school. Did you even know that Jonathan Turley identifies as a Democrat? Pardon me, but I don’t think it is the Trump supporters who are making stupid arguments and not worried about the spread of COVID. You wanted Biden, well now you have him warts and all. He has yet to visit the border and the closest Kamala got to it was a nearby airport. If you question what is going on at the border, google the Texas Dept of Public Safety, Texas & Arizona governors and Sheriffs’ Associations as well as the Border Patrol. It is criminal how women are being sexually trafficked and how children are being abused and molested by “coyotes” who work for the cartels. But the MSM is not worried about this–“Nothing to see here.” The Border Patrol has been forbidden by the Biden administration from speaking to the press unless the interview is first approved by the White House. They don’t want the people to know how bad things are at the southern border. So much for journalistic efforts and freedom of the press. If the press are muzzled what freedom will be curtailed next? American Marxists are among us and they are not the Trump supporters. American Marxists want to control you, your family, health care, job and your family, especially your children. They want to turn your children against you.This is what critical race theory does as well as early in appropriate grade level sex education. Beware of the far Left trying to control everything. They are the new American Marxists.

              1. Rosemarie has clearly read Mark Levin’s book “American Marxism,” to wit:

                “American Marxists are among us and they are not the Trump supporters. American Marxists want to control you, your family, health care, job and your family, especially your children. They want to turn your children against you.This is what critical race theory does as well as early in appropriate grade level sex education. Beware of the far Left trying to control everything. They are the new American Marxists.”

                We American Marxists are going to fight you American Nazis tooth and nail. This time we are NOT going quietly to the camps. NEVER AGAIN.

                1. Are you crazy? We are not Nazis. Trump supporters are people who want the liberties and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution. We have no intentions of putting anyone in camps. You on the other hand are a Marxist who wants to control everything and wants the government to control all aspects of everyone’s lives. Not much different from the Nazis. What people did Trump put in camps and who did more for the state of Israel than Trump as a trusted ally of the US? Would a Nazi do that? I haven’t read Mark Levin’s book, but watch his show. I have respect for his opinions. He is Jewish and believes in God. Have you noticed how the Middle East has destabilized since the Biden administration came into office. If you think Marxism is the way to go, then where has it worked in other parts of the world? Russia? Venezuela? Cuba? Marxism has been responsible for the economic ruin of societies, the deaths of millions of people and the torture and starvation of millions more. If you think that is the way to go, then be careful what you wish for. It’s not Nazis you need to fear, but yourself and your own warped ideas. Have you noticed the founders of BLM who claim they are Marxist but one of whom bought six houses with BLM’s millions. But black lives don’t matter to them when you look at the crime in major cities, all the Blacks who are killed and BLM’s non-response. What exactly has the Marxist BLM done for Black communities? Trump on the other hand established economic opportunity zones in poor Black communities and had the lowest Black unemployment ever. Not exactly a Nazi. And take Bernie Sanders, another hypocrite Marxist, who wants socialism for you, but for himself and his wife–both are slaves to capitalism being worth millions from schemes to bilk others. It’s not Trump supporters you need to fear. And how about George Soros, a Jew, who outed Jewish families in hiding from the Nazis. He expresses no remorse for his actions. He was the biggest financial supporter for Obama’s presidential campaigns. Now he is the biggest financial supporter for radical Democrat candidates all over the country. Especially district attorneys who are in favor of tying the hands of the police and no cash bail even for violent criminals. So now you have criminals free to create more violence with as many as 7 felony warrants against them. And Soros is the funding behind Antifa who incite riots, burn and loot. Such actions are responsible for billions of dollars in property damage and most of all loss of minority businesses in minority communities and the wounding of over 2000 law enforcement officers and the deaths of several more. Once again I say it is not Trump supporters you need to fear, but yourselves, your own Marxist ideas and professed American Marxist leaders.

                2. “We American Marxists are going to fight you American Nazis tooth and nail. This time we are NOT going quietly to the camps. NEVER AGAIN.”
                  ************************
                  Hahahaha! You’ll go where you’re told — like every good Marxist. It’s what you guys do.

                3. Jeff, the only mistake Mark Levin likely made in his book was calling you an American Marxist instead of a hateful Nazi that would have no problem gassing those he disagreed with.

                  Jeff’s ‘never again’ is B.S., and he has proved that time after time.’ Never again’ excludes him, not others. He will march with whichever Nazi is in power and not give a damn who in the process is hurt.

                  SM

                4. Jeff, what the heck are you talking about. Nazis believed in an all powerful government with very limited individual rights, such as the right of a Jew not to be gassed and turned into a lampshade.

                  It would be literally impossible for Nazis or Fascism to arise under the conservative principles of limited government, strong individual rights, and free speech.

                  However, it would be very possible for such abuses to arise under the Left hegemony, in which political dissenters are targeted for ruin, sometimes physically attacked. They act like Brown Shirts. The Left, especially Antifa, labels anything that they disagree with as “Fascist”, with a whimsical lack of any understanding of what Fascism actually entails.

                  Public spaces are being divided based on vaccination status. Racist ideology promotes the concept that you are born oppressed or oppressor, based on immutable characteristics such as race. The state seeks more control over children, for example when children are taught that gender is mutable and indefinable. It’s not based on genetics, genitals, or behavior. There is no longer any definition of male or female, or any of the myriad gender identities and pronouns. Information and counseling on transgenderism is given to children in some districts without notifying parents.

                  The Left has even created racially segregated college dorms, graduations, student groups, and clubs. It has instituted racist hiring and college application practices.

                  Abusing conservatives is a virtue. There has been talk of “reeducation camps” for Trump voters. Black listing. Assaults. Entire city blocks seized as anarchical “autonomous zones.” Anti-cop rhetoric. Defund police. Riots. Looting. Arson. Holding entire blue cities hostage. Rising violence and murder.

                  And you think the danger comes from conservatives?

                  For tyranny to rise requires gullible followers not to question or reason.

                  1. Karen says, “For tyranny to rise requires gullible followers not to question or reason.”

                    Boy, you said it. I agree wholeheartedly. Time will tell who was more gullible and blind to facts and reason.

                    Go on the record now. *IF* Trump is ever found guilty of any crime or held liable for lying (Defamation) in a civil court, will you accept the jury’s verdict? Or will you simply accept Trump’s claim that he was framed or the victim of a witch-hunt? Suppose Alan Weisselberg cooperates with the government, will you accept Trump’s accusation that he is a “rat” not to be believed?

                    Is there anything that would make you begin to question your faith in Trump??

              2. Rosemarie, Jeff says he lives a very comfortable life so that the nation’s economy doesn’t significantly impact him. He sounds like a spoiled brat whose parents had more than sufficient money and sent Jeff to private school, something he confirmed.

                Based on the intellectual deficiencies he demonstrates on the blog, I will not be surprised if most of his assets came from his parents. He neither strikes me as worldly or intelligent.

                I am used to making my own life and am pretty comfortable. Still, unlike Jeff, I am grateful for what I have and want to see others in less affluent communities protected from Democrats who favor illegal aliens, including rapists and murderers, over the American working class.

                1. Understood. That’s why Trump’s economic opportunity zones in poor neighborhoods were so good. I hate to think all that has gone by the wayside, but I guess it has. I don’t know how this chasm between the Right and Left can be closed. We need some kind of huge round tables all over the country where participants pledge not to call each other names, use profanity or shout. Could that ever be possible? First, I would like someone to explain where the frightening depth of hatred for Trump comes from. I had a son who was shot and killed. No one was ever charged. He never got justice. Even so, I don’t have this kind of hatred for who I believe is responsible. I hope I never do. It is pathological. I wish someone could explain rationally to me the root of their profound anger and hatred. Other than saying Trump was a liar and irrational. It is disturbing. Have you taken a look at Biden? He has been caught in many lies like saying he didn’t know anything about his son Hunter’s business affairs when he is seen in photos with these same people. Oh right, they were just talking about golf and grandchildren. Biden has to be the most corrupt politician ever. But he is treated with kid gloves while Trump is despised especially by the MSM. Go figure. Compare the list of accomplishments by Trump to the non-list of accomplishments by Biden after 47 years in politics. What did he accomplish as a Senator or Vice-President that was in anyway significant? Do you honestly think Biden has the physical stamina and mental acumen to be President?

                  1. Rosemarie,

                    You certainly have the Mark Levin false narratives memorized. My compliments! You say that you have not bought his book? Why not? He says that you can’t be part of his cause to push back against “American Marxism” until you sell out $16.95 to buy his book.

                    You say, “Biden has to be the most corrupt politician ever.”

                    You ask, “I don’t know how this chasm between the Right and Left can be closed. We need some kind of huge round tables all over the country where participants pledge not to call each other names, use profanity or shout. Could that ever be possible?“

                    You think Levin will ever stop shouting with rage and calling people names? Not until he drops dead. The Left/Right chasm will never be breached until Trumpists acknowledge that Trump is more corrupt and has told more lies than Biden. Period.

                    1. Well you don’t even have the guts to use your name. What is false to you is truth to me. If it makes you feel better, I won’t invite Mark Levin to the round tables or you either since you are so negative. I promise to speak softly and represent Mark well. Now go back to wallowing in your hate and negativity. I feel sorry for whoever needs to be around you on a daily basis, but maybe misery loves company. Have a nice evening!

                  2. Rosemarie,

                    Trump did a good job, excellent if one recognizes that he was paddling upstream because the left wanted failure. They could see that he was improving the lives of the poor and the minorities and making America great again.

                    The break between today’s left and American tradition cannot be closed. Today’s left is a radical type of Marxism that is racist and can only lead to failure. We can only hope that the Democrats of the past rise and throw this new malignant Democrat out. We also have to hope that Republicans grow a spine. Our leaders are supposed to serve American interests and not their own.

                    “We need some kind of huge round tables all over the country where participants pledge not to call each other names,”

                    Historically Democrats have been far more aggressive than Republicans, who tend to lie on their backs. Look historically at how Democrats treated Reagan, Kill Bush and then Trump, where the left broke all types of laws and standards. IMO Americans need not worry about politeness. They need to do whatever needs to be done to reinstate the rule of law and character over color. We can see on this blog how despicable those promoting the left are today. They are not interested in discussion.

                    “I had a son who was shot and killed. No one was ever charged. He never got justice.”

                    My sincere condolences. There is nothing anyone can say. We are forced to recognize our mortality, but to comprehend or justify the death of one’s child is too brutal.

                    1. S.Meyer, I thank you for your condolences. It has been a hard road, but I write a Blog for Bereaved Parents. My late husband who was very ill at the time, died six weeks after our son. I was alone for many years, but re-married 4 months ago. God is good. I agree with all the points that you made. It’s a fine balance. I worked for a large inner city school district for 24 years. My motto was, “Discretion is the better part of valor 98% of the time, but sometimes you gotta come out swinging with all you got.”

                    2. Rosemarie,

                      I am glad you were able to keep yourself on the high road. The Jeffs of this world caused a lot of suffering and death, including family members of mine. That he carries a typically Jewish name doesn’t mean he has learned anything from history. Instead, he uses history in the worst possible way.

                    3. Rosemarie,

                      You may not be aware that I announced that I would no longer be replying to any comments made by S.Meyer. So please do not infer that my silence suggests that I do not take issue with his opinions. Others on this blog share my concern for Meyer’s well-being, but unlike them, I have given up responding because I believe that his is a hopeless case.

                    4. Rosemarie,

                      Case in point, you will notice that S.Meyer will likely not be able to resist his psychological compulsion to react to my last post, but let’s see if he can contain this impulse.

                    5. Jeff, you don’t have to tell Rosemarie that you don’t agree with me. That is evident from the postings. From the start I asked you to list Trump’s significant lies in his Presidential duties. You didn’t like that I wouldn’t take your non-responsive answers so you decided not to respond to me, but you made sure you stated it publicly. You could have just not responded, but you have this overvalued feeling about your intelligence and ability to hold your own. You have proven the opposite and rely on two repetitive themes involving Trump and Turley, both of them being libelous and idiotic..

                    6. Thank you again. I am grateful that things have turned around for me. What I read on some of the posts here are pretty-much what you can expect from some of these irrational Anti-Trumpistsmwho can never explain why they are so angry. It is my opinion as an RN, that a couple of these people are deeply disturbed if not downright delusional. They cannot explain in detail what there beef is with Trump. I think Trump is not there problem. They are there own problem and projecting there personal issues on Trump.

    4. Dennis McIntyre wrote “The medical consensus is that such immunity is temporary–maybe 90 days and that such a person still needs to get vaccinated.”

      That is patently incorrect. You should not be spreading such misinformation! Here’s one reference from the NIH. There are plenty more if you fire up Google.

      January 26, 2021
      Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19

      At a Glance
      – The immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had durable memories of the virus up to eight months after infection.
      – The results provide hope that people receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will develop similar lasting immune memories after vaccination.

      https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19

      Additionally, it has been proven that naturally acquired immunity is better than any immunity (or is actually harms reduction?) that the new vaccines provide. The new vaccines will require periodic booster shots to deal with new variants while people with naturally acquired immunity will not have to be reinfected to rebuild their immunity.

    5. So you are saying it is wrong for college professors to push a political agenda and have backing of radical groups?

    6. “The medical consensus is that such immunity is temporary–maybe 90 days and that such a person still needs to get vaccinated.”

      That is incorrect. People who had SARS-CoV1 in 2003 still have those antibodies, which are also effective against SARS-CoV2. (Side note: isn’t that interesting…?) Also, a recent study showed that people who recovered from SARS-CoV2 had antibodies “up to 8 months”… only because the study ended at 8 months. Now, many doctors are parroting that natural immunity only lasts for 8 months because they apparently can’t properly read a scientific report.

      Many doctors and scientists went on record and warned *against* vaccinating a large portion of the population in the middle of a pandemic in order to avoid what we’re seeing right now with variants.

    7. I don’t want to rain on your parade to defend Zywicki and his cause to fight the vaccination requirement at GMU but it seems you have joined the Koch anti-regulation crowd that thinks “personal freedom” trumps public health even if it jeopardizes the fight against Covid and the Delta variant.

      Lawrence v. Texas.

    8. Dennis,

      I liked your story that the school was named the –“Antonin Scalia School of Law” until someone pointed out the acronym is “ASSlaw”. The University quickly changed the name to “Antonin Scalia Law School.” At Brown University, the library was donated by John D. Rockefeller, and the students referred to it as “The Rock,” until Mrs. Rockefeller felt the name was disrespectful, at which point, they referred to it as “The John.”

  4. The CDC issued a advisory saying that antibody tests should not be given at all, neither before or after vaccination. Why? Natural immunity is effective and long lasting, and is not
    improved by these injections. Yet this government, and governments world wide, are mindlessly refusing to recognize this. Why? Refusal to recognize treatments. Refusal to recognize natural immunity. It appears that, at best, the motive is to continue “covid fear”, cases and emergency rule. How can this make any sense? How can this idiocy be stopped?

    \\

    1. “How can this idiocy be stopped?”

      In about 15 months we get the opportunity to vote the politicians out of office. If we then get a more “freedom” freienly Congress, hopefully they will work to limit the power that health officials now hold.

  5. It is really disturbing to read all the name calling and vilifying on this site. It is so unnecessary. What I have learned, after 49 years as a practicing RN, is you can always find a study to verify your position. Unless you are a Board certified physician in Infectious Disease, you should at least have respect for others POV’S. The one I don’t trust is the CDC due to all their flip-flopping and backtracking. That being said, if you ask 10 different Inf. Dis. docs, their opinion on this topic you would probably get 10 differing opinions. As with this or any topic in medicine, there are many studies and many POV’s. What really matters is the “risk-benefit ratio” of any given treatment. That is a highly personal matter based on one’s age, medical conditions and past medical history and family history. Even taking aspirin, Tylenol or NSAIDS has a risk-benefit ratio. I cannot take the flu vaccine as it gave me a rare form of neuropathy. But, I elected to take the COVID vaccine after discussion with my physician and considering the contagion and lethality of COVID compared to influenza. We determined the benefit out weighed the risk for me. I took the 2 doses of Pfizer w/o any problem. Mean-spirited criticism of one another and Professor Turley is uncalled for. It will hardly elevate your post or change anyone’s mind. It smacks of fascism where everyone should be the same and controlled by governments and institutions. We still have freedom of speech in this country. Emeritus Law Professor Alan Dershowitz wrote an article in which his opinion was the Supreme Court would uphold mandatory employee vaccinations in CERTAIN situations such as hospital personnel and first responders and long-term health care. In Professor Turley’s article, knowing a little about medical malpractice, it seems incumbent upon the University in question, to Prove there is “no risk” to individuals getting the vaccine who have already had COVID and have a “reasonable” level of antibodies, (TBD) as that is the University’s supposition. In medicine the question is always, “What is the reasonable standard of care?” And with the law, it remains to balance one’s individual rights against the common good. I think the Supreme court will have to make that decision.

    1. Hi , thanks for your opinion.

      I would like to share my opinion here. Going on my 7th decade on Terra Firma & related to many large families & being somewhat a responsible person I’ve multiple times exhausted myself burying the medical community’s Phk’ups. I guess they say: Oops, another one down, Next! I’m not saying they are all like that.

      But let me cut to the chase of just what incompetent Imbeciles the public like me have to deal with today with this Medical Community, Govt-Made Binary Bio-Weapon Sars/Covid & it’s corresponding attachments Big Pharmas’ Gene Therapy.

      Yesterday it came out the the AMA endorsed leaving off the birth certificate the gender of a new born child.

      As with those other issues so what are we the citizens left to believe than those AMA Imbeciles are so out of their minds insane that they don’t even know the difference between a Penis & a Virgin or the function is of God’s human built in junk!

      With that & other acquired knowledge of life I deem the medical community’s leadership incompetent.

      Feel free to look it up.

      https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=AMA+recommends++leaving+off+the+birth+certificate+the+gender+of+a+new+born+child++news+++++&ia=web

      Know back on the ongoing Democide/Genocide/Public Charges against those Aholes by way of the Sars/Covid/Vacs’ :

      Plandemic 2: Indoctornation

      472,187 views

      ·

      Sep 14, 2020
      43
      Share
      Download
      Most Banned Videos
      Most Banned Videos

      Created by the team behind the game-changing Plandemic video segment from Mikki Willis featuring Dr. Judy Mikovits that went viral and was banned on every major social media platform for exposing the truth about Covid-19, this new FEATURE LENGTH PIECE which is the most revelatory film on what is driving the vaccine agenda, the various roles of the WHO, Bill Gates, Tedros Adhanom, Anthony Fauci and more.

      Going deep into what is really happening with mainstream media, Silicon Valley tech giants, big pharma and our health protection agencies, Mikki’s new film finally connects the dots…

      https://banned.video/watch?id=5f5fe441dc50dc07a1fbe5c1

  6. This question will now be required to all those mandating protocols

    By what metric will you lift this protocol?

  7. There should be No immunity for the Evil Aholes that cooked all these Democide / Genocide Bi Bio-Weapons up, but rather a Warp Speed Trail.

    There is Evidence, Facts & Laws everywhere for the Criminal Charges for people far worst, I believe, then Hitler’s Nazis on PCP & Steroids……

    I’ve seen enough already & know I see the trailer for this:

    Plandemic 2: Indoctornation

    472,187 views

    ·

    Sep 14, 2020
    43
    Share
    Download
    Most Banned Videos
    Most Banned Videos

    Created by the team behind the game-changing Plandemic video segment from Mikki Willis featuring Dr. Judy Mikovits that went viral and was banned on every major social media platform for exposing the truth about Covid-19, this new FEATURE LENGTH PIECE which is the most revelatory film on what is driving the vaccine agenda, the various roles of the WHO, Bill Gates, Tedros Adhanom, Anthony Fauci and more.

    Going deep into what is really happening with mainstream media, Silicon Valley tech giants, big pharma and our health protection agencies, Mikki’s new film finally connects the dots…

    Save 50% on our hottest products before they’re gone during the Limited Supply Flash Sale!

    https://banned.video/watch?id=5f5fe441dc50dc07a1fbe5c1

  8. The relevant question is whether someone has protective antibodies. It does not matter how they were acquired, whether by vaccine or infection.

    Immunity is either there, or it’s not.

Leave a Reply