Court Cases and Judgements
- Dr Coetzee and others vs SAHPRA
- ACDP and Doctors for Life vs SAHPRA
- ‘I can make a difference’ Doctors and Medical Practitioners Group vs SAHPRA
- Eight Pharmacies vs SAHPRA
An order was passed by the High Court on 1 April 2021 that SAHPRA would enable the use of Ivermectin for preventing and treating COVID-19. This means medical practitioners may prescribe Ivermectin and any South Africans may legally obtain Ivermectin in a form approved for human use (therefore there is no need to use veterinary grade Ivermectin)
“First vax case”, an aribtration set down by Schalk van der Merwe
Formal notice of set-down was sent by Schalk van de Merwe as part of what he believes to be the first ‘vax case’ in South Africa involving a company-employee in Natal that was dismissed. Given that it is an arbitration, it is a public-domain case, meaning that all information should be published as it becomes available, subject to the provisions of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), Act 4 of 2013.
CCMA case KNNC863-21 (HO) is scheduled for arbitration on Tuesday, 16 November 2021 at 9am.
Ricardo Maarman vs. President Cyril Ramaphosa, The Speaker of The House, and the Governor of The Reserve Bank
Ricardo Maarman has filed a case before the Constitutional Court of South Africa.
Maarman claims that the President, Government and Reserve Bank of South Africa have failed to follow correct procedure as it relates to COVID-19. He is therefore on behalf of the People of South Africa seeking a ruling to hold the President and Parliament liable for the damages, as well as a ruling to will liquidate the South African Reserve Bank in order to pay damages suffered by the people.
“Show us the virus”
- RICARDO MAARMAN vs STATE
On 27th May 2021, Ricardo Maarman approached the High Court of South Africa in a landmark case requesting the government to produce proof of the SARS-CoV‑2 virus in its isolated and purified form. Maarman maintains that if there is no isolated SARS-CoV‑2 virus then the lockdown measures are unjustifiable and criminal. While the case was struck off on the grounds that “the applicant has not made a case for urgency” and the judge stated that the ruling only pertained to the aspect of urgency, the outcome is not lost on We, the People. It leads a reasonable person to question whether the State is playing for time and therefore whether the isolated virus in its purified form does, indeed, exist.
Liberty Fighters Network vs. Minister Dlamini-Zuma
On 2 June 2020, the South African High Court declared ALL COVID-19 measures as unconstitutional and invalid.
The Court order declared the Disaster Management Act Regulations as unconstitutional and invalid (save for regulations 36, 38, 39 (2) (d) and (e) and 41 of the regulations promulgated in respect of Alert Level 3. It is wrongfully assumed that this Court Order was suspended when Minister Dlamini Zuma entered her appeal against it.
The Court order did suspend the operation of its effect in terms of paragraph 3 thereof by having afforded 14 days to the Minister to rectify the issues with the regulations and, if she required more time, she had to obtain permission by way of application from the Court to afford her more time. The latter never happened and she incorrectly assumed that her appeal would have stopped the operation of the Court order. This Court order is valid until either the Supreme Court of Appeal or the Constitutional Court upholds the appeal by the Minister; however, because the Court order came into operation formally on 24 June 2020 declaring the complete set of Disaster Management Act Regulations as unconstitutional and invalid, there simply are no more regulations and neither of these latter Superior Courts can even revive them.
The 19 February 2021 Court judgment did not override the 2 June 2020 Court order.
That judgment related to a separate Contempt of Court application against the Minister and had nothing to do with “appealing” or “rescinding” the 2 June 2020 Court order which order is currently pending before both the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court. Only these Courts may invalidate the 2 June 2020 Court order.
SAHPRA Legal Appeal: COVID-19 “vaccination” of children
MEDIA RELEASE — 8 OCTOBER 2021
Free the Children – Save the Nation is a non-profit company that strives to promote, protect and uphold the best interests and rights of the children of South Africa.
On 8th October, they launched a legal appeal to SAHPRA (South African Health Products Regulatory Authority) in terms of Section 24A(1) of the Medicines and Related Substances Act, 101 of 1965, against the “vaccination” of children.
They are appealing against the authorisations granted by SAHPRA for the use of the “vaccine” known as “Comirnaty” of Pfizer/BioNTech for children aged 12 – 18 years, and against the paediatric trials to be conducted on children aged between 6 months and 18 years involving the administration of the “vaccine” known as Sinovac/Coronavac of Sinovac Life Sciences Co (imported by Curanto Pharma (Pty) Ltd).
Apart from relying, inter alia, upon Sections 12 and 28 of the Constitution of South Africa to protect and ensure the best interests and rights of children, they contend that medical science does not support the blanket “vaccination” of children and that such a strategy is not in the best interests of society as the risks of “vaccinating” children far outweigh any possible benefits. In addition, there is no legal recourse against the producers of the “vaccines” for any harm the children might suffer arising out of the administration of the “vaccines”, and there is no proper provision for proper and/or adequate informed consent on the part of children and parents.
They request that SAHPRA fulfil their obligations in terms of such appeal and look forward to their direct engagement with them as provided for in the Act.
Email: [email protected]
CCMA Cases – Schalk van der Merwe
- 2 CCMA Cases, 18 October 2021
One in Gauteng and one in Cape Town. Both placed only for Conciliation. In both, the employers objected to Concilliation/Arbitration, which they may in terms of the Rules of the CCMA. Where a party objects to the double process on one day, this indicates that the party is uncertain about the matter and only wants to test the water first during conciliation.
Schalk and one of the law firms in Pretoria will serve as a hub, from where they will start posting the hundreds of cases that are now starting to come through.
University Mandates: Solidarity consults with legal team on UCT making vaccination mandatory
20 October 2021: Solidarity today announced that it is meeting with its legal team to challenge the controversial decision of the University of Cape Town (UCT) to make vaccination mandatory for students as well as for university employees.
“In South Africa we enjoy certain fundamental rights such as the right to bodily integrity and the right to freedom of religion, belief and opinion. Furthermore, students also have a right to education. A university council cannot simply revoke all these rights. This issue is not merely a debate on the desirability of vaccination or otherwise, but much rather about South Africans’ right to make their own decisions about what may enter their bodies,” Paul Maritz, manager of Solidarity Youth explains. “UCT is a public university and must therefore be accessible to all South Africans. The university has no right to discriminate in such a blatant manner against those who are not vaccinated”.
BUSA Seeks Clarity on mandatory COVID-19 vaccines in South Africa
25 October 2021: Businesses head to court for clarity on mandatory COVID-19 vaccines in South Africa: Organised business group Business Unity South Africa (BUSA) says it will approach the High Court for clarity on introducing mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations at businesses in South Africa. BUSA will apply for a declaratory order to help give business owners and employers confidence on where exactly the law stands. In an analysis of the country’s regulations around mandatory vaccines, law firm Webber Wentzel said that a case would likely be needed to be decided in the courts to give further clarity on certain key issues – including blocking entry for unvaccinated employees and visitors. The firm noted that there is currently no legislation that requires all South African citizens to be vaccinated and that vaccination is still a choice and is not mandatory.
Case brought by the Democratic Alliance against SA Government
08 February 2021: This case concerns two interrelated constitutional issues. First, the constitutionality of section 27 of the Disaster Management Act1 (Act). Second, the sufficiency of Parliament’s oversight over the Executive in instances where the former has delegated broad legislative powers to the latter.
Ruling was that: Constitutional law – Section 27 of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 – Consistent with the Constitution and thus valid.
Application to the Pretoria High Court to issue an interdict to stop the roll-out of the vaccine to children
5 Nov 2021
The ACDP, supported in its application by Free the Children – Save the Nation, the Caring Health Workers Coalition and the Covid Care Alliance, has asked the Pretoria High Court to issue an interdict to immediately Halt the Vaccine roll out in the 12 – 17 age group.
The application will be heard on Tuesday 9 November 2021. If you would like to join this application as part of the CHC, please email Dr Naseeba Kathrada ([email protected]).
Rev. Meshoe highlighted in his affidavit that the Department of Health is relying on the Children’s Act to allow children to consent for themselves without their parents’ approval or involvement, “in circumstances where people are driven by fear and force of others and the vaccines are in fact being tested on the populace of the nation – something totally unheard of and otherwise inconceivable until now”.
He said the children’s vaccination roll-out can only be legal if it showed a clear benefit to children, but in South Africa’s case it was driven by a decision that the adult population would benefit from child vaccinations and children are being vaccinated “for the sake of others”.
Attorney and ACDP NEC member Bongani Khanyile-Luthuli said, “The Department of Health and its Acting DG, Nicholas Crisp (Crisp), who has not committed to vaccinate his own daughter, doubled down on the nation’s children and their parents.”
Dr Clare Craig said excess deaths among young men living in the UK had shown a “significant” increase in mortality since the start of the vaccination programme for young people and were between 16% and 47% above expected levels.
This, she said in an affidavit, cannot be dismissed without further investigation.
She added that myocarditis can have long term effects as it can damage the heart muscle and carry an increased risk of morbidity – adding that this side effect has been seen after only one dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
Medical science agrees that children are effectively at no risk of serious illness or death when infected with the SARS ‑COV‑2 virus and that there is no need to vaccinate children against the SARS-COV‑2 virus for their own protection or safety.
Vaccinating children by way of an unproven Emergency Use Authorisation (“EUA”) vaccine and / or conducting trials on children to test the efficacy and /or effectiveness of the vaccine against SARS-COV‑2 in children, can never be in the best interests of children.
There is mounting evidence that children who are vaccinated with the vaccine against SARS-COV‑2 suffer vaccine injuries and death, especially from myocarditis.
According to expert evidence, excess deaths in the UK, USA and Israel amongst vaccinated children and particularly boys, are mounting.
There is no scientific, reasonable or rational reason for children to be vaccinated against the covid virus currently, and until the appeal against SAHPRA’s decision to roll the vaccine, which will focus on the medical evidence as to the relative benefits and risks of vaccination, has been completed and can prove otherwise, children have to be protected according to their constitutional, human and obvious rights.
The ACDP has accordingly served urgent court papers in the High Court on the DoH, Crisp and SAHPRA, to seek an order interdicting and restraining the rollout pending the internal appeal before SAHPRA.
ACDP’s bid to halt child vaccinations – UPDATE – The children of South Africa deserve better — failure of the State respondent parties to file papers on time delays case
12 November 2021: The application by the State to dismiss the case was rejected and the case will go ahead on a date to be agreed. The minister had instructed his advocates to have it struck off the roll with costs. The Minister was “dealt a blow” when the Judge refused the request.
The case had to be postponed, on request from the applicants, because of the failure of the State respondent parties to file papers on time. (The minister had filed papers late (the day before) and SAHPRA had not filed any.)
A meeting has been set for Monday 22 November and the applicants have humbly requested a special allocation for an urgent date. (hopefully 1 December, assuming SAHPRA files their papers)
Daily Maverick Misinformation on the ACDP case – reported to the Press Ombudsman
The Daily Maverick published a misinformation piece on the above case. This has been reported to the Press Ombudsman by a member of the public.
Mainstream media blackout – there has been NO reporting on this critical and urgent case except for the DailyMaverick misinformation piece and the msn article linked above. This is a sad week for the SA media.
The president of the Cape Chamber of Commerce and Industry says there aren’t many businesses that have introduced mandatory vaccination policies in the workplace at this stage.
Nov 2021: Jacques Moolman tells CapeTalk that companies are waiting on a ruling from the court before making a decision on introducing vaccination policies.
“Most businesses are waiting to see whether there is going to be some legal clarity, hopefully, fairly soon”, Moolman says.
Last month, Business Unity South Africa (Busa) filed legal papers seeking a declaratory order that will confirm the legality and constitutionality of mandatory vaccination policies in SA.
Moolman says businesses that have introduced mandatory jabs have to accommodate people who don’t want to get vaccinated.
The Cape Chamber president says the steady vaccine uptake has been driven by private sector companies pushing their employees to get vaccinated, particularly in the hospitality sector.
When you speak to our larger corporate members and even the smaller business members that we have… they are definitely driving it.
As far as mandated policies where their staff have to be [vaccinated] one or two of our members have introduced that but there isn’t absolute legal certainty.
Business will need to wait for the courts to rule on that… and those that have introduced the mandatory vaccinations had to apply for expressed permission. There are so much high-risk assessments that need to be done.
Jacques Moolman, President — Cape Chamber Of Commerce
Vaccine trial Injured man and his wife take on Goliath
Nov 2021: Trevor Musgrove was a participant in the J&J trial. “The Aurum Institute and Coert Grobbelaar is taking us to Court — HIGH COURT for ‘Defamation of Character’ they are going to sue us for letting the world know how unethical THEY are!!!” — Carol Musgrove
Legal challenge to South Africa’s never-ending lockdown
Nov 2021: Civil society group Afriforum has sent a legal letter of demand to Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, stating that the continued implementation of national curfews as part of the state of disaster is irrational and unjustified.
The Institute of Race Relations (IRR) intent of going to court to get the DMA disbanded
Can businesses in South Africa block unvaccinated people from entry?
The firm said there is no prohibition on requesting employees to declare their vaccination status voluntarily.
“This information may be obtained by way of consent in the form of a voluntary, specific and informed expression of will. It may also be argued that, despite an employee’s right to privacy, an employer’s obligations in terms of the OHSA require that an employer is aware of who is and is not vaccinated within that workplace.
“Such information should, however, be gathered and processed in accordance with POPIA.”
Pfizer pleads guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act due to fraudulent marketing
The US Department of Justice announced in September 2009 American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products, the Justice Department announced.
Action to revoke Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for COVID-19 injections, and a preliminary injunction to immediately block the EUA
On 19 July 2021, attorney Thomas Renz filed for an injunction against the Covid-19 “vaccine”. The case is based on a sworn statement from a whistle blower who reports that 45 000 Americans died within 3 days of receiving their COVID-19 “vaccine” and that this has been covered up. Renz is in the process of suing the Federal Government in the USA.
Three separate court orders declared in New York to allow the use of ivermectin
As of 19 April 2021, the New York State Supreme Court had issued three separate court orders forcing New York hospitals to administer Ivermectin to their dying patients. Incredibly, these three hospitals and their lawyers fought against the patients, arguing they did not have the right to receive the medication despite a valid prescription written by their doctors. In essence, the argument was that they did not have the right to try a potentially life-saving medication.
University of California’s flu vaccine mandate in a COVID pandemic
Children’s Health Defense has supported litigation to challenge a flu vaccine mandate for all students, faculty and personnel in the University of California system. While the preliminary injunction was denied, as a result of these efforts, students obtained the right to a religious exemption on the grounds of equal protection, which they did not have previously.
DC City Council “consent” law
The DC City Council passed a bill to allow children to “consent” to any CDC-recommended vaccine without the knowledge or consent of their parents or guardians. This bill specifically looks towards having children consent to COVID vaccines without parental knowledge. The bill even requires schools to conceal vaccination information from parents. This bill is not yet law; it must go through a waiting period in the US Congress. If it becomes law, Children’s Health Defence will sue on behalf of DC parents and children, as this law violates many federal laws and Constitutional rights.
Expected COVID-19 “vaccine” mandates
Children’s Health Defence is working with a consortium of lawyers to prepare challenges to forthcoming institutional, city and state mandates for COVID vaccines.
Children’s Health Defence is calling out the invalidity of PCR testing as a basis for diagnosis and therefore school closures with a lawsuit against the New York Department of Education, Mayor de Blasio, and other NYC officials. This lawsuit seeks to reopen schools and halt coerced in-school PCR testing, paving the way for more pushback against using PCR “case numbers” to strip citizens of freedoms based on a test that does not diagnose COVID infection and generates many false positive results.
Biden, Pentagon Face Massive Class-Action Lawsuit Over Vaccine Mandate on Federal Employees and Military Members
17 October 2021: Two dozen military members, federal employees, and federal civilian contractors have joined in a massive class-action lawsuit against the Biden administration’s federal mandatory vaccine policy. The group includes members from all five branches of the US military, including Navy Seals, Green Berets, and several high-ranking officers.
The Liberty Council – a Christian legal firm – filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, on behalf of the 24 plaintiffs who oppose the vaccine because of their deeply held religious beliefs. So far, they have been “refused any religious exemption or accommodation” for the mandate.
Biden’s attempt to set COVID-19 vaccine rules for businesses faces legal challenges
6 November 2021 A U.S. federal appeals court issued a stay Saturday freezing the Biden administration’s efforts to require workers at U.S. companies with at least 100 employees be vaccinated against COVID-19 or be tested weekly, citing “grave statutory and constitutional” issues with the rule. The new rule, which is set to take effect on Jan 4, will be enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Saturday’s court order came in response to a joint petition from several businesses, advocacy groups, and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah. The rule is also facing separate legal challenges before other courts.
Chicago vaccine mandate for city’s cops blocked
5 Nov 2021: Judge BLOCKS Chicago enforcing vaccine mandate for city’s cops — SUSPENDS jab requirement deadline. Judge Raymond Mitchell ruled Monday the mandate should be halted after the police union sued the city over vaccine requirements. (Chicago Tribune)
It signals a major victory for the unions against Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s vaccine mandates that are scheduled to come in December 31. According to recent data, 57% of the city’s police force have been vaccinated against Covid-19. 30% of the force has not yet reported their vaccination status to the city at all.
New York City’s vaccine mandate
28 Oct 2021: A Staten Island judge denied a police union’s request to temporarily halt the implementation of the city’s vaccine mandate that is set to take effect November 1. The Police Benevolent Association, New York City’s largest police union, had argued in their request for a temporary restraining order on Monday that the policy does not make clear potential exceptions for medical or religious reasons, and does not give unvaccinated officers sufficient time to apply for such exemptions, as those appeals must have been submitted by Wednesday — one week after the mandate was announced.
Proposed bill in Illinois would remove ‘conscience’ as basis for refusing vaccine
28 Oct 2021: Illinois law has for more than four decades protected those who oppose providing or receiving medical treatment because of their religious beliefs. Now Democrats want an exception to allow repercussions for those who refuse vaccinations in the battle against COVID-19.
The “Natural Immunity Is Real Act” Introduced in Congress
31 Oct 2021: In an effort to get the U.S. government to recognize the value of natural immunity in providing effective protection against COVID-19, U.S. Representative Diana Harshbarger of Tennessee introduced the Natural Immunity Is Real Act in the House of Representatives on Oct. 18, 2021. The bill, H.R. 5590, requires U.S. federal agencies to take into account naturally acquired immunity from previous COVID infection when issuing any rules or regulations aimed at protecting from the disease.
Class action against animal vaccine manufacturer Zoetis (formerly Pfizer)
12 Mar 2021: The Class Action against Zoetis (formerly Pfizer), the pharmaceutical company responsible for manufacturing and marketing the Hendra vaccine, has commenced in the Federal Court of Australia.
“The APVMA, Zoetis and the AVA have argued that the levels of adverse reactions to the HeV vaccine are low and well within the normal acceptable range. The APVMA has reported only seven deaths of horses ‘possibly’ linked and no deaths ‘probably’ linked to vaccinations to date,” the report tabled in parliament said.
“Despite these statistics, many horse owners are adamant that adverse reactions to the vaccine are more prevalent and under-reported (by vets to Zoetis to APVMA, and then reported by APVMA), and that vets and Zoetis have clear vested interests in not reporting adverse reactions.”
The committee’s own survey of horse deaths highlighted challenges with adverse event reporting. They decided not to recommend legislation to make the Hendra virus vaccine mandatory.
7 Lawsuits Challenging COVID #VaccineMandates for U.S. #Military Members
Thousands of military members face dishonorable discharge, court-martial and loss of retirement benefits for refusing COVID vaccine mandates. These seven pending lawsuits challenge the U.S. Department of Defense mandates for the emergency use vaccines.
Naturally Immune Federal Workers Lodge Class-Action Suit Against Fauci, Walensky Over COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate
Plaintiffs say the mandate violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which allows courts to overturn government actions deemed “arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.”
AFLDS files a landmark Preliminary Injunction against Kaiser Permanente
Dr. Gold explains, “Kaiser and the government worked hand-in-hand in a way that is illegal, and I am going to explain exactly how they did that.”
Watch Dr. Gold explain why this lawsuit will change the course of the tyrannical COVID mandates.
Western Michigan University Gives Up Lawsuit Fight Over COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Student Athletes
16 Nov 2021: Western Michigan University (WMU) has agreed to stop opposing a legal challenge by student athletes who declined to get a COVID-19 vaccine, attorneys announced on Tuesday (Nov. 16).
After two courtroom losses, WMU settled the dispute by allowing unvaccinated athletes to play their sport if they undergo regular testing for SARS-CoV‑2 and wear masks when appropriate.
The university started the fall season by requiring all athletes to be vaccinated against COVID-19. At least 16, mostly women, sought an exemption on religious grounds but were turned down.
President Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate
OSHA has suspended the mandate In the wake of the Fifth Circuit stay that found it likely to be struck down as unconstitutional.
17 Nov 2021
“On November 12, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a motion to stay OSHA’s COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard, published on November 5, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 61402) (“ETS”). The court ordered that OSHA “take no steps to implement or enforce” the ETS “until further court order.” While OSHA remains confident in its authority to protect workers in emergencies, OSHA has suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending future developments in the litigation.”
White House Orders Businesses to Proceed With COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Despite Court-Ordered Pause
Over the weekend the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit halted President Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate pending review, writing that “the petitions give cause to believe there are grave statutory and constitutional issues with the Mandate.”
Meanwhile, more than half of U.S. states have filed or joined lawsuits opposing the mandate, including three Democrat-led states.
In its response Monday (Nov. 8) evening, the Biden administration claimed that pausing the requirements “would likely cost dozens or even hundreds of lives per day” as COVID-19 spreads.
“People should not wait,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Monday (Nov. 8).
“They should continue to move forward and make sure they’re getting their workplace vaccinated.”
“Staggeringly Overboard”: U.S. Appeals Court Affirms Hold on Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate
12 Nov 2021: A U.S. appeals court on Friday affirmed its decision to put a hold on President Biden’s mandate for companies with over 100 workers to require COVID-19 vaccines.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling despite the Biden administration claiming on Monday (Nov. 8) that halting implementation of the rule could lead to the deaths of hundreds of workers.
“We next consider the necessity of the Mandate. The mandate is staggeringly overboard,” the appeals court says.
“Applying to 2 our of 3 private sector employees in America, in workplaces as diverse as the country itself, the Mandate fails to consider what is perhaps the most salient fact of all: the ongoing thread of COVID-19 is more dangerous to some employees than to other employees. All else equal, a 28 year old trucker spending the bulk of his workday in the solute of his cab is simply less vulnerable to COVID-19 than a 62 year old prison janitor,” they said.
“Likewise, a naturally immune unvaccinated worker is presumably at less risk that an unvaccinated worker who has never had the virus. The list goes on, but one constant remains — the Mandate fails almost completely to address, or even to respond to, much of this reality and common sense,” they conclude.
The government has been sued by private employers, religious organizations and U.S. states saying it was exceeding its authority.
On Friday, November 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an order staying enforcement and implementation of the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) COVID-19 “vaccine or test” emergency temporary standard (ETS). The order was issued after an expedited briefing and in response to a petition filed by various employers, states, religious groups, and individual citizens seeking a temporary stay of the ETS pending judicial review to determine if a permanent injunction of the ETS should issue. While the Fifth Circuit will not necessarily be the final word on the matter, the ruling signals that at least one federal appellate court has made a preliminary determination that the challenge to the ETS will likely succeed on the merits. Pending review, the ruling effectively nullifies the ETS as OSHA is barred from both enforcing and implementing it.
Ping-Pong Ball Bounce Could Determine the Fate of Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate
The fate of Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private employers could come down to the bounce of a ping-pong ball.
Officials in 27 states, employers and several business organizations have filed challenges to the mandate in numerous federal courts. The cases are expected to be consolidated under one of the circuit courts in a decision expected any day now.
On Friday (Nov. 12), New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that put the mandate on hold before it even started, but which federal court ultimately ends up with the case will likely determine whether the COVID-19 vaccine mandate gets tossed out.
In all, 34 objections have been filed in all 11 regional circuits plus the one for the District of Columbia. That’s where the ping-pong balls come in.
It turns out that each circuit where a challenge is filed within the first 10 days of the agency taking action has an equal chance of being selected. The staff at the Washington office of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation pulls a ball out of a bin to determine where the case will be handled. No judges are involved in the drawings.
The U.S. Department of Justice has said in court filings that it expects the drawing to be conducted on Tuesday (Nov. 16).
Unfortunately, the office denied a request by The Associated Press to allow media access to the drawing.
UPDATE: Challenges to the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate targeting employers with more than 100 employees will be consolidated and heard by the Ohio-based 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals after it was chosen Tuesday by a ping-pong ball lottery.
According to NPR, “Even if the the 6th Circuit weighs in quickly, it’s likely the decision will be appealed and the litigation could continue for some weeks and months. Ultimately, the case could wind up in the Supreme Court.”
In a bad sign for the mandate, the lottery consolidated all 34 cases filed in 12 regional circuit courts to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, where a majority of the justices have been appointed by Republican presidents.
It’s likely the Justice Department will now ask the new court to lift the stay the 5th Circuit previously put on the mandate. Legal experts say this dispute could last months and ultimately end up at the Supreme Court, which has a six-three conservative majority.
It’s not clear how the Supreme Court would rule.
Oklahoma National Guard ‘Goes Rogue’ After New Commander Rejects Vaccine Mandate; Pentagon To Respond ‘Appropriately’
15 Nov 2021: The Biden administration is having another bad week. One day before an appeals court upheld a stay against Biden’s ‘vaccine-or-test’ requirement for private businesses, the Oklahoma National Guard ‘rescinded’ the Pentagon’s requirement that service members receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
On Wednesday, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt announced Army Brig. Gen. Thomas Mancino as the state’s new adjutant general — replacing Army. Maj Gen. Michael Thompson, a vaccine advocate who was previously scheduled to transfer command to Mancino on Jan. 15, 2022 according to the Oklahoman.
Mancino’s first order of business? A memo formally ‘rescinding’ the Covid-19 vaccine requirement for Guardsmen.
“No Oklahoma Guardsman will be required to take the COVID-19 Vaccine,” it reads, adding that Gov. Stitt is the force’s “lawful Commander in Chief” when not mobilized by the federal government.
“No negative administrative or legal action will be taken against Guardsmen who refuse the COVID‑9 vaccine.”
Navy SEALs Sue Biden Admin Over Denial of Religious Exemptions to Vaccine Mandate
Several dozen Navy SEALs and sailors filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration for denying them religious exemptions to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for members of the military, according to a legal group that filed the complaint on their behalf.
FDA Asks Federal Judge to Grant it Until the Year 2076 to Fully Release Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Data
13 Nov 2021: The FDA repeatedly promised “full transparency” with regard to Covid-19 vaccines, including reaffirming “the FDA’s commitment to transparency” when licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
With that promise in mind, in August and immediately following approval of the vaccine, more than 30 academics, professors, and scientists from this country’s most prestigious universities requested the data and information submitted to the FDA by Pfizer to license its COVID-19 vaccine.
The FDA’s response? It produced nothing. So, in September, my firm filed a lawsuit against the FDA on behalf of this group to demand this information. To date, almost three months after it licensed Pfizer’s vaccine, the FDA still has not released a single page. Not one.
Instead, two days ago, the FDA asked a federal judge to give it until 2076 to fully produce this information. The FDA asked the judge to let it produce the 329,000+ pages of documents Pfizer provided to the FDA to license its vaccine at the rate of 500 pages per month, which means its production would not be completed earlier than 2076.
A team of over 1,000 lawyers and over 10,000 medical experts led by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich have begun legal proceedings against the CDC, WHO & the Davos Group for crimes against humanity
Fuellmich and his team present the faulty PCR test and the order for doctors to label any comorbidity death as a Covid death as fraud. The PCR test was never designed to detect pathogens and is 100% faulty at 35 cycles. All the PCR tests overseen by the CDC are set at 37 to 45 cycles. The CDC admits that any tests over 28 cycles are not admissible for a positive reliable result. This alone invalidates over 90% of the alleged covid cases / ”infections” tracked by the use of this faulty test.
In addition to the flawed tests and fraudulent death certificates, the “experimental” vaccine itself is in violation of Article 32 of the Geneva Convention. Under Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, “mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person” are prohibited. According to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of the Convention.
#AZ Maricopa Community Colleges Must Honor Nursing Students’ Religious Exemption For COVID-19 Vaccine
“Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of both of their claims, that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm absent injunction, and that the balance of equities and the public interest weigh in their favor,” wrote U.S. District Judge Steven Logan. “Their case is not doubtful, and the harm that they have alleged – the violation of their constitutional and fundamental right to free exercise – is an injury of the highest order under the Constitution and the law. Such an injury cannot be remedied by damages.”
PCR tests found to be unreliable
In Portugal, on 11 November 2020, the Lisbon Court of Appeal declared the PCR test unreliable as it “is unable to determine, beyond reasonable doubt, that a positive result corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV‑2 virus”. The court concluded that if misused the PCR Test would have a reliability as low as 3% for the detection of Coronavirus, with a False Positive rate of 97%.
COVID-19 protocols in schools
On 8 April 2021, the Weimar Family Court in Germany ruled that mask-wearing, distancing measures and rapid testing at schools were to be prohibited. According to the conviction of the court, school administrators, teachers and others could not invoke the state legal provisions on which the measures are based, because they are unconstitutional and therefore null and void. The judge stated that “children are damaged physically, psychologically and educationally and their rights are violated, without any benefit for the children themselves or for third parties.”
Deena Hinsaw vs. Patrick King in Alberta, Canada
Patrick King represented himself in court after being fined $1,200 for violating the Alberta Public Health Act for being in a group larger than 10.
To provide a plausible defence, he issued a subpoena to the Provincial Health Minister for proof that the COVID-19 virus exists. During the course of the court hearing on 24 July 2021, the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Alberta admitted on record that they had no material evidence to provide King for his defence.
He may have lost his case and still had to pay the fine for being at the gathering, but the real issue is that there seems to be no evidence to prove the ‘isolation’ of the SARS-COV2 virus. King requested it isolated — not in a lab setting, nor in a PCR test that is over spun- and this could not be done which begs the question, “what then are the government’s legal grounds for imposing restrictions.”
Criminal charges laid against WHO chief scientist
The Indian Bar Association (IBA) has served two legal notices (on 25 May 2021 and 13 June 2021) to Indian national and WHO Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan for allegedly “running a disinformation campaign against Ivermectin”, after the WHO failed to recommend use of Ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment stating lack of evidence of efficacy. Dr. Swaminathan spoke against the use of Ivermectin in the Tamil Nadu province with the consequence that Ivermectin’s use in that province was blocked and Covid cases skyrocketed with deaths increasing ten-fold compared to provinces who continued to use Ivermectin.
YouTube restored deleted vaccine effects channel after it receives legal notice from the Indian Bar Association
YouTube restores the deleted channel after apologizing for its mistake soon after it receives legal notice. Another victory for the Indian Bar Association (IBA) and Awaken India Movement (AIM).A case is likely be filed on YouTube for penalty to the tune of Rs. 1000 crores. (Approx. US $135 million)
French Senate rejects proposed law on compulsory vaccination
13 October 2021: The COVID-19 vaccine will not join the list of mandatory vaccinations. Senators did not adopt the bill tabled by the Socialists on October 13. Another setback for the supporters of compulsory vaccination against covid-19 in the general population, The bill, tabled by members of the Socialist Group at the end of August, was rejected on October 13 in public session, by 262 votes to 64. This parliamentary initiative will therefore not go further.
MEPs of European Parliament defend fundamental rights of EU citizens, oppose mandatory proof of vaccination
20 October 2021: Four MEPs from several minority party groupings have joined forces, reacting to the increased violations of fundamental human rights across the EU. They took a joint stand in defense of the fundamental rights of all EU citizens, which they say are under threat now due to mandatory vaccination and abusive use of the Digital Covid Certificate.
MEP Christine Anderson, after emphasizing the importance of human rights, said: “Let me say this, I am not afraid of this virus. What I am afraid of is governments abusing this or any other «crisis» for that matter, to infringe on civil rights, to revoke them or to question freedom altogether. What we have seen in this crisis is that civil rights and liberties have been transformed from fundamental rights to privileges that governments grant or revoke as they see fit. I call on all Europeans to stand up to any government trying to take away our freedom, civil rights, and liberties!”
UK Government Ordered to Release COVID-19 Lockdown Impact Assessments After Refusing to Make Documents Public
12 Nov 2021: The UK government has been ordered to publish its assessments on the impact of national lockdowns and COVID-19 restrictions after refusing to make the documents public.
Department of Health and Social Care officials drew up documents predicting how changing COVID-19 rules would affect different groups but they have so far been kept secret.
The Liberty human rights group requested the equality impact assessments under the Freedom of Information Act, but was refused and told releasing them would “not be in the public interest.” It accused the government of “evading scrutiny and undermining accountability” over its use of unprecedented restrictions.
The information commissioner has now ordered the government to publish the documents and rejected arguments that they should remain secret to “protect the policy process.”