Story at-a-glance
- According to Alan Dershowitz’s interpretation of Constitutional law, you only have the right to refuse to be vaccinated against a disease that would affect only you. You do not have the right to refuse a contagious disease that might spread to others
- As the basis and justification for his legal orientation on this issue, Dershowitz relies on a 1905 Supreme Court ruling in the matter of Jacobson v. Massachusetts
- According to Robert F. Kennedy, there is a “big Constitutional chasm” between this 1905 case and today’s vaccine mandates. Jacobson sued to avoid the vaccine and the fine for refusing the vaccine, which was $5. When he lost, he paid the fine. There’s a big difference between paying a small fine, and being forcibly injected with a potentially hazardous vaccine, against your will
- According to a recent poll, about half of Americans say they want to get the COVID-19 vaccine; 27% say they will “definitely” refuse and another 12% say they will “probably” refuse it
- 1 in 40 people — not 1 in 1 million — are injured by vaccines, and a clinician who administers vaccines will have an average of 1.3 adverse vaccine events per month
READ MORE
Image by Mirko Sajkov from Pixabay
Image by carolinaca1995 from Pixabay
Related posts:
COVID CABAL SCAM
Israel to keep schools closed until at least Thursday as COVID numbers remain high
CDC Had Definition of Vaccine Changed So Clot Shot Could Be Pushed Illegally
Even the Ku Klux Klan & Antifa Should Come Together Against the COVAX (Covid Vaccine!)
COVID Lockdowns plummet White Birthrates to even Lower than What it Was, Extinction is now Totally I...
HORRIFYING: Man’s Skin ‘Peeled Off’ Due To Reaction From Johnson & Johnson COVID Vaccine