More on the tiered coercion cascades.

Jul 09, 2022

New Civil Liberties Alliance law firm has filed an appeal in a Michigan State University vaxx mandate case.

July 5, 2022 Press Release - NCLA Clients, Two Fired by MSU, Appeal Its Unlawful Covid-19 Vaccine Mandate to Sixth Circuit

Reader, responding:

…the 'science' to require vaccination was certainly not there at that time [Summer 2021]. Certainly not for an employer…to mandate a vaccination as a requirement for employment.

Here the court cited Jacobson v. Massachusetts…isn't Massachusetts a state? I'm not saying there would never be a case where the state's interests would require vaccines. But it's not anything we've seen during covid.

And a 'state' MSU is not!

I've never understood where schools, public or private, had the authority to require these vaccines. If the state required it for schools, I could at least recognize the legal authority even though I'd be against it.

Me:

Best clues for the federal government views on this are the July 6, 2021 DOJ legal opinion by Deputy Attorney General Dawn Johnsen

And a series of Congressional Research Service reports by Attorney Wen W. Shen that started in May 2019. Links to a few of the many versions:

Short synopsis is that the federal executive branch might prefer to do one massive federal mandate for simplicity’s sake, but for purposes of diffusing responsibility and covering tracks — and because they couldn’t be sure Congress could pass a mandate through legislation — they instead framed the legal question as (paraphrasing) “Is there anything in US law that would prohibit any public or private entity from forcing medical treatments on people?”

They decided there wasn’t any impediment, because Congress destroyed informed consent laws through the 2004 Project Bioshield Act and the 2016 Cures Act.

And then they coerced military branches, hospital systems, local governments, states and public and private entities (universities, employers regulated by OSHA etc.) to coerce soldiers, employees and students, through federal funding withdrawal threats under Congress’s power under the Spending Clause:

“You do the mandates, or we’ll take away your federal money.”

They’ve also considered using the Commerce Clause, regulating interstate commerce, but they’re not sure they can get away with ordering individuals to engage in the commercial activity of receiving a specified medical treatment. See 05/17/2022 CRS report by Shen at pp. 40-41.

The Spending Clause bit is basically the same coercion mechanism the Bank for International Settlements/WEF is using to coerce federal governments to play ball on the whole Covid-based totalitarian world government thing.

“Do what we say, or no more access to international financial system.”

All the way down to the employer level.

“Do what we say, or you’re fired and can’t pay your bills to keep your kids fed and a roof over your head.”