Playback speed
Share post
Share post at current time

Leslie Manookian talks about her big win in the courts v LA Unified School District's vaccine mandates for employees

120 yo legal precedent for state vaccine mandates (Jacobson v MA) finally narrowed. How can this be leveraged going forward?

On Tuesday I connected with Leslie Manookian of Health Freedom Defense Fund to discuss her victory in the US Courts of Appeal for the 9th District, the largest in US, comprising several western states, including California.

I set up this interview, because I think this win is highly significant. Leslie and her colleagues were able to finally make a dent in a 120 yo legal precedent (Jacobson v Massachusetts), the case which has been used ever since to justify the forced systematic poisoning campaign by the US Government, masquerading as “public health measures”.

From Jacobson:

"The state legislature proceeded upon the theory which recognized vaccination as at least an effective if not the best known way in which to meet and suppress the evils of a smallpox epidemic that imperiled an entire population. Upon what sound principles as to the relations existing between the different departments of government can the court review this action of the legislature?  

If there is any such power in the judiciary to review legislative action in respect of a matter affecting the general welfare, it can only be when that which the legislature has done comes within the rule that if a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health the public morals or the public safety has no real or substantial relation to those objects or is beyond all question a plain palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts so to adjudge and thereby give effect to the Constitution." 

Full 9th circuit decision here:

Interview notes:

  • Leslie described the history of the case HFDF filed v LAUSD.

  • We talked about the Jacobson case, which was:

-about smallpox, which may or may not be caused by a virus (IMO, its not) but was rather deadly (30%-40% death rate);

-applied ONLY to Cambridge MA, not even the entire state;

-was about Jacobson not wanting to pay a state-imposed fine of $5 (~$160 today);

-did not say anything about state power to force the injection or coerce anyone via denial of basic liberties or employment;

-it was believed that the vaccine stopped transmission of smallpox (it doesn’t, but that was the belief of the court at the time and it was not challenged by Jacobson);

-for context, 120 years ago the eugenics beliefs were a fashionable open attitude in the society, reflected in laws and practices. Now it is just as cherished by the power elites but they prefer to camouflage it in “equity-diversity-sustainability” slogans.

  • Leslie provided some relevant case law developments since Jacobson, namely the court decisions that affirmed and even fortified the concept bodily autonomy/privacy since then. Did you know that it was illegal to use condoms in CT in the 1950’s?

  • We discussed the case v LAUSD in detail, including the despicable behavior of the defendants lying to court and trying to evade judicial review. They clearly demonstrated that the only thing they were defending is the state’s power to control people’s bodies. That’s rich for the rabid democrats obsessed with abortions on demand any time including after full term birth. And turns out, in the 9th Circuit they can’t have it both ways…

  • In the final portion of the interview we talked about how this victory can be leveraged going forward: many lawyers are now updating their cases based on this win, it is a good time to challenge any “vaccine” on CDC schedule that does not stop transmission of the disease (including polio, numerous toxoids, pertussis, flu, etc.) None of them really do anything other than poisoning, but in many cases CDC admits there is no prevention of the disease, and this can be used to challenge any mandate. This can also be used to challenge any non-vax mandates - testing, tracing, masking!

  • We discussed the insane and unconstitutional HHS quarantine powers briefly. I reported on this here.

  • Ultimately, this and other cases must challenge the federal kill box laws. We talked about what can be done in the courts. The courts are set up against the people and in favor of the government, so realistically we can aim at small victories. However, some relatively small things can undermine, disable and stall large structures.

The federal kill box laws themselves or the state versions of them to argue that the constitutionally protected right of an individual to not be killed by anyone, is violated by the kill box laws.  This is especially evil as these laws enable and legalize homicide by a public health proxy such as a pharmacist or nurse administering a lethal injection that's falsely presented as a medicinal product

And so it is now possible, because of the light shed on these things over the last couple of years to litigate those two prongs established by Jacobson and put before a court the evidence and the argument that public health emergencies themselves are a fictional construct. 

They are not "real or substantial." 

They're pretextual. They're derived exclusively from fraudulent diagnostic testing protocols combined with homicidal treatment protocols to deceive people, to confuse people, to get people to be afraid, and to get people to then comply with the lethal injection programs. 

And so from that perspective and with that evidence, the public health emergency laws and regulations and programs promulgated by Congress and the federal executive branch and the administrative agencies are beyond all question, "plain, palpable invasions of rights secured by the fundamental law." 

You can read all case documents here on HFDF website. Please consider supporting Leslie and HFDF.

Art for today: Rotterdam, NL, watercolor from my sketchbook.

Due Diligence and Art
Due Diligence by Sasha Latypova Podcast
Uncovering Fraud in Pharmaceutical R&D and Manufacturing