Mandatory Vaccinations: "You have no right not to be vaccinated" - Alan Derschowitz

Totalitarian Alan Derschowitz, a notorious Zionist/neocon, has opined that the Constitution does not permit you to refuse a vaccination, apparently even it if is untested and if there is no recourse if it injures you. Alan, who claims to be a constitutional expert, is lying, as the issue has not yet been decided by the Supreme Court. In 1905, before the Supreme Court recognized that the Bill of Rights also protect citizens from State power, the Supreme Court ruled in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) (, in which the court held that Massachusetts could fine and imprison Mr. Jacobson for refusing to consent to being vaccinated against smallpox, as required by state rules.

There are a number of reasons that case is inapplicable to a potential mandatory SARS-CoV-2 virus vaccine. First, smallpox has a death rate of around 30%, including the young, compared to under 0.2% for COVID-19 (accounting for all the infected who were not tested as well), and much lower in the young and healthy population.

Second, since COVID-19 impacts mainly a small subset of society adversely, it is more logical to vaccinate those people than society at large. One of Dershowitz's arguments is that you cannot refuse a vaccine to a contagious disease because you might infect others. But that misses the point: the others, that are worried about contracting the disease, can have themselves vaccinated.

Third, the Massachusetts order applied only to residents of Cambridge, and Mr. Jacobson could have left Cambridge to avoid the vaccination (contrary, of course, to a national vaccine mandate).

Fourth, by dint of over a century of use, the smallpox vaccine was well understood and relatively safe. While some conditions were known to cause risk with the smallpox vaccine, Jacobson had not proved he suffered from any of those conditions. The same will not be true of a proposed SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In addition, a person injured or killed by a vaccination has limited remedies at court given that Congress has granted manufacturers and distributors immunity from suit.

Fifth, as noted above, in the intervening years, the Supreme Court has held that in general the Bill of RIghts applies to the States and not just the federal government. In addition, the court has developed and elaborated on a "right to privacy".


By: CalDre (1010.60)

Tags: COVID-19, vaccination, totalitarianism, plandemic, despotdemic