Supremes Hear Arguments on Biden Regime Kill Shot Mandates

by Stephen Lendman

Since last August, the Supremes ruled in favor of kill shots five times.

Most US judicial rulings at the federal and state levels expressed support for what demands outlawing.

No matter that taking this step is crucial to prevent state-sponsored destruction of public health.

On Friday, nine Supreme Court justices heard arguments for and against two Biden regime flu/covid mandates.

Both flagrantly breach international and US constitutional law — that require informed and voluntary consent on all things health related.

No federal, state or local authority can legally override these rights.

Yet since last year, it's happened repeatedly throughout much of the US with judicial and MSM support.

One illegal Biden regime mandate calls for employees of businesses with 100 or more employees to be fully jabbed by health-destroying kill shots.

The other requires the same thing for staff of healthcare facilities that receive federal funding by participating in Medicare and/or Medicaid programs.

While no ruling was issued straightaway on Friday, the High Court said it'll rule with exceptional speed on both mandates.

While nothing is certain until its rulings are announced, Chief Justice Roberts said the following:

State governments and Congress are best suited to address issues related to workplaces, adding:

"This is something that the federal government has never done before."

Majority conservative justices expressed similar views.

At the same time, the court appears likely to go along with requiring staff of healthcare facilities that receive Medicare and/or Medicaid funds to require jabs — no matter how in breach of international and constitutional law.

Justices Breyer, Kagan and Sotomayor expressed support for kill shots.

Based on their remarks, the nine justices showed profound ignorance about unparalleled harm to millions at home and abroad by kill shots.

Claiming they're safe and effective defies peer-reviewed science.

Kagan invented a nonexistent "pandemic," falsely saying what doesn't exist killed "nearly a million people" in the US (sic).

A tiny fraction of this number died from flu/covid since 2020.

In stark contrast, hundreds of thousands of Americans perished from kill shots — likely millions worldwide.

Breyer matched Kagan's ignorance, falsely claiming it's "unbelievable that it could be in the public interest to suddenly stop" kill shots.

It's the international and constitutional law of the land to rescind the Biden regime's illegal mandates.

Sotomayor embarrassed herself by falsely claiming that more scariant than variant omicron is deadly.

Defying reality a second time, she falsely said the following:

"We have over 100,000 children (hospitalized) in serious condition…many on ventilators (sic)." 

"So saying it's a workplace variant just underscores the fact that without some workplace rules with respect to (mass-jabbing) or encouraging (then) because this is not a (kill shot) mandate." 

The true number of unjabbed children hospitalized on ventilators is zero or close to it.

Kill shots, not flu/covid, are responsible for hospitalizing them and the vast majority of others.

Breyer astonishingly claimed that "there were 750 million new (US flu/covid) cases" on Thursday.

That's more than double the size of the US population.

Based on their Friday remarks, the High Court justices showed they're ignoramuses on kill shots and all else flu/covid.

Commenting on Friday's High Court hearing, Law Professor Jonathan Turley said the following:

On whether the court will require healthcare staff at facilities receiving Medicare and/or Medicaid funding, he tweeted:

"(I)t may be close, but I am tentatively predicting there are at least five votes to uphold the mandate in full and maybe six votes to uphold it in large portion."

There was "a marked difference in the questions from the conservatives justices on the health care mandate as opposed to the workplace rule."

Roberts "express(ed) skepticism that dealing with an infectious disease in this way is not within the" government's authority.

The conservative majority appeared to agree.

A ruling could come as soon as this weekend or early next week.

Kill shots are responsible for causing irreparable to everyone jabbed.

Based on science and the rule of law, there's no ambiguity about how the High Court should rule.

Most often, its rulings support privileged interests over the general welfare and judicial fairness.

Michael Parenti explained that High Court rulings reflect "the climate of the times and…political composition of the justices."

Most often they support corporate and conservative interests, especially in recent decades.

Putting an end to mandatory kill shots — as well as related health and freedom-destroying policies — won't come top down.

Like virtually all positive change, grassroots activism is the only way to turn things around.

Nothing else can work, nothing with staying power.