Jacobson vs Massachusetts

Do you remember the COVID-19 vaccines that were rushed to market to allegedly help create immunity against the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus, which has still, to this day, never been isolated in its entirety from human or animal hosts and contains no viral isolates?

Do you remember that the COVID-19 vaccines were all untested, unproven, and unsafe medicinal concoctions that hadn’t been approved for humans? Instead, the products were granted Emergency Use Authorizations by the corrupt FDA.

What exactly did that mean?

An Emergency Use Authorization allows for the distribution and administration of an untested, unsafe, and unapproved drug product to the clueless public.

EUA’s are temporary allowances for experimental drugs to be used during government-defined public health emergencies. Under normal circumstances, people wouldn’t be allowed to touch such medicines with a 200-foot pole.

No government under any circumstances whatsoever can order or force the public to take drug products, let alone experimental ones! The controlling powers were bluffing about vaccine mandates and vaccine passports.

The Constitutionality of Vaccine Mandates and Vaccine Passports

The entire false narrative back in 2020, regarding the Constitutionality of vaccine mandates, was centered on an outdated SCOTUS decision from the early 1900s known as Jacobson v. Massachusetts. The case would never hold up in modern times because there are known side effects to all vaccine products that were unknown when this case was decided.

The presiding justices who ruled on the case stated that their decision to rule against Jacobson was made because the vaccine, at that time, was determined not to be more dangerous to the public than the disease it was allegedly preventing.

If Jacobson v. Massachusetts was ever retested in a modern legal setting, it would be overturned because of the known adverse reactions that have been scientifically proven to be associated with all current vaccines.

Having written all of that, let me further note that Jacobson v. Massachusetts shouldn’t have even been in the discussion because we were dealing with untested, unsafe experimental vaccines that had been rolled out and administered to people under an Emergency Use Authorization. All of the COVID-19 vaccines, at the time of the debate, were classified as experimental medicines and therefore couldn’t be forced upon any human being at any time whatsoever.

Jacobson v. Massachusetts allegedly has legal precedent or teeth concerning FDA-approved vaccines becoming mandatory during a pandemic — and that’s another legal can of worms that needs to be revisited and thoroughly retested through the courts as soon as possible.

If the controlling powers can roll out a plethora of new toxic vaccines in less than a year, a new challenge to Jacobson v. Massachusetts through the courts can surely be expedited in record time to reverse an outdated and antiquated legal decision from over a hundred years ago.

Using Jacobson v. Massachusetts to help Americans determine the constitutionality of mandatory vaccines and vaccine passports amid a world pandemic is tantamount to using century-old road maps to drive from New York to California. It’s a ridiculous scenario because many roads have been closed, and new ones have been cut over the years. It’s outdated information, and the Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision was made through reliance on the scientific information available in the early 1900s.