Get A Free Quote NOW




COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements are Challenged in Court

COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements are Challenged in Court
  • Post category:News

COVID-19 vaccine policies are being challenged in new federal lawsuits by four soccer players at Midwest University and one of its employees. They are contending the policies are unconstitutional.

COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements Versus Religious Beliefs

On Monday, Emily Dahl, Hannah Redoute, Bailey Korhorn, and Morgan Otteson filed their suit against Western University Michigan and University President Edward Montgomery, and its athletic director, Kathy Beauregard. The upshot is the university’s requirement that student-athletes get vaccinating does “seek to override” their “sincerely held religious beliefs and viewpoint. Moreover, it discriminates against them on the basis of their religion.”

COVID-19 Vaccination and the Violation of the First Amendment

“The defendants’ policies do violate the First Amendment this is done by punishing students exercising their religious beliefs in connection with their own personal medical decisions.” This is according to the suit filed in U.S. District Court for Michigan’s Western District. I totally agree and believe in freedom and civil liberties for all!

Regular Testing of the Unvaccinated

Western Michigan, for the rest of the student body, is requiring regular testing of those who are unvaccinated. Pure harassment and shaming are on display! Moreover, the four soccer players’ lawyers are from the nonprofit Great Lakes Justice Center.

Not commenting on pending litigation for Western University is their spokeswoman Paula Davis.

Herd Immunity is Real and Can’t be Denied!

Jeanna Norris, a 37-year-old MSU administrative associate, and fiscal officer, in a separate case, in fact, has sued university president Samuel Stanley and the Board of Trustees. She, in fact, has argued (rightfully so!) that she has natural immunity after recovering from COVID-19 late last year.

Unlawful Mandate

Hooman Noorchashm, her immunologist, has, in fact, advised her that it is medically unnecessary to undergo vaccination, the lawsuit stated.

“Moreover, if Plaintiff follows her doctor’s advice and chooses not to take the vaccine, she will face adverse disciplinary consequences,” according to the suit. Therefore, it was that was filing in U.S. District Court in another Michigan city. “In essence, the Directive is absolutely coercive and cannot reasonably be considering anything other than an unlawful mandate.”

Leave a Reply