Following reports that aborted fetal tissue is being used to develop Covid vaccines, a U.S. judge has granted a preliminary injunction allowing health care workers in New York to avoid ‘no jab, no job’ rules on religious grounds. The state’s Govenor says she will “fight this decision” to “keep New Yorkers safe”. MailOnline has the story.
U.S. District Judge David Hurd made the ruling on Tuesday after 17 Catholic and Baptist health care workers sued the state last month, saying they objected to being forced to take a vaccine that used “fetal cell lines” from “procured abortions”.
The order prohibits the New York State Department of Health from interfering with religious exemptions or taking disciplinary action against workers who have sought or obtained them.
Govenor Kathy Hochul, responding to the order, said she backs the vaccine mandate, whose original deadline was September 27th, with the state’s 450,000 medical and care staff expected to have received at least one vaccine dose by that date.
“My responsibility as Governor is to protect the people of this state, and requiring health care workers to get vaccinated accomplishes that. I stand behind this mandate, and I will fight this decision in court to keep New Yorkers safe,” she wrote in a statement.
According to the injunction, which was obtained by CNN, the state health department is “barred from interfering in any way with the granting of religious exemptions from Covid vaccination going forward, or with the operation of exemptions already granted”.
The organisation is also prohibited from taking any action on licenses, certifications, residency or other professional status for workers who seek or have obtained religious exemptions to the vaccine mandate.
Christopher Ferrara, the lead counsel for plaintiffs in the case applauded the judge’s ruling.
“With this decision the court rightly recognised that yesterday’s ‘front line heroes’ in dealing with Covid cannot suddenly be treated as disease-carrying villains and kicked to the curb by the command of a state health bureaucracy,” he said in a statement obtained by the news outlet.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Good!
This is just a judge applying the law. It is welcome and legally correct, but very limited in scope.
What is needed is for a judge to state that the law is unlawful — but they won’t do that because judges don’t really care about how much sense it all makes — it is their job to ensure that laws passed are compliant with other aspects such as freedom of religion.
Eventually we’ll have more judges stating that the law is nonsensical because the vaccines don’t do what is presumed in the law — ie, they have no significant impact on infection and onwards transmission, beyond a short time after the second jab.
And even then it will almost certainly need the lawmakers to repeal the law. But they won’t do that as they are mainly influenced by the population, and TPTB are ensuring that the population remain ignorant of the (low) risks of covid and of the (lack of) benefits offered by the vaccines.
Or, eventually we’ll have no judges left who are prepared or permitted to question the orders of The Party.
The judiciary are simply there to protect the system & keep the status quo, they are and always have been ideologically biased, law enforcement have the least respect for the law!
The middle class has been captured by neoliberal dogma, Perversely I blame Thatcher, she encouraged conservatives not to work for state institutions making way for Blairite neoliberals.
BBC news item today on growing shortage of care staff, no mention of effect of mandatory vacc or sackings. Government spokesperson praises their dedication in the pandemic. It’s sickening.
As I have said before here, the UK does not have a proper free press. None of these outrages could happen with a proper, rigorous free press. We have only, for the main, a state-controlled press especially on TV.
When it comes to TV news, especially the BBC and Channel 4 I’m not convinced that they are state-controlled in the sense that the government tells them what to, and what not to broadcast. Rather I think that they are part of the same neo-liberal elite, having all graduated from the same left wing universities, and all believing in the same things e.g. technocratic government, fighting climate change, woke ideology etc. Therefore there is no need for the government to control these media outlets as they are broadcasting what they believe in, which happens to suit the government, without being told to do so.
I hardly ever watch Channel 4 or BBC news anymore, as it is little more than woke propaganda. I did try watching Channel 4 news last week for the first time in months, spent the first 10 minutes shouting abuse at the presenters/guests then switched off before I put my fist through the screen.
By wanting to keep the people safe can she tell us what is in the vaxxines? My guess is she doesn’t have a clue!
Profit. Lots and lots of profit.
It’s a step in the right direction, but it should not be specifically on religious grounds – anyone should be able to decline to have the “vaccine” on any grounds at all, and should not have to justify their decision, nor face any discrimination as a result.
No wonder Pfizer wanted to keep the foetal tissue usage quiet.
Good news. And watching the effects of the strike at Southwest Airlines is heartening too.
Fake news, apparently, there are no problems, and also, the problems are down to very localised bad weather than only effects Southwest Airlines aircraft.
As an atheist my religious reason would be because I don’t believe in it.
But even more fundamentally – because I object on the basis of all known civilized ethical standards relating to individual autonomy.
Don’t cheer too loudly – it’s a very narrow judgment.
“My responsibility as Governor is to protect the people of this state, and requiring health care workers to get vaccinated accomplishes that.”
There you have it. The governor’s responsibility is to protect people in her state. I guess she can do whatever she wants to “protect” people.
I would add that it’s not the governor’s responsibility to protect people. People can protect themselves.
I’m wondering which religion to choose for the battle ahead!
I recommend Islam. Given how worried a lot of people are of being accused of Islamaphobia you will probably find more people bowing to your beliefs and/or standing up for you than for any other religion.
Has there been any mention of this decision on UK broadcast news? Guessing not much, if any! Got to keep quiet about anything damaging The Narrative!