9th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules mRNA COVID-19 Jab is NOT a Vaccine Under Traditional Medical Definitions

Unsplash

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has delivered a seismic decision that could reshape public health policy across the nation. The Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs sued the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and the court has declared that mRNA COVID-19 injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions because the shots were said to mitigate COVID rather than preventing transmission. This crucial distinction undermines the foundational premise of the vaccine mandates enforced by various governmental and educational institutions.

.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has delivered a seismic decision that could reshape public health policy across the nation.

In a contentious case involving the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs versus the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the court has declared that mRNA COVID-19 injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The case revolved around the LAUSD’s COVID-19 vaccination policy, which required all employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by a specified deadline.

The plaintiffs argued that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon their fundamental right to refuse medical treatment, as the mRNA injections do not prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely mitigate symptoms for the recipient.

The court’s opinion, penned by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins, asserts that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus. This crucial distinction undermines the foundational premise of the vaccine mandates enforced by various governmental and educational institutions.

Judge Nelson pointed out that the mandate was inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s century-old ruling in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, a case that upheld the state’s right to enforce smallpox vaccinations due to their proven effectiveness in preventing disease spread. In contrast, the mRNA COVID-19 shots do not offer such public health benefits, thus failing the criteria established by Jacobson.

The ruling points out that traditional vaccines are designed to provide immunity and prevent transmission, which is not conclusively proven in the case of mRNA COVID-19 shots.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had modified the definition of “vaccine” to include the mRNA shots.

So, look at what the CDC did. Here’s the definition the CDC used on 26 August 2021:

Vaccine– “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
Vaccination– “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”

Rather than admit the COVID-19 vaccine is not working as advertised, the CDC took a page out of Orwell’s 1984 and opted for new spin language.

Here is the new definition:

Vaccine– “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

Read full article here…

Health Freedom Defense Fund:      https://healthfreedomdefense.org/huge-legal-victory-hfdf-wins-appeal-in-ninth-circuit/

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

  • Save
Other

Los Angeles BANS Rent Payments Until July 2026!

March 18, 2025 John WIlliams 0

Los Angeles enacted a new law that is a moratorium on evictions for tenants affected by the fires who claim to have lost at least 10% of their income. Rent is no longer due until July 31, 2026 – more than a year from now! Tenants can self-certify financial hardship.

Classified Ads

The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We cannot vouch for accuracy of statements or integrity of advertisers. We will investigate complaints, however, and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent or unethical.
For ad rates, click here.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marina
Marina
9 months ago

Very good! Maybe the tide is turning.

Ragnar D.
Ragnar D.
9 months ago

Liability protection for Big Pharma and the “healthcare” establishment is out the window regarding their poison COVID shots. Send in the bloodsucking lawyers! “Were you or a loved one injured or killed by the Pfizer or Moderna shot? If so, you may be entitled to significant compensation. Call Larry the Lawyer now!”