Fabulous. Now there is a precedent.

Considering medical experts say what the law is I think it's only fair judges say what the medical treatment is.

That judge didn't kill himself.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to stop a virus dead in its tracks, now would we?

https://nypost.com/2021/08/30/ohio-judge-orders-covid-patient-be-treated-with-ivermectin/

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/trending/coronavirus-ohio-judge-orders-hospital-administer-ivermectin-covid-19-patient/JPUHJDKUBJHY5J7OSIQL6GU3EU/

The wife had to sue the fucking hospital to get the order to give him ivermectin immediately.

The fucking hospital was refusing after nineteen days on a ventilator. They were doing their fucking best to kill the guy. I hope he recovers, but I would be seriously standing guard over him to make sure they didn't kill him with something else just so the cabal's parrots could use his death as more manure to feed the sheeple.

can we clone this judge? based pede

They need to watch the patient carefully. They'll do something to kill him now to make Ivermectin look bad.

This is really interesting.

If an argument is made that a judge (judicial branch) doesn't have that power, the same argument can be made that the executive branch also doesn't have that power when it comes to vaccines.

This is not good. This is a rebellion against freedom.

On the one hand, they say "forced vaccines are not good," but on the other hand, they say "forced ivermectin is good.

No different thoughts from those who promote mandatory vaccines.

Those who support this have no understanding of the meaning of freedom.

this isnt a win, no judge should be able to force anyone to take any drug PERIOD. i mean wtf do i really even have to say this? cmon.