Basically SCOTUS would not hear the petition to review the 9th Circuit Courts ruling. Therefore, it must be handled state by state in their respective legislatures. It will be up to the people to refuse these mandates. That is where we are folks. There needs to be better cases built with the goal of getting SCOTUS to actually make a ruling that would apply nationally. This is how this stuff works.
How sad that SCOTUS can't fix the problem of "mandated healthcare crap" ... America was built on FREEDOMS ...so what's their problem in RECOGNIZING "freedom to NOT BE VAXXED"??? 😱😡💥
I wonder what the "vote count" was on DENYING CERT???
Thank you. I am not sure I understand what your question is asking. From what I understand, this matter was not heard by the high court. The petition to hear the case before the full court was denied thus leaving the lower appellate ruling stand. That would be Justice Elena Kagan that reviews emergency petitions for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. That may simply be a failing in the petition itself to make the matter hearable by the full court. Basically the high court refused to hear the matter on its merits. That was the risk of the petition for review coming out of the 9th Circuit Court for SCOTUS. It has to make it past the 9th Circuit gatekeeper which is Kagan. Although the case out of Calif was important, the matter may have to originate from another similar lawsuit coming out of a different Circuit Court to get to the full court. Say from the 11th Circuit Court which would be Justice Thomas' jurisdiction. That is just how the system works. However, the 9th Circuit Court's history has probably one of the highest number of reversals of any US Appellate Court in the country. If at first you don't succeed, try again - just through a different court.
SCOTUS IS NOT COMING TO SAVE US: The Supreme Court denied Health Freedom Defense Fund's petition to review a 2025 Ninth Circuit ruling that allows government to mandate medical interventions without evidence of efficacy or judicial oversight. The case originated from HFDF's 2021 lawsuit against Los Angeles Unified School District's COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The Ninth Circuit ruled that courts shouldn't question mandates as long as authorities claim they're for 'public health' — and that it doesn't matter whether the shots actually worked, only that officials believed they would help.
HFDF President Leslie Manookian warned the ruling sets binding precedent across the largest federal circuit: 'The system is not going to protect us. It's up to us, the people, to refuse to ever obey a mandate from authority again.' She pointed to emerging disease narratives as potential pretexts for future mandates. HFDF is now focused on state-level Medical Freedom Acts — Idaho passed one in 2025, Arizona's legislature just approved a similar bill, and at least a dozen more states have introduced versions.
A mandate isn't a law. It is just bureaucrats saying "you have to"... And if it turns out that it is legally binding then we have fallen to a tyrannical regime and need to start thinking like George Washington.
AND what you have espoused is EXACTLY WHY THEY ARE WANTING TO OVER-THROW THE 2ND AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION...think about that for a second...this is occurring in states where they are trying through the courts, to get "RID OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT"!!!!
This could be about states rights. Personally I like that. Let the states compete with each other. A state is going to have a hard time justifying mandates when the state next door does not mandate and there is no difference
They can mandate all they want. They can also die trying. My guess on this is the petitioners fucked up the petition and didnt meet the level the court would address. States need to make their laws against it like florida. If a state doesnt people should leave or vote then out and get it done.
Well health is a state power so I guess that is the issue here or does the bill or rights of other clauses in the constution provife protection in some way?
though I believe federal funding for health is unconstitutional, as long as it is there, ban states from getting funding unless they protect health freedom and choice what not to have injected in people
The Supreme Court doesn't write laws, Congress does. We need to go after Congress to pass a law which keeps the federal government from forcing us to accept their medical opinion, and go after state legislatures so that the state can't. This is how our Republic works.
Basically SCOTUS would not hear the petition to review the 9th Circuit Courts ruling. Therefore, it must be handled state by state in their respective legislatures. It will be up to the people to refuse these mandates. That is where we are folks. There needs to be better cases built with the goal of getting SCOTUS to actually make a ruling that would apply nationally. This is how this stuff works.
Thy can mandate all they want. They still cant actually force me to take it.
Right there with you fren. In the end, it will be up to all of us to tell them to take their mandates and shove them.
When they engineer the vaccine to self-disseminate, will mandates mean anything since we will not be able to choose to take or not?
GGGGGGGGGGGGREAT clarification...THNX
How sad that SCOTUS can't fix the problem of "mandated healthcare crap" ... America was built on FREEDOMS ...so what's their problem in RECOGNIZING "freedom to NOT BE VAXXED"??? 😱😡💥
I wonder what the "vote count" was on DENYING CERT???
Thank you. I am not sure I understand what your question is asking. From what I understand, this matter was not heard by the high court. The petition to hear the case before the full court was denied thus leaving the lower appellate ruling stand. That would be Justice Elena Kagan that reviews emergency petitions for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. That may simply be a failing in the petition itself to make the matter hearable by the full court. Basically the high court refused to hear the matter on its merits. That was the risk of the petition for review coming out of the 9th Circuit Court for SCOTUS. It has to make it past the 9th Circuit gatekeeper which is Kagan. Although the case out of Calif was important, the matter may have to originate from another similar lawsuit coming out of a different Circuit Court to get to the full court. Say from the 11th Circuit Court which would be Justice Thomas' jurisdiction. That is just how the system works. However, the 9th Circuit Court's history has probably one of the highest number of reversals of any US Appellate Court in the country. If at first you don't succeed, try again - just through a different court.
SCOTUS IS NOT COMING TO SAVE US: The Supreme Court denied Health Freedom Defense Fund's petition to review a 2025 Ninth Circuit ruling that allows government to mandate medical interventions without evidence of efficacy or judicial oversight. The case originated from HFDF's 2021 lawsuit against Los Angeles Unified School District's COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The Ninth Circuit ruled that courts shouldn't question mandates as long as authorities claim they're for 'public health' — and that it doesn't matter whether the shots actually worked, only that officials believed they would help.
HFDF President Leslie Manookian warned the ruling sets binding precedent across the largest federal circuit: 'The system is not going to protect us. It's up to us, the people, to refuse to ever obey a mandate from authority again.' She pointed to emerging disease narratives as potential pretexts for future mandates. HFDF is now focused on state-level Medical Freedom Acts — Idaho passed one in 2025, Arizona's legislature just approved a similar bill, and at least a dozen more states have introduced versions.
SOURCE: https://x.com/theHFDF/status/2056509036103958977
The precedent I see is the one where a decent portion of society told the TPTB to...
Stick your fucking vaccine up your arse! And meant it. All in!
I expect if they try something similar in the future it will be a majority singing that song this time.
Someone expected Commiefornia to be against Man dates ?
Would need to be more out of touch than Commiefornia politicians 🙄
With fishing rods at the ready. Trust and believe.
A mandate isn't a law. It is just bureaucrats saying "you have to"... And if it turns out that it is legally binding then we have fallen to a tyrannical regime and need to start thinking like George Washington.
AND what you have espoused is EXACTLY WHY THEY ARE WANTING TO OVER-THROW THE 2ND AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION...think about that for a second...this is occurring in states where they are trying through the courts, to get "RID OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT"!!!!
This could be about states rights. Personally I like that. Let the states compete with each other. A state is going to have a hard time justifying mandates when the state next door does not mandate and there is no difference
They can mandate all they want. They can also die trying. My guess on this is the petitioners fucked up the petition and didnt meet the level the court would address. States need to make their laws against it like florida. If a state doesnt people should leave or vote then out and get it done.
Well health is a state power so I guess that is the issue here or does the bill or rights of other clauses in the constution provife protection in some way?
Positve could be Obama care gets killed.
Insidious.
though I believe federal funding for health is unconstitutional, as long as it is there, ban states from getting funding unless they protect health freedom and choice what not to have injected in people
Can’t the legislature move to enact a law banning it
As fractious as the Legislature is, getting them to do ANYTHING would be a heavy lift.
The Supreme Court doesn't write laws, Congress does. We need to go after Congress to pass a law which keeps the federal government from forcing us to accept their medical opinion, and go after state legislatures so that the state can't. This is how our Republic works.