Something just happened in Oregon … and it’s not about hunting.
(twitter.com)
💉 Mental/Physical NCSWIC
Comments (13)
sorted by:
Until mail in voting is gone Washington, Oregon and California are occupied territory.
Agree
Agree 100%
I would say "despoiled," but that would be picking nits.
But who pays attention to the Constitution? Even here, during the covid mess when people were begging for help to get out of their job mandated shots, they wouldn't listen when I kept telling them over and over and over again to use the CONSTITUTION. That's ALL they needed. I have to wonder how many people even know what it is. (It's the Supreme Law of our land, fyi.) After all, I remember the fren here who didn't even know that it takes BOTH houses of congress to pass a bill into law!! What hope do we have when people don't even know the most basic of basics.
That's a primary function of why we are here. To learn. Or would you prefer someone not get informed about the Constitution and how this government of ours operates. Be patient Patriot we all get there together.
The thing is, it is a requirement to understand and know the Constitution to become a citizen, and to run for office.
Also, too many people "know" things that are simply not correct. Especially in regards to the Constitution.
They knew is the thing. Someone is going to have to cough up some big bucks and I would bet the government and Big Pharma are BOTH going to get busted.
I remember I was told my denied religious exemption form was "too constitutional". I'm pretty sure this wouldn't help me though since it hinges on the state issued license. That brings the constitution into play. I'm pretty sure I need the jabs to be proven part of the giant RICO case on election fraud, but that'll be a long time coming.
I protested under "religious grounds" for not getting vaccinated. I've no doubt this further moved me up a 'list of people to degrade even further. About a year and a half later when a small group of people to let go came out, I was not only in it but a written reprimand for being warned not to o spread conspiracy theories on work time was included. Are we at the point of having ANY clean courts and good lawyes yet?
All those bankrupt businesses they shut down were victims of violation of the 'takings clause'.
Also in violation of international laws
https://research.unc.edu/human-research-ethics/resources/ccm3_019064/
Sez Grok for those (like me) whose became immediately lost in the legalese:
Simplified facts from the post:
The U.S. Supreme Court has asked the State of Oregon to respond to a petition (docket 25-1280) in a case challenging a state requirement that healthcare professionals (e.g., nurses) be injected with an investigational/experimental drug (COVID-19 vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization) and waive rights to sue for injuries, as a condition of keeping their professional license to work.
Key elements of the legal question presented (from the petition):
The post argues:
Oregon (and the 9th Circuit) overreached by claiming a state right to mandate such drugs, which allegedly violates federal law.
COVID-19 vaccines were under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) or similar investigational status, with liability shields (e.g., PREP Act).
This implicates broader issues like informed consent, federal preemption over investigational products, and whether states can override federal protections for experimental drugs.
The Supreme Court requesting a response is described as a rare/significant step, potentially signaling interest in the case.
Brief context for law-abiding U.S. citizens:
This could be important because it tests the limits of government power to impose medical mandates tied to livelihood, especially for products with liability protections and limited testing/consent requirements during emergencies.
A ruling could:
Reinforce individual rights to bodily autonomy and informed consent (e.g., refusing experimental products without losing one's job or license).
Clarify boundaries between state public health authority and federal rules on investigational drugs/EUA.
Affect future pandemic responses, professional licensing, and accountability for mandates — protecting citizens from compelled medical interventions that carry risks, while balancing public health needs.
It may open avenues for challenges to past mandates or set precedents limiting overreach, though outcomes depend on the Court's eventual decision (this is still at the petition/response stage).
Always consult legal experts for personal situations.