by John Klar
The Vermont Supreme Court has doubled down on its recent decision denying Vermont parents and their children basic constitutional safeguards against unauthorized government infliction of an experimental vaccine on a young public school child.
After its opinion earlier this summer that shielded schools and vaccines from all state law claims for administering an experimental vaccine to a 6-year-old boy against his parents’ express directives, the Vermont Supreme Court Friday rejected plaintiffs’ motion to re-present their constitutional claims to the Court for reconsideration.
In its August 9 Motion for Re-Argument, plaintiffs’ counsel specifically emphasized that the Vermont courts have denied fundamental state constitutional protections to its citizens by shielding school officials who administer experimental COVID-19 vaccines to young children against their parents’ and the child’s express wishes, are immune from any accountability whatsoever.
The Motion summarizes the essence of this family’s concerns, alleging that school officials
“…acting ‘under color’ of Vermont law – and cloaked in its authority, took L.P. from his seat in class, and while L.P.protested, escorted him to the clinic.
“This action deprived L.P., and, derivatively, his parents, of their Article 11 right to be free in their persons from unreasonable seizure by agents of the State, without due process.
“[School officials] then injected L.P. with an experimental substance, while they held him in place. They did it without consent, while L.P. protested what they were doing to him.
“This act deprived L.P., and, derivatively, his parents, of their Article 11 right to be free from intrusion into their bodily integrity by agents of the State, without due process.”
Author’s editorial statement – ‘One need not be an attorney to see that what was done to this child by a government authority was every parent’s worst nightmare. If that nightmare could be made worse, it would be by a state court system that denied any relief to the family: a court system that sided absolutely with the federal government and a large corporate manufacturer at the expense of all Vermont children’s rights!’