List of Law Suits filed by Federal Employees regarding the "Vaccination" Mandate Executive Order

This page is mostly to keep track of the federal employee mandate cases. From what I can tell, no one is keeping a list of those cases and reporting on it is very infrequent. I also keep some track of the other sister mandates (1. Military , 2. Federal Contractor, 3. Federal Employees, 4. CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), 5. OSHA, 6. Head Start. I also have some honorable mentions at the bottom which don't involve any of the six sisters.

I. Federal Employee mandate cases

1. 

   Scylla, a Six-headed Beast

   Brnovich v. Biden, filed by Attorney General of Arizona, on 9-14, No. 21-1568 (D. Ariz.) ("Defendants’ imposition of vaccine mandates on U.S. citizens and lawfully employed aliens, but not on unauthorized aliens at the border or already present in the United States, constitutes discrimination on the basis of national origin and alienage in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.") See his 10-22 motion for TRO ; Order granting leave to file amended complaint and new motion for preliminary injunction 11-10; Amended Complaint;  Motion for Preliminary Injunction 11-19; 
2. GREGG COSTIN, et al. v. Biden filed by Michael Yoder on 9-23 (D.C.), 1:21-cv-02484
3. Foley v. Biden, filed by David Foley and Daniel Flickinger on 9-29 (Northern District of Texas)  4:21-cv-01098-O, See Defendant's Response, the Judge's Order, and Plaintiff's Response to that Order, and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion; Plaintiff's second motion to amend and draft amended complaint; Defendant's request for extension of time to file answer to original complaint in light of potential amendment 11-22;  Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's request for extension 11-23; Defendant's Reply re extension of time 11-24; Order granting motion for extension in part 11-29; Defendant's opposition to motion for leave to amend 12-3; Plaintiff's reply to Defendant's opposition 12-6-21; Defendant's notice of supplemental authority (Order in McCray); Plaintiff's Notice of supplemental authority (Cochran v. SEC); Defendant's Second Notice of Supplemental Authority 12-23 ( Donovan v. Vance, No. 4:21-cv-5148-TOR, ECF No. 58, at 10-14 (W.D. Wa. Dec. 17, 2021); AFGE Local 501 v. Biden, No. 21-23828-CIV, ECF No. 33, at 13-18 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 22, 2021); Plaintiff's Second Notice of Supplemental Authority 12-23 (Texas v. Becerra, No. 2:21- CV-229, (N.D. Tex. Dec. 16, 2021) and Florida v. Nelson, No. 8:21-cv-2524-SDM-TGW, (M.D. Fla. Dec. 22, 2021)); Plaintiff's third notice of supplemental authority; Plaintiff's fourth notice of supplemental authority (in light of injunction in F4MF); Joint Status Report,  Order staying case pending Feds for Medical Freedom Injunction resolution
4. Brass v Biden, filed pro se, 1:21-cv-02778-MEH (D. Colo.) October 15, 2021; copies of FOIA requests sent by Brass
5. ALTSCHULD ET AL v. RAIMONDO et al  (D.C.) filed by the Federal Practice Group on 10-19,   1:2021cv02779, Defendant Response to motion for preliminary injunction ;exhibits11-3; Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
6. Rydie et al v. Biden et al Employee A v. Biden, filed by Jonathan Bolls on October 19, 2021 (Maryland) 8:2021cv02696, see motion for TRO; Biden response in opposition 11-12; Plaintiff Reply; Order Denying TRO 11-19
7. Church v. Biden, filed filed by Michael Yoder on 10-24 (D.C.)1:21-cv-02815, as reported by Under Cover DC; Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order;  opposition from the Defendants; Plaintiff's Response 11-3; Memorandum Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
8. Smith v Biden, 1:21-cv-19457-CPO-SAK filed 10-29 (NJ); brief in support motion for injunction with exhibits; opposition to motion for injunction 11-5; Reply to motion in opposition 11-6;  Order denying injunction 11-8; 
9. AFGE Local 501 et al v. Biden et al filed by Mark Berkowitz on behalf of AFGE Local 501 and Council of Prison Locals CPL 33 on 10-30 (Southern Florida) 1:21-cv-23828-JAL, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Order denying preliminary injunction (11-15) 
10. McCray v. Biden filed on 11-1-21; Order denying motion for TRO dismissing complaint without prejudice (12-7) 
11. James Joseph Rodden, et al. v. Dr. Anthony Fauci, et al. filed by John J. Vecchione, Jenin Younes, and Harriet Hageman of New Civil Liberties Alliance and Robert Henneke of Texas Public Policy Foundation on November 5, 2021 (Southern District of Texas) 3:21-cv-00317; Defendant's response in opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, exhibits; Plaintiff's reply and exhibit; Order denying injunction 11-27-21
12. Donovan v. Vance, 4:21-cv-05148 (E.D. Wash.), filed by Nathan Arnold and Simon Peter Serrano for the Silent Majority Foundation on 11-15 (one federal employee, others contractors)
13. Payne v. Biden, filed by Reed Rubinstein for America First Legal Foundation on November 22, 2021 (D.C.)  1:21-cv-03077; Plaintiff's motion for Summary Judgment (Nov 24); Memo in support of motion for summary judgment; Defendant's motion for extension to answer MSJ; Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motion 12-23
14. MacGregor & Bjerken v. Federal Agency Heads, 21-cv-142 (D. Mont.) filed on 11-17, Brief in support of TRO, filed by Chris Gallus and Abby Moscatel  Order voluntarily dismissing case 11-29
15.  AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF PRISON LOCALS 33 and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LOCAL 2018 v. DIRECTOR KIRAN AHUJA, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Attorney General MERRICK B. GARLAND and LLOYD AUSTIN, filed by Bruce L. Castor, Jr. Michael T. van der Veen on behalf of Council 33 and Local 2018 on November 23, 2021 (E.D. Pa) 2:2021cv05172
16. Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden et al., filed by TRENT MCCOTTER, JONATHAN BERRY,  MICHAEL BUSCHBACHER of BOYDEN GRAY & ASSOCIATES December 21, 2021  (S.D. Tx)  3:21-cv-00356, motion for injunction part 1, part 2, Order accepting Plaintiff's proposed briefing schedule; Defendants' Response in oppo to injunction; Plaintiffs' reply; Plaintiff's supplement in light of Supreme Court in OSHA and CMS; Transcript of hearing (1-13-22); Defendant's Response to supplemental authority (1-18-22); Nationwide Injunction (1-21-22); Notice of appeal 
17. VIERBUCHEN v. BIDEN, Case 0:22-cv-00001-NDF, filed 01/04/22 (Wyoming) by John Knepper and Andrew Block for America First Legal  
18. Doe v. Austin (Feds for Medical Freedom) filed 1-14-21(M.D. Fla) by Nick Whitney, Carol A. Thompson, John J. Michaels of Federal Practice Group See covereage: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/federal-employee-group-broadens-legal-case-against-biden-vaccine-mandate 

II. Military only (August 24, 2021 Department of Defense Mandate)

1. Robert v. Austin, filed by Todd S. Callender and Dale Saran on 8-17 (Colorado) 1:2021cv02228, Motion for preliminary injunction 11-2, Exhibit 17, Exhibit 18
2. Doe v. Austin, filed by Ibrahim Reyes, Brandon Johnson, and Travis Miller (Defending the Republic) on 10-6 (N.D. Fla.)  3:21-cv-01211-AW-HTC (Military only, no federal employees), see Defendant Response,  Memo of Defendant Response, and Plaintiff's Reply and other Reply; Order denying Preliminary Injunction (But also finding that service members can't be required to take BioNTech)
3. Navy Seal, et al v. Biden filed by Liberty Counsel on 10-15 (Middle District of Florida) 8:21-cv-02429; Order denying prelim injunction, deferring judgment in part (military only), and ordering information about exemption requests provided on schedule (finding that accommodations process might be guise as plaintiff suggest - military only); Defendant's opposition to class action with attached affidavits of military involved in the denial accommodation process 12-3
4. Navy Seals 1-26 et al v Biden and Austin et al, filed First Liberty associated attorneys Kelly J. Shackelford, Jeffrey C. Mateer, Hiram S. Sasser, III, David J. Hacker, Michael D. Berry, Justin Butterfield Texas, Roger Byron, Heather Gebelin Hacker, Andrew B. Stephens, and Jordan E. Pratt on November 9, 2021 (Northern District of Texas) 4:21-cv-01236-O; Amicus America First Legal Foundation;  motion for preliminary injunction 11-24; brief in support motion injunction 11-24; order denying motion for lack of notice to counsel (none filed NOA yet) and providing further instruction 11-24 ; 12-10 defendant's response to motion for injunction; 12-17 Plaintiff's reply  supplemental evidence 12-23 (complaint of commander re ruse process); supplemental evidence 12-24 (denial of travel authorization for medical treatment); 1-3-22 Order Enjoining
5. ?1:21-cv-03053-UNA FRETZ v. BIDEN et al, filed 11-17-21 (info not available at this time)
6. Abbott v. Biden, Case 6:22-cv-00003 Filed 01/04/22 (National Guard)
7. Airforce Officer v Austin, Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES filed, 01/06/22 by Michael R. Hirsh and others with St. Thomas More Society, (M.D. Ga)

***See also this excellent memo from an Area Defense Counsel 1-19-22***

III. Federal Contractors only (Executive Order 14042)

1. State of Texas v. Biden, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on October 29, 2021 (Southern District of Texas) 3:21-cv-00309 
2. State of Georgia et al v. Biden, filed by representative for States of Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia (Southern Georgia) 1:21-tc-05000  
3. Kentucky v Biden Judge Tatenhove's order on 11-30, enjoining the federal contractor mandate in 3 states.
4. VANDERSTELT v. Biden, filed 1:22-cv-00005 ECF No. 1, filed 01/04/22 (W. Michigan) by Sheng Li, John J. Vecchione, and Jenin Younes for New Civil Liberties Alliance (NECLA)

IV. CMS

    Louisiana v. Becerra https://laborrelated.blogspot.com/2021/12/a-good-question-raised-by-us-district.html (dec     1)

   Missouri v. Biden Judge Schelp's order on 11-29, enjoining the federal healthcare worker mandate in 10 states. 

1/13/22

21A240

Biden v. Missouri

V. OSHA

1/13/22

21A244

NFIB v. OSHA

 BTS Holding v. OSHA on 11-12

VI. Head Start

• December 31, 2021, Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix in Texas v. Becerra, Case No. 5:21-cv-00300-H, Doc. 42 (N.D. Tex) 
• January 1, 2022, Memorandum Order issued by Judge Terry Doughty in Louisiana v. Becerra 3:21-cv-04370-TAD-KDM (Doc. 15)  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Honorable Mentions

On the issue of the time and forum to challenge the constitutionality of laws and orders when there exists an administrative scheme

    Cochran v. Security and Exchange Commission, No. 19-10396 (5th Cir., December 13, 2021) 

In Cochran, the court recognized that a rule set forth in Elgin v. Department of Treasury, 567 U.S.         1 (2012), which acts to preclude certain plaintiffs from seeking redress in federal district court in             favor of administrative adjudication, “cannot be absolute.” Cochran at 20.                        

        https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Cochran-En-Banc-Opinion.pdf  Cochran v. SEC - New Civil Liberties Alliance (nclalegal.org)

On the issue of the efficacy of the injections

Halgren v. City of Naperville, 21-cv-05039

Contrary to Defendants’ claim, the nature of the disease and vaccines involved in Jacobson (and thus the legitimate government interest furthered by the legislation) present sharp factual distinctions from the current case. Unlike COVID-19, which presents an infection fatality rate range of ostensibly 0.0-1.63 percent, the smallpox pandemic killed tens of millions with an infection fatality rate of 30 percent, exceeding the death toll of World War I and II combined, and leaving even its survivors permanently scarred, blind or disabled. Likewise, the Jacobson pandemic involved higher transmissibility “attack rates” (i.e. the rate of contraction among the at-risk populations), and unlike the vaccines for COVID-19 (which are designed to mitigate symptomatic infection in the person vaccinated), the available vaccine in Jacobson was, in fact, a sterilizing vaccine that affirmatively killed the virus and prevented transmission within the community at large. Factually, this case isn’t Jacobson.

 " most current evidence …confirms no proven differential in the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus based upon vaccination status for those infected"

“court examined the record evidence on the issue presented and finds that Plaintiffs…made a preliminary showing that that natural immunity equals the material benefits of vaccine-induced protection alone.”

 

On the travel mandate (masks not vaccines)

Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. et al v. Biden et al, 8:2021cv01693 (M.D. FL) filed July 12, 2021 by Brant Hadaway and George Wentz, Jr.; Amended Complaint (filed 12-13-21); Answer to Amended Complaint (1-6-21)

Pre-emptive strikes

Numerous Federal Officials Enjoined from Enforcing Federal Employee Vaccine Mandate

The tireless efforts of the good people at Feds for Medical Freedom have paid off with a huge win today in securing an injunction. As we know, these fights are never over until they are over, and we can expect more ups and downs, but this was a big day. 

 The order and filings are linked here:

Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden et al., filed by TRENT MCCOTTER, JONATHAN BERRY,  MICHAEL BUSCHBACHER of BOYDEN GRAY & ASSOCIATES December 21, 2021  (S.D. Tx)  3:21-cv-00356, motion for injunction part 1, part 2, Order accepting Plaintiff's proposed briefing schedule; Defendants' Response in oppo to injunction; Plaintiffs' reply; Plaintiff's supplement in light of Supreme Court in OSHA and CMS; Transcript of hearing (1-13-22); Nationwide Injunction (1-21-22)

March for Life on January 21, Rally for Freedom on January 23

This could be a huge year for the Pro-Life movement. I cannot make it, but my prayers will be with those marching on January 21.

A massive rally is being held two days later in protest of the injection mandates. Feds for Medical Freedom will be there and some of the strongest voices in the freedom movement will be there, including RFK Jr., Dr. Malone, and Dr. McCullough. Again, I wish I could be there, but my prayers will be with the rally attendees. 

 The Joe that Americans voted for promised not to impose mandates. We seem to ended up with a different Joe. We can't be silent about it. I encourage anyone who can go to go, and those who cannot go to support them.

Sudden Deaths in Tarrant County Update

In previous posts, I asked if anyone was even trying to keep track of vaccine deaths and I noted the rise in "sudden deaths" that seems to have marked 2021. To be clear, I don't know why there has been a rise in sudden deaths. 

Covid-19 has disrupted many aspects of American life. Between lockdowns, telework, life under a mask, and life under fear, Americans are more unhealthy than ever. Americans are exercising less and socializing (in real life) less at the same time that they are drinking more, using more drugs, murdering each other more, and dying in car accidents more. Perhaps all of these factors have something to do with the rise in sudden deaths. 

If it hadn't been for Covid-19 and Covid-19 "vaccines" my chief culprits for the rise in sudden death would probably have been energy drinks (it seems like at some point in recent years we saw an odd anything-goes approach to their regulation and a dramatic rise in their consumption), vaping (could be fine, but it is fairly new), or illegal drugs. 

But, when the majority of the entire population has been injected with a new technology, that technology should be considered suspect #1 for evaluating any medical trends that follow.

To rule out suspect #1, I looked at data from the Medical Examiner's office and identified thirteen decedents (out of about 1300) whose deaths seemed most likely to have been the result of the "vaccinations" (based on listed cause of death, age and date of death). I asked the Medical Examiner's office for records of their "vaccinations". The Medical Examiner's office explained that it did not have such records and so I requested their autopsy reports.

So far I have received nine autopsy reports. Only one includes vaccine status. That case involved a 30-year old man whose medical history included asthma. According to the Medical Examiner, he was "vaccinated" but the Medical Examiner has no information as to when he was vaccinated or by what product. Prior to his death, he experienced extreme coughing, vomiting, and diarrhea. He tested negative for Covid-19. He had no history of drug or alcohol problems. He died in late August, 2021. The cause of death is listed as "Sudden Death with a history of asthma."

I would feel a lot more comfortable with what is happening if someone could tell me the "vaccine" that he took, its batch number, and the date(s) that he took it. I would feel even more comfortable if they had already looked into this issue before I asked about it.

I have similar concerns about the others whose autopsy reports I reviewed, I just don't know whether they received a "vaccine" (although the odds are that at least 5 of them had).

The best way to assure those of us who are "vaccine hesitant" would be to provide us with all of the data so that we could reassure ourselves. 

Who to read (Covid Injection and related)

I intend to add some more and will update this page, but here is a start:

• Jeff Childer's Coffee & Covid https://substack.com/profile/45832042-jeff-childers 
• Florida attorney who has great insight and stays on top of the developments
• Steve Kirsch  https://stevekirsch.substack.com/ 
• Silicon Valley guy who has brings together a lot of information and provides excellent analysis
• Robert F. Kennedy Jr https://childrenshealthdefense.org
• His book is a prerequisite for understanding what is happening 

The Six Sister Federal Mandates

Between August and November 2021, President Biden and his agents enacted six sister federal injection mandates. 

The first sister, the Military Mandate (issued by the Secretary of Defense on August 24, 2021) was partially enjoined yesterday by U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor on January 3, 2022. 

 The second sister, the Federal Contractor Mandate (Executive Order 14042, issued on September 9, 2021) was enjoined– nationwide–on December 7, 2021, by U.S. District Judge R. Stan Baker in Georgia v. Biden, Case 1:21-tc-05000, (Doc. 94)

The third sister, the Federal Employee Mandate (Executive Order 14043, issued on September 9, 2021) has not yet been enjoined.

The fourth sister, the CMS Mandate (issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on November 5, 2021) was enjoined by both

U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp on November 29, 2021 in Missouri v. Biden, Case No. 4:21-cv-01329-MTS (Doc. 28)

and

Judge Terry Doughty on November 30, 2021 in Louisiana v. Becerra, Case No. 3:21-cv-03970-TAD-KDM (Doc. 28)–upheld by the Fifth Circuit in Louisiana v. Becerra, 20 F.4th 260 (5th Cir. 2021).

The fifth sister, the OSHA Mandate (issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration on November 5, 2021) was enjoined by the Fifth Circuit on November 12, 2021, in BST Holdings v. OSHA, No. 21-60845. The injunction was later lifted by a Sixth Circuit panel and is currently before the Supreme Court.

The sixth sister, the Head Start Mandate, was enjoined on

December 31, 2021, by Judge James Wesley Hendrix in Texas v. Becerra, Case No. 5:21-cv-00300-H (Doc. 42) and by

Judge Terry Doughty on January 1, 2022 in Louisiana v. Becerra 3:21-cv-04370-TAD-KDM (Doc. 15)

What can you do to help? Pray and keep praying for all who face these injection mandates, especially federal employees. 

Why are Sudden Deaths due to "Natural Causes" or "Etiology Unexplained" up in 4 Texas Counties? (Tarrant-Johnson-Denton-Parker)

The Tarrant Medical Examiner classifies sudden deaths into a variety of sudden death categories. Most are recorded as something like "sudden death with a history of [specified] disease." 

But the Medical Examiner also has several generic sudden death categories, which I have grouped together. These are variations of "sudden death due to natural causes" or "sudden death etiology undetermined". Focusing on these unspecified sudden deaths in adults, I put together a chart which shows that 2021 has seen a significant rise in such deaths.

In fact, there were more sudden, unexplained, natural deaths from June to September of this year, than there were total in any previous year. Now, what was happening during those months...

No such deaths have yet been reported for October-December, 2021, but there are still 409 deaths which have not yet been given a determination, most of them falling in those months. 

Age, date of death and description here

I honestly hope that there is a reasonable explanation for this which is due to an increased number of residents or a change in policy or personnel or something. But I also have no faith that anyone is really tracking the effects of the large-scale medical experiment that has been taking place.

I am not jumping to conclusions, I just want an explanation and assurances that the "vaccination" records of the dead are being tracked.

Edit: On a social media post that has since been "moderated" into oblivion, someone asked where I got this data. I got it from the link below. I downloaded each year going back to 2011. I sorted for "sudden deaths" and looked for those that had no explanation. This is a different category than "unknown causes" because this death category includes the signifier "sudden." I have previously posted about an Open Records Request where I am trying to satisfy my curiosity and quell my concerns. I posted as well about the rise in searches for "sudden death" and others have also noticed this. I don't claim to have answers. I just want to know. And if a bunch of us are just conspiracy theorists, I think that the best way to bring us back into the fold would be to provide information and stop ending discussions. Just throw us a bone and give us the data so that we can go chase some other conspiracy.

It is no conspiracy theory however that the Pharmaceutical-Medical-Government-Media-Military establishment trained for such occasions as this and during their training, they decided that they should shut us up, drown us out, and discredit us. See for example The SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028, a Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators. 

Also: I am happy to share the full spreadsheet that I put together with anyone who wants it. I am just not posting it here because it has people's names in it. You can leave a comment if you want to see it or email me at david.foley.JMJ@protonmail.com.

Following up

In this graph, I used all adult or adolescent "sudden" categories. The results here are not as dramatic as the sudden unexplained results above. So far, 2021 does not have more overall "sudden" deaths than 2020. But, again, there over 400 pending cases, so we don't know what the final result will be. The last "sudden" death recorded was in September and that is about where the backlog of "pending" cases begins. 

In a rude projection, I matched a projected column which ends in September 2021 to the September 2020 column. If the numbers hold (they could be more, they could be less) to what happened last year, we would be adding another 18 cases. If that is what happens, 2021 will indeed have shown a significant increase in overall sudden deaths in addition to very significant increase in sudden-unexplained deaths. 

Far left column is projected (56) next is so-far 2021 (38), next is 2020 (49) etc

12-29

Another note is that there were ten-year highs for all-category sudden deaths in three months in 2021: March, June, and July.

For years 2021-2011, the numbers recorded in March were

    9-0-6-4-5-4-3-6-5-1-2

For the month of June in those years

    8-6-1-5-5-1-2-4-1-2-2

For the month of July in those years

    6-3-1-4-3-4-1-4-5-4-1

What do those numbers mean? It is hard to say. Were injection rates high in March, June, and July? I think so, but I am not sure.  

Perhaps these numbers are too small to think much of and perhaps this is just statistical noise. But, there are still 4 cases pending for March, 3 cases pending for June, 8 cases pending for July, 28 for August, 36 for September, 67 for October, 120 for November, and 115 for December. When all of those pending cases are categorized, my guess is that there will be no argument about whether 2021 was a bellwether year in sudden deaths. 

The only question will be why. I hope someone asks. And I hope they aren't afraid to ask if it has something to do with the injections that have been incessantly pushed.

Federal Employee Fired for Injection Refusal Just before Christmas

In my post Staying true to its Arbitrary Roots, Federal Employee Mandate takes December Off, mostly, (Nov-29), I mentioned that the SFWTF was cryptic when it caveated its guidance to agencies about waiting until January to start firing people. The SFWTF wrote,

“We understand that your agencies may need to act on enforcement sooner for a limited number of employees, such as where there are additional or compounding performance or workplace safety issues under consideration, but in general, consistency across government in further enforcement of the vaccine requirement after the start of the new calendar year is desired,” they added.

I observed, that it sounded like they were talking about probationary employees but don't want to say it. 

At least one probationary federal employee just before she would have gained the rights of a permanent employee and two weeks before Christmas.

Michaela Coughlin was a civilian operations research analyst at Eglin Airforce Base. She took a principled stand was fired on December 17, 2021. She describes her reasons:

"So my whole argument here is obviously I have my own personal reasons but it stands to that we have a personal choice to do this," Coughlin said. "This is tyranny at play here so especially being a federal employee under the office of office were held to a higher standard. And we can’t go breaking the constitution here whether or not I would’ve had the vaccine wouldn’t of change things for me because we all have a right to choose."

https://weartv.com/news/local/unfair-labor-practice-complaint-filed-against-eglin-air-force-base-over-vaccine-mandate

Well said and good luck.

 

Definition of "Fully Vaccinated" depends on what they can get away with, simple as that

Press Secretary Psaki on 12-20-21/;

Q:..Is there going to be any sort of update to those requirements that will include further guidance on, you know, whether boosters will be included as like a — as a requirement towards being fully vaccinated, essentially?

MS. PSAKI: Sure, it’s a good question. So, we would — first, the CDC has not changed their evaluation of what being “fully vaccinated” means. I think Dr. Fauci has said it’s not a matter of “if” but “when.” And then, obviously, we base any of our policies from the federal government on the CDC guidance.

Dr. Fauci said on 12-09-21 that the decision to change the definition of "fully vaccinated" was dependent on the status of cases in the courts.

   

 "Well, timing of that matters, Kate, with regard to the lawsuits"

The goal is to get more shots into more American arms as fast as possible. The only thing slowing them down is the courts. Once they get the green light to mandate the first installment of the subscription service, they will mandate its continuance. At some point, they will likely roll the flu shot into it as well.  

By the way, it is not acceptable for a President to use his powers over the workplace as a means to change the behavior of citizens. That is not what those powers are for. We don't have a king or an emperor. But the Administration has admitted that is what it is doing as part of its plan to get "the unvaccinated vaccinated."

The President’s plan will reduce the number of unvaccinated Americans by using regulatory powers and other actions to substantially increase the number of Americans covered by vaccination requirements—these requirements will become dominant in the workplace

When the President is not only requiring the military service members and the employees that he directly controls to be injected or leave, but also attempting to make it so they cannot work anywhere without the only jab, how can anyone say that he is not coercing people to take an EUA product?

 

Cobwebs, Small Flies, and Big Lies, some things never change

Laws like to Cobwebs catch small Flies

Great ones break thro' before your eyes

    -Poor Richard's Almanac 

See also

The Plan is Pretty Clear

If it doesn't make a lot of sense to you that the President has required teleworking employees to receive injections to keep their coworkers safe, that's probably because the goal of the mandate has less to do with the safety of the workforce than it does to move the needle on the number of Americans (i.e. citizens) who are "vaccinated."

Just look at the the White House website. He is bluntly using every tool at his disposal to make American citizens get vaccinated. His Safer Federal Workforce Task Force and agency heads barely even try to come up with reasons to justify a policy that has no nooks or crannies except for those "as required by law." But why should they? 

He has already telegraphed that this is just part of the plan to get Americans vaccinated. Of course, the problem with this is that the President is not supposed to use the pretense of workplace safety in order to commandeer the bodies of his workforce to achieve his goals that are unrelated to workplace safety.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/covidplan/#vaccinate

The President announced vaccination requirements for the federal government in July and called on the private sector to do more to encourage vaccination as well. Since that time, employers, schools, nursing homes, restaurants, hospitals, and cities in all 50 states have announced new vaccination requirements. Since July, the share of job postings that require vaccination are up 90%. And we know these requirements work. At the beginning of August, when Tyson Foods announced its requirement—only 45% of its workforce had gotten a shot. Today, it stands at 72%, meaning half of Tyson’s unvaccinated workers have now gotten a shot—well ahead of the company’s November 1^st deadline. After United Airlines announced its vaccination requirement, more than half of its unvaccinated employees went out and got vaccinated with weeks left to go before the deadline. In Washington State, the weekly vaccination rate jumped 34% after the Governor announced requirements for state workers.

All told, these efforts—and countless other Administration initiatives and policies—have resulted in over 175 million fully vaccinated Americans. But there are still nearly 80 million Americans eligible to be vaccinated who have not yet gotten their first shot.

The President’s plan will reduce the number of unvaccinated Americans by using regulatory powers and other actions to substantially increase the number of Americans covered by vaccination requirements—these requirements will become dominant in the workplace. In addition, the plan will provide paid time off for vaccination for most workers in the country.

Is anyone keeping track?

Earlier tonight, I sent a request to my county's medical examiner for the vaccination dates (if any) for certain people whose causes of death are be publicly available. I cross-referenced them in VAERS to confirm they had not been reported there. I have no information as to the "vaccination" history of any of these people and could not glean anything from the internet other than that they died way too young.

Given that several new, experimental medical products have recently been injected by more than half of the public, I would expect the medical examiner to have this information at his fingertips. 

If he does not have that information, that can only be because he is not looking for it when he assesses the cause of death. If he is not looking for it, is anyone?

I would like nothing more than to find out that most of these people were not "vaccinated" and that if they were "vaccinated" they had not received any injections near the times of their deaths. Even though it is a small sample size/universe, I would find that somewhat comforting. On the other hand, I would be more concerned than I am now if I saw that all of them had been "vaccinated" within two weeks of their deaths.

I will update this page with any information that I receive.

Historic Defiance of an Order and Discharge of Members of the Armed Forces

Earlier this week, we learned that the Air Force had terminated 27 airmen for defying the order to take experimental injections. 

Whatever you think of the "vaccines", you should at least respect these airmen for following through on their moral convictions.  I find it as pathetic as it is predictable that the relatively few press outlets who covered this story failed to acknowledge the moral courage of these men, but rather sought to diminish their importance by quoting only Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said "all of them were in their first term of enlistment, so they were younger, lower-ranking personnel." In other words, their life's dream was to serve in the Air Force and they had to give it up for the convictions not long after they joined. .  

The Hammer and Syringe Emblem

Even worse is the transparently dishonest characterization of this purge as normal by comparing these heroes to common order violators.

It is not unusual for members of the military to be thrown out of the service for disobeying an order; discipline is a key tenet of the armed services. As a comparison, Stefanek said that in the first three quarters of 2021, about 1,800 airmen were discharged for failure to follow orders.

Of those 1,800, how many involved a group of airmen being discharged for refusing to follow an order out of moral conviction? Comparing these courageous airmen to those who are discharged for common order violations strikes me as spiteful and inappropriate.

In 1968, 43 soldiers from Fort Hood refused to be deployed to repress peace demonstrations at home. 

I am no military history buff and I don't know if there have been other similar events.  I think it is pretty safe to guess however, that we will soon be eclipsing the 43 order-refusers of 1968 in a mass defiance of orders event that will eventually lead to the largest discharge of soldiers in modern times.

Federal Vaccine Mandates: Three Iced, Two In Effect. Don't forget to pray for members of the Military and Federal Employees

There has been a lot of great news about the blocking of three federal mandates (OSHA, CMS, and federal contractors). But, the orders requiring servicemembers and federal employees have not yet been blocked.

 Please pray for the members of the military and the federal civilian employees,  and especially for the spiritual and physical health of those who took the injections because of the mandates.

Whose "Community Standards"?

A group of federal employees who reject the mandated injections recently had their thriving Facebook group disabled.  According to Mr. Zuckerberg's Company, "Feds 4 Medical Freedom goes against our Community Standards on misinformation that could cause physical harm." Facebook claims that it encourages free expression, but doesn't allow false information about COVID-19 that could contribute to physical harm.

So, you are free to talk on Zuckerberg's platform, just so long as what you say isn't false. That is, you are free to talk, as long as what you say agrees with Zuckerberg. You can get away with contradicting Zuckerbergian shibboleths until Zuckerberg's monitors notice that you are getting too many views, likes, reposts, and new members. At that point, you might be a danger to yourself and others.

I would not have such a problem with that if Mr. Zuckerberg were more upfront about it. The terms and conditions should be clear: "You are not allowed to disagree with the orthodoxy and shibboleths of your betters on this platform." Instead, he claims that this is part of "our Community Standards."

I have lived in various states and regions of America. I think that I understand the community standards of most American communities. Based on all of my experience, I don't recognize the Community Standard. It is foreign to me.

American Community Standards involve accepting that a man has the right to open his mouth and be proved an idiot. American Community Standards involve the right to exclaim that the Emperor has no vaccine.

The "Community Standards" of Mr. Zuckerberg's company is simply the standard of an insecure elite that  knows it cannot compete in the free flow of ideas and information. 

Since we are now communicating over the Internet, Americans had better do something to make sure that their Internet communications are governed by American Community Standards.  And we'd better do it fast. In 2017, you were probably not planning how you would find ways to speak freely about your opinions in the event of a health emergency, but at that time, Big Pharma was making plans to partner with Big Tech to muzzle you. 

If you want to understand what is happening, you need to read RFK's book and follow the citations for yourself. The prescience of the scenario from the 2017, The SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028, a Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators, is unsettling. 

 

 

FOOD FOR THOUGHT: How might using social media partners to silence and deplatform critics ensure that Americans have access to information that is as free, safe, and effective as the vaccine?

A Good Question Raised by U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty noted and asked in his order yesterday in Louisiana v. Becerra the following:

The CMS Mandate does not yet require boosters to the COVID-19 vaccines. However, the CDC recently recommended boosters.  If boosters are needed six months after being “fully vaccinated,” then how good are the COVID-19 vaccines, and why is it necessary to mandate them?

Judge Doughty's question is spot-on and apparently had not been answered to his satisfaction. Indeed, how could it have been? This is one of the worst conundrums of arbitrariness that the President faces. The drug companies and the federal agencies admit that the injections lose protections after six months, but the mandates grants employment privileges to those who took them a year ago, while banishing those who decline. Makes no sense.

The Administration's only way out of this Bermuda Triangle of logic is to require booster shots, which would have happened had that FDA advisory panel not rejected the booster application in September. Until boosters are mandated, the mandate makes absolutely no sense as anything but a political loyalty test.

Federal Vaccine Mandates Found Not Immune to Challenges- Roundup

Lots of good stuff has been happening on in the courts in the last couple of weeks.

5th Circuit's order in BTS Holding v. OSHA on 11-12, enjoining the OSHA mandate.

Judge Winsor's order on 11-12, rejecting the claim rejected a claim by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine being administered under Emergency Use Authorization is interchangeable with Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine.

Judge Merryday's order on 11-22, requiring the military branches to provide information about exception grants on a schedule to prove the exception grant process is not "a ruse."

Biden Administration's kicking of  the can on the federal employee mandate out until January.

Judge Schelp's order on 11-29, enjoining the federal healthcare worker mandate in 10 states. 

Judge Doughty's order on 11-30, enjoining the federal healthcare worker mandate in all other states.

Judge Tatenhove's order on 11-30, enjoining the federal contractor mandate in 3 states.

Hopefully one of the challenges to the federal employee mandate turns the corner soon. I am aware of 12. 

1. Brnovich v. Biden, filed by Attorney General of Arizona, on 9-14, No. 21-1568 (D. Ariz.) ("Defendants’ imposition of vaccine mandates on U.S. citizens and lawfully employed aliens, but not on unauthorized aliens at the border or already present in the United States, constitutes discrimination on the basis of national origin and alienage in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.") See his 10-22 motion for TRO ; Order granting leave to file amended complaint and new motion for preliminary injunction 11-10; Amended Complaint;  Motion for Preliminary Injunction 11-19; 
2. GREGG COSTIN, et al. v. Biden filed by Michael Yoder on 9-23 (D.C.), 1:21-cv-02484
3. Foley v. Biden, filed by David Foley and Daniel Flickinger on 9-29 (Northern District of Texas)  4:21-cv-01098-O, See Defendant's Response, the Judge's Order, and Plaintiff's Response to that Order, and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion; Plaintiff's second motion to amend and draft amended complaint; Defendant's request for extension of time to file answer to original complaint in light of potential amendment 11-22;  Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's request for extension 11-23; Defendant's Reply re extension of time 11-24; Order granting motion for extension in part 11-29
4. Navy Seal, et al v. Biden filed by Liberty Counsel on 10-15 (Middle District of Florida) 8:21-cv-02429; Order denying prelim injunction, deferring judgment in part (military only), and ordering information about exemption requests provided on schedule (military only); Defendant opposition to class certification and exhibits 12-3
5. ALTSCHULD ET AL v. RAIMONDO et al  (D.C.) filed by the Federal Practice Group on 10-19,   1:2021cv02779, Defendant Response to motion for preliminary injunction ;exhibits11-3; Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
6. Rydie et al v. Biden et al Employee A v. Biden, filed by Jonathan Bolls on October 19, 2021 (Maryland) 8:2021cv02696, see motion for TRO; Biden response in opposition 11-12; Plaintiff Reply; Order Denying TRO 11-19
7. Church v. Biden, filed filed by Michael Yoder on 10-24 (D.C.)1:21-cv-02815, as reported by Under Cover DC; Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order;  opposition from the Defendants; Plaintiff's Response 11-3; Memorandum Order denying preliminary injunction 11-8
8. Smith v Biden, 1:21-cv-19457-CPO-SAK filed 10-29 (NJ); brief in support motion for injunction with exhibits; opposition to motion for injunction 11-5; Reply to motion in opposition 11-6;  Order denying injunction 11-8; 
9. AFGE Local 501 et al v. Biden et al filed by Mark Berkowitz on behalf of AFGE Local 501 and Council of Prison Locals CPL 33 on 10-30 (Southern Florida) 1:21-cv-23828-JAL, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Order denying preliminary injunction (11-15) 
10.  James Joseph Rodden, et al. v. Dr. Anthony Fauci, et al. filed by John J. Vecchione, Jenin Younes, and Harriet Hageman of New Civil Liberties Alliance and Robert Henneke of Texas Public Policy Foundation on November 5, 2021 (Southern District of Texas) 3:21-cv-00317; Defendant's response in opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, exhibits; Plaintiff's reply and exhibit; Order denying injunction 11-27-21
11. Payne v. Biden, filed by Reed Rubinstein for America First Legal Foundation on November 22, 2021 (D.C.)  1:21-cv-03077; Plaintiff's motion for Summary Judgment (Nov 24); Memo in support of motion for summary judgment
12.  AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF PRISON LOCALS 33 and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LOCAL 2018 v. DIRECTOR KIRAN AHUJA, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Attorney General MERRICK B. GARLAND and LLOYD AUSTIN, filed by Bruce L. Castor, Jr. Michael T. van der Veen on behalf of Council 33 and Local 2018 on November 23, 2021 (E.D. Pa) 2:2021cv05172

I keep the list updated here: https://laborrelated.blogspot.com/2021/10/list-of-law-suits-filed-by-federal.html