*On May 24, I sent out the link to Del Bigtree's exemplary debate with Alan Dershowitz,* *on the constitutionality of forcible vaccination. Dershowitz was, as usual, supremely* *confident that such vaccination is not constitutional, and claimed that he would readily* *defend that position before the Supreme Court.*
*Here John Jones, former professor of constitutional law, debunks Dershowitz's claims,* *explaining how the law (like science) is on the side of those refusing mandatory shots.* *MCM* *p.s. This is part 2. The link to Part 1 is next to Jones' name as author.* *Vaccine Truth vs Alan Dershowitz: Law and Science Is On Our Side, *Part 2 TOPICS:Jacobson Vs Massachusetts <https://vaxxter.com/tag/jacobson-vs-massachusetts/>Mandatory Vaccination <https://vaxxter.com/tag/mandatory-vaccination/>Smallpox <https://vaxxter.com/tag/smallpox/> POSTED BY: VAXXTERADMIN2 <https://vaxxter.com/author/drsherrit/> 05/27/2020 By John Jones, JD, PhD, Vaxxter contributor (Part 1 here) <https://wp.me/p9YsH5-2g9> More about *Jacobson* and the Law As a former professor of constitutional law, I have read nearly all the case law on vaccination policies and practices in the United States. As a person who has analyzed the history and science of vaccines from the 18th century to the present, I insist that Dershowitz (2020), Matthews (2020), and all the other vaccine *zealots* are completely wrong. As noted above from *Jacobson*, there is no legal opinion that supports the idea that the government can compel injections, and certainly, nothing in the text of the U.S. Constitution <https://constitutionus.com/> addresses the idea. Before I explain in more detail about the holding of *Jacobson*, let me recount the tangible result of the case: Mr. Henning Jacobson was neither vaccinated, nor jailed. After his final appeal was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court, there was no outbreak at the time and it had been three years since health officials in Boston had declared a smallpox epidemic in 1902, Jacobson paid a one-time fine of $5. This was a sizable sum for the day; it was roughly 50% of the average weekly income of a working-class laborer. See Willrich (2011), chapter 8 <https://erenow.net/common/pox-an-american-history/9.php>. Let that sink in: During an era of a supposedly highly contagious rate by a deadly disease, despite an order from the local health board for mandatory vaccination, people could just pay a fine and go about their business. No lockdown, no quarantine. Even though the ruling against him, the U.S. Supreme Court did *not* rule that Jacobson could be forced to receive the shot. Nor did the court rule that Jacobson could be detained, indefinitely. I have edited and parsed the exact text of the holding in *Jacobson* as follows: “The highest court of Massachusetts, *not* having held that the compulsory vaccination law … establishes the* absolute rule*, that an adult must be vaccinated, even if: (i) he is [unfit] at the time; or (ii) [the] vaccination would seriously injure his health or cause his death, *this* court holds that: as to an adult, residing in the community, and a fit subject of vaccination, the statute [does not violate] the Fourteenth Amendment.” *Jacobson* at 12. Near the end of his opinion, Harlan added a significant caveat. He explained that: (A) vaccination laws are never to be applied to all people regardless of circumstance; and (B) Courts may issue injunctions to prevent harm or injury that could be caused by a vaccine. As demonstrated by his declarations, Prof. Dershowitz is either woefully ignorant of the full opinion or cannot comprehend the breadth of the following: “It is easy, for instance, to suppose the case of an adult [for whom] vaccination in a particular condition of his health or body, would be cruel and inhuman…We are not to be understood as holding that the statute was intended to be applied to such a case, or … that the judiciary [could not] interfere and protect the health and life of the individual concerned.” ( *Jacobson* at 38-39). I think that we can best paraphrase the rule from *Jacobson* like this: ‘A local jurisdiction may impose a fine upon any *fit *adult, who refuses a free vaccine, administered by the government, when there is an *epidemic*, unless, the person can show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that they are likely to be harmed by the shot.’ *Click on the link for the rest.* -- If you appreciate News From Underground, please consider making a donation — either a one-time gift or a monthly subscription: http://markcrispinmiller.com/support/ Thank you for your support. Ways to unsubscribe: 1) send a blank email to [email protected] PLEASE NOTE: you must unsubscribe using the SAME email with which you subscribed 2) go to http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the "Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "News From Underground" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/newsfromunderground/CAGxB6W9SGveeN6JeDERATxnCCQvoXvyQfmEE4U-7-G_4fq_%2Baw%40mail.gmail.com.
