Vermont Supreme Court Denies Re-Hearing of Vaccine Consent Decision

Court doubles down on vulgar, unconstitutional decision.

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 an ill-considered opinion 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, 2024 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 la – 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.”

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!

It is striking that Vermont is so renowned for its judicial activism in the name of protecting supposed constitutional ‘rights’ to gay marriage (Baker v Vermont, 1999), abortion (Beecham v Leahy, 1972) and freedom from search of the airspace over Vermonters’ homes (Stae v Bryant, 2008). The state is a constitutional refuge for children seeking transgender hormone and surgery “therapies” against the wishes of their parents and home states searching for them, but its constitution and courts are now incapable of protecting healthy young Vermont children from experimental injections that carry obvious health risks, for a disease that is almost completely harmless to minors.

In State v Bryant, Vermont’s court ruled the government could not use a helicopter to search for cannabis below 100 feet because “A home’s curtilage—the “area outside the physical confines of a house into which the 'privacies of life’ may extend”—merits “the same constitutional protection from unreasonable searches and seizures as the home itself.” Lay Vermonters may be forgiven for asking how any court can strain to achieve such obviously inequitable and outrageous results – a home, and the area around it, is afforded eminently more constitutional protection in Vermont than a healthy young child’s body. 

That is the perverse outcome of a Supreme Court simply unwilling to look at the ample available legal theories that would have enabled it to side with the parents and children, and compelled a higher federal court to rule that the federal PREP Act (which is completely silent about parental consent) extinguished these longstanding, essential rights. 

Vermonters presently live in a state that offers them absolutely zero legal protection for their children’s healthcare in schools – schools that maintain separate healthcare records for minor children who inform school officials that they identify as ‘trans,’ and conceal that information from parents even to the point of maintaining two different names for the child. Is it any wonder that public school enrollment is declining as citizens lose trust in the government to respect their rights and their children’s best interests? Schools in Vermont are also indoctrinating children with sex education, race, and queer ‘theories’ that are themselves social (justice?) experimentations on other people’s children, often against their wishes. 

A growing team of lawyers and concerned Vermonters are coming together as allies to ensure these plaintiffs are provided with the necessary resources to challenge Vermont’s obscene decision in this experimental vaccine case. Like a modern Marie Antoinette, the Supreme Court of Vermont has decided that its citizens can just go pound sand and eat cake if they want basic protections from experimental vaccines and federal government overreach. However the case is decided in the end, the Court has shown that it is not the protector of the people, but an accomplice in their enslavement to Big Pharma.

Such rights to our children’s safety can never be abrogated by any court in this land. Fundamental liberties are ‘inalienable’ by any government action including federal statute (including the PREP Act), and regardless of whether Vermont’s highest court can comprehend that this is the Supreme law of this land. 

We the People can see right through them.

(For a more detailed discussion of this case, see my Substack article here and my interview with Children’s Health Defense here.)