These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content test

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More


Vermont Supreme Court Approves FORCED Vaccination of Children without Parental Consent

Little boy receives a vaccination in the doctors office.

This is one of the most disturbing developments about the COVID shots to date and it should infuriate every parent in America. A 6-year-old child was forcibly injected with the COVID shot at his school after his parents explicitly requested that he not receive it. The Vermont Supreme Court has ruled that this was fine. No problem. Schools can just hold screaming children down and inject them without parental consent.

This is horrifying. This was a landmark case that has set what is for now the lone precedent in courts across America. Your school could do this to your child tomorrow and get away with it because of this ruling.

The parents in the case were Tony and Shujen Politella. Their 6-year-old son Leo attended an elementary school that decided to hold a clinic and give all the kids the experimental mRNA gene serum. Tony and Shujen refused to sign the consent form because they did not want their young son to be injected with an untested, experimental shot.

Tony Politella was so worried about it that he made a special trip to the school to make sure administrators knew their stance: Do not give Leo a COVID shot. Period.

The school said they understood completely and that Leo would be excluded.

When the day of the shot clinic arrived, they led all the kids to line up for their shots and put wristbands on them with their names. Someone put a wristband on Leo with a different child’s name on it. When they got him into the room set up for the clinic and he realized what was happening, Leo objected to receiving the shot. He knew that his parents didn’t want him to receive the jab.

They held the screaming 6-year-old down and injected him anyway.

Tony and Shujen sued Leo’s elementary school and the school district. The case made it all the way to the Vermont Supreme Court. The high court took the school’s side, completely ignoring the parental right to have a say in what gets injected into their child.

 

This is much worse than it even sounds.

The court ruled that schools and school districts are protected by the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP). This is the federal law that shields Pfizer and Moderna from lawsuits whenever their vaccines injure or kill people. Luckily for the Politellas, Leo did not die or end up in an emergency from his forcible injection, as so many other children have.

The immediate implication of the ruling is that any school in Vermont can now forcibly inject any child with any vaccine, even if the parents have not consented to it. John Klar is the attorney who represented the family. He warns that the precedent that has been set by the Vermont Supreme Court is now applicable in all 50 states.

Even if you live in Florida, where the state’s Surgeon General has called for a halt to all experimental mRNA shots, your child’s school can now forcibly inject them without your consent. The Vermont Supreme Court ruling grants immunity to schools and government officials when they mandate any vaccine, according to Klar.

“Stunningly, the Vermont Supreme Court did not even pay lip service to the constitutional liberties implicated, ruling against traditional protections of parental rights and informed consent,” noted Klar.

“The child protested and was forced to be jabbed anyway,” he added.

The danger now is that the Vermont precedent is the one thing in the books that other courts across the country will rely on if similar cases happen. Klar argues that the PREP Act should not protect malicious government employees when they injure someone with a vaccine. It’s bad enough that Big Pharma gets a unique liability shield that doesn’t apply to any other product or service. Now government employees are exempt, too?

The COVID shots have now been proven to be especially dangerous to young people. DEATH is one of the proven side effects! The shots have also proven to be ineffective at preventing anyone from catching COVID, including children.

The good news is that the family plans to appeal to the US Supreme Court. Parents should have a right to object if they don’t want their children injected with an experimental vaccine!


Most Popular

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More



Most Popular
Sponsored Content

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More