Federal Appeals Court Confirms COVID Jabs Don’t “Prevent The Spread” Of Disease

by | Jun 19, 2024 | Headline News | 0 comments

Do you LOVE America?


    A federal appeals court has determined the COVID-19 mRNA injections do not prevent the spread of the “disease” they are intended for. That means those crazy conspiracy theorists who warned that these shots were not vaccines from the beginning were correct.

    COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines

    In a lawsuit filed against a California school district for mandating the COVID-19 injections as “vaccines,” it was determined that they do not offer any protection from the virus, nor do they prevent transmission. Members of the ruling class have been telling us this for quite some time, and it’s definitely interesting that even the judicial side of the rulers’ system is now saying it too.

    Pfizer Executive Admits COVID “Vaccines” Were Not About Preventing Transmission

    The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California had previously defended LAUSD’s jab mandate based on the 1905 Supreme Court decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts to allow states to mandate smallpox vaccinations. The problem, according to Ninth Circuit Judge R. Nelson, is that smallpox injections, in that case, were deemed to help stop the spread of smallpox, which is not the case for COVID-19 jabs, according to a report by Natural News. 

    2 Million Americans Dead From COVID Vaccines & It All Started With The Department Of Defense

    In this case, plaintiffs “have plausibly alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine does not effectively ‘prevent the spread’ of COVID-19,” Judge Nelson wrote. “At this stage, we must accept Plaintiff’s allegations that the vaccine does not prevent the spread of COVID-19 as true. And, because of this, Jacobson does not apply.”

    Another argument successfully argued by plaintiffs is that mRNA injections do not even qualify as “vaccines” in the first place because they are a new technology. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) actually had to redefine what a “vaccine” is back in September 2021 from a product that “produce[s] immunity” to a “preparation” that supposedly “stimulate[s] the body’s immune response.”

    “Their complaint’s crux is that the COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ is not a vaccine,” Nelson said. “‘Traditional’ vaccines, Plaintiffs claim, should prevent transmission or provide immunity to those who get them. But the COVID-19 vaccine does neither.” -RT

    The COVID “vaccines” have proven themselves to be everything but.



    It Took 22 Years to Get to This Point

    Gold has been the right asset with which to save your funds in this millennium that began 23 years ago.

    Free Exclusive Report
    The inevitable Breakout – The two w’s

      Related Articles


      Join the conversation!

      It’s 100% free and your personal information will never be sold or shared online.


      Submit a Comment

      Commenting Policy:

      Some comments on this web site are automatically moderated through our Spam protection systems. Please be patient if your comment isn’t immediately available. We’re not trying to censor you, the system just wants to make sure you’re not a robot posting random spam.

      This website thrives because of its community. While we support lively debates and understand that people get excited, frustrated or angry at times, we ask that the conversation remain civil. Racism, to include any religious affiliation, will not be tolerated on this site, including the disparagement of people in the comments section.