Written by Nathaniel Mannor
Once again, the COVID czars have taken over as the San Diego Unified School District put into motion a mandate that forces students 16 years and up to get vaccinated. The plan is to have all kids fully vaccinated by December 20, meaning that students must receive their first shot on Monday. Children who fail to comply have to isolate themselves at home and take a remote, independent study program. Thankfully, not everyone is taking this nonsense lying down.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the district’s vaccine mandate thanks to one brave Scripps Ranch High School student and her parents voicing their dissent via a lawsuit. The student, identified as Jill Doe, opted out of taking the jab due to her solid religious and pro-life beliefs. The plaintiff says that her pro-life beliefs prohibit her from getting the vaccine as aborted fetal cells were used for testing of the vaccine.
The plaintiff’s attorney, Paul Jonna, explained how the mandate discriminates against the religious. For example, only teachers can get religious vaccination exemptions. Students can also forgo inoculation for secular reasons such as medical restrictions, deferrals for pregnant women, and migrant, disabled, and foster students. The mandate only provides exemptions for medical obligations and pregnant students, alienating pious students because it places greater weight on secular deferrals than religious reasons. Jonna said, “Our clients are firmly pro-life and refuse to benefit from vaccines that were made in this way, which they view as immoral — as do many other people of faith.” SDUSD responded to the ruling by saying, ” We expect the court’s brief order issued last night will be short-lived, and the primary take-away is that the court appears poised to uphold the District’s vaccination mandate in the face of numerous lines of attack.”
Jonna believes this seemingly insignificant case could reach the Supreme Court if the Ninth Circuit holds up the mandate despite the temporary victory. Not only are there five justices to rule in the family’s favor, but this would also set a precedent against future orders. After all, the court of last resort’s decisions are the law of the land, and even Democrats must abide.
Photo Cred: SDUSD File Photo