A Magic Moment in Time To Remember When You Cast Your Next Vote

 

Never forgive politicians for stupidity.  Change is near!

LAUSD To Lose Court Fight to Impose Vaccine Mandates

Children’s Health Defense California chapter employed attorney Nicole Pearson to challenge the LA school district’s ability to impose a vaccine mandate for kids.

The papers were filed last week for a preliminary injunction. At Nicole’s request, I was one of about 10 experts who filed an affidavit in support of CHD’s motion.

The hearing was today. The judge walked in with a 12-page proposed order denying CHD’s motion.

Nicole wasn’t going to let that happen. She made a brilliant argument that if the order were to be signed by the judge that every school district in California would be able to set the medical policy for all kids and the State would thus lose control. She also pointed out that schools shouldn’t be allowed to dictate medical policy for kids. If they can do it for vaccines, then they should be able to require birth control so kids don’t get pregnant and miss school, etc., etc.

The judge is now having second thoughts. He didn’t issue his order and is now going back to re-think his position. We are all optimistic he will strike down LAUSD’s ability to set medical policy for kids.

Congratulations Nicole! GREAT JOB.

Lawsuit LA Unified School District Over Mandates

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is bringing against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD).

Yes, this is the same school district that is educating you on the benefits of vaccination WITHOUT telling you ANYTHING about the risks. In short, they are the ones giving you a one-sided view of the argument.

Also contributing affidavits in opposition of their mandate are:

Dr. Ledbetter

Dr. Fleming

Dr. Barke

Brian Isley

Dr. Tracy Darling

Dr. Jessica Rose

Nurse Tawny B.

Nurse Lexi T.

Nurse Devin T. 

Nurse Jackie - TBD, 

Ryan Cole - TBD

Dr. Aaron Kheriarty (UCI) -TBD

I’ve read the declarations from LAUSD. Two were submitted.

David Baca said what the policy was (get vaccinated or don’t participate on campus) but didn’t opine on the cost-benefit analysis.

Smita Malhotra, MD says everyone must wear masks because it is consistent with what the CDC says to do. And that all their policies are consistent with CDC guidelines. Because the FDA has “determined that the vaccines benefits outweigh the risks,” it must be safe. In short, we are doing this because we follow their guidance without asking any questions. We don’t do any checks on the science. A credible risk-benefit analysis from these agencies is not required. Who needs that when you have their assurances?

So there you go. Blind trust. We can safely ignore what the science and evidence say. No need to look at the data at all!

We have the facts and evidence on our side. They have the infallibility of the FDA and CDC on their side.

What matters now is what the court decides.

We’ll find out when the decision pops out around December 8. Stay tuned.

Nicole C. Pearson [SBN 265350]

Jessica R.  Barsotti [SBN 209557]

Rita Barnett-Rose [SBN 195801]

LAW OFFICES OF NICOLE C. PEARSON

3421 Via Oporto, Ste. 201

Newport Beach, CA 92663

Telephone: (424) 272-5526

Nicole@FLTJllp.com; Jessica@FLTJllp.com; 

Rita@FLTJllp.com 

Attorneys for Petitioners CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, and PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS (P.E.R.K.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE-CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, a California 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, on its own and on behalf of its members, and PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS (P.E.R.K.), a California 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, on its own behalf and on behalf of its members, 

Petitioners,

                    vs.

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, a local educational agency and school district for the County of Los Angeles; MEGAN REILLY, in her official capacity as Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District; GEORGE MCKENNA, in his official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; MONICA GARCIA, in her official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; SCOTT SCHMERELSON in his official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; NICK MELVOIN, in his official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; JACKIE GOLDBERG, in her official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; KELLY GONEZ, in her official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; TANYA ORTIZ FRANKLIN, in her official capacity as a member of the LAUSD Board of Education; Respondents, 

Respondents.

Case No.:  21STCP03429

DECLARATION OF STEVEN T. KIRSCH IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

Date:                     December 8, 2021

Time:                    9:30 a.m.

Dept.:                    86

Complaint Filed:  October 13, 2021

Trial Date:            Not yet set

DECLARATION OF STEVEN T. KIRSCH

I, STEVEN T. KIRSCH, declare as follows:

1. I am an adult over 18 years of age and have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein this declaration, which are offered in support of the Reply in support of the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction of Petitioners CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE – CA CHAPTER (“CHD”), and PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS (“PERK”) (hereinafter collectively “Petitioners”).  If called upon as a witness, I could and would competently testify under oath to the facts stated herein.

BACKGROUND

2. I attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) from 1974 to 1980 and earned a SB/SM from MIT. The main computer science auditorium at MIT is named after me.

3. I am a retired high technology executive, but, prior to my retirement, founded seven (7) high technology companies, two with billion-dollar market caps. 

4. I am independently wealthy. I have no conflicts of interest. My sole motivation is to save lives. Making a positive difference in the lives of others gives me a sense of purpose and fulfills me. I have received many awards for my philanthropy over the past 20 years, the most notable being awarded the recipient of a “National Caring Award” from the Caring Institute in 2003. Senator Hilary Clinton presented me with the award in Washington DC in front of a very large audience. 

5. In March of 2020, I was working as Chief Executive Officer at a digital money startup company, M10, when COVID impacted our operations.

6. In April 2020, I decided to put my company on hold to do things that could save lives. I donated $1M to start the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund. I raised another $5M and we funded research into early treatments for COVID. 

7. The COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund funded fluvoxamine, an inexpensive, safe drug with virtually no side effects at the effective dose that can reduce the death rate from COVID by 12 times making it far more effective than any vaccine (e.g., the Pfizer vaccine only had only a 2X reduction in mortality in the clinical trials). (See 60 Minutes: Funding a Possible Early Treatment for COVID-19 in a 40-year-old Antidepressant, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fluvoxamine-antidepressant-drug-covid-treatment-60-minutes-2021-03-07/ aired on March 7, 2021). 

PERSONAL VACCINATION

8. On March 29, 2021, I completed my second dose of Moderna. At the time, I was convinced by government assurances that the vaccines were safe and effective. I had no reason at all to question the experts. I had always complied with advice from the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”).

9. In early May, 2021, I began hearing stories from my friends who related stories of either themselves or loved ones who died or became permanently disabled shortly after being vaccinated. All of these cases were statistically unlikely if the government assurances of safety were true. However, I knew my friends weren’t lying, so that left only two possibilities: 1) the government was lying or 2) I am a very unlucky person. I put my job on hold and devoted full time to uncovering which option was more likely.

RESARCH FINDINGS 

10. By May 25, 2021, it was more than clear to me what was going on, so I wrote a 287-page document detailing what I had learned on TrialSiteNews entitled “Should you get vaccinated?” That article had over 1 million views and over 18,000 “likes.” That is pretty amazing for a 287-page article! My article laid out the evidence behind my assertion that these COVID vaccines were more deadly than any vaccine in human history and should be immediately halted. 

11. Specifically, I found that the vaccine doesn’t stay in your arm like most vaccines, but gets delivered everywhere in your body, including your brain, heart, lung, and reproductive organs. Secondly, the payload delivered by the vaccine causes cells to express a protein which is cytotoxic causes inflammation and blood clots, which leads to a wide range of neurological, cardiovascular, immunological, and reproductive symptoms. Ultimately, I found that COVID-19 vaccines kill more people than they save. 

12. I also verified with a local neurologist who told me that in her 11 year in her current practice, her office has never had to make a Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) report. This year, they need to make 2,000 VAERS reports and they have 20,000 patients. This is exceptional. It is clear, irrefutable evidence that these vaccines are thousands of times more dangerous than any vaccine that has been used in the last 10 years.

13. After publication of my article, for the very first time in my life, I was labelled as a spreader of misinformation and people told me that they no longer would speak to me. When I asked if there was anything wrong with my logic, nobody could point out a flaw in what I wrote. They said I was an evil person for opposing the supposedly “safe and effective” vaccines.

CORROBORATION OF FINDINGS

14. The conclusions of my original article that the COVID-19 vaccines kill more people than they save were subsequently confirmed by two papers published in peer-reviewed medical journals: one “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?” by Ronald Kostoff et al.  and “The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations: Should We Rethink the Policy?” by Harald Walach et al. , both published in August 2021.

15. The conclusions of my original article that vaccines kill more people than they save were also subsequently confirmed by official government data: the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) stunning admission that in the clinical trials for Pfizer, more people died who got the vaccine than who got the placebo. Let me repeat that: The FDA admitted that vaccine killed more people than it saved. 

16. On page 23 of the Summary Basis for Regulatory Action submitted by Dr. Ramchandra Naik on May 18, 2021, it says “From Dose 1 through the March 13, 2021 data cutoff date, there were a total of 38 deaths, 21 in the COMIRNATY group and 17 in the placebo group.”  Since there were just two COVID deaths in the placebo group and 1 COVID death in the vaccine group, a net total of 1 death from COVID was saved by the vaccine. However, when all causes of death were considered, there were 4 net deaths (21-17). If there is 1 life saved, this means than 5 people died (since 1-5 = -4). In short, 5 people

lost their lives, one person was saved, resulting in a net loss of 4 people. Another way to look at this is that 5 times as many people lost their lives from all-cause mortality due to the vaccine as compared to the number who were saved from dying from COVID. 

17. The bottom line is that Pfizer’s own clinical trial showed no evidence whatsoever that the vaccine was saving lives overall. In fact, it showed the reverse: the vaccine kills around 5 people (who die from the vaccine) for every 1 person saved from COVID. 

18. The Pfizer trial also showed that for every 22,000 fully-vaccinated people, we would save a total of approximately 1 life from COVID. This means with 220M vaccinated people, we’d save only 10,000 lives from death from COVID, but this would be at a cost of at least 50,000 lives resulting in a net loss of 40,0000 lives after 220M full vaccinations. 

19. In short, the vaccines are nonsensical. They do appear to save people from dying from COVID, however, at the cost of killing them from cardiac, neurologic, or immunologic causes caused by the vaccine itself. In short, the cure is worse than the disease. 

20. The CDC is focusing the public’s attention exclusively on lives saved “from Covid” and completely ignoring the people killed and disabled from the vaccines.

21. Because the numbers in the Pfizer clinical trial were small and not statistically significant, they needed to be validated using larger sample sizes – real-world data – so I sought out assistance from researchers from all over the world and assembled 8 different methods and different data sources. Through this research we identified at least 150,000 excess deaths in the US were caused by the vaccine. 

22. The results showed that we killed a minimum of 150,000 from the vaccine itself, but we saved 10,000 people from dying from COVID. This is an even worse tradeoff than the 5 to 1 calculated from the Pfizer clinical trial data. This is a 15 to 1 ratio. The detailed calculations and methodology are laid out in my article, “Estimating the number of COVID vaccine deaths in America.”  These are only estimates, but these are conservative estimates, since I used the lowest death estimate of the 8 methods I used (the highest death estimates were over 300,000 people).

23. Just because the vaccine is deadly overall, it still might have a positive risk-benefit for certain age groups. However, because there was no risk-benefit analysis by age performed by the CDC (and still isn’t), I did the calculations myself, being very conservative in my calculations (e.g., assume the vaccine saves 100% of all COVID deaths). What I determined is that, even if the vaccine was 100% effective, is has a negative benefit for every age group and the younger you are, the worse it was. 

24. For example, for very old people, we would kill approximately 2 people from all-cause mortality causes to save 1 person from dying from COVID. For 20-year-olds, the number was more than 6 people killed by the vaccine for every 1 person saved. At the time I did the calculation, data for younger people wasn’t available (since they hadn’t been vaccinated yet), but the trend was extremely clear: the younger you are, the more nonsensical vaccination was. 

25. The detailed calculations are set out in my article, Vaccine risk benefit by age, and the table by age is on page 11 :

Computing the final V:C ratio 

So here is our final result in one table that shows that the vaccines don’t make sense for any age group. The V:C ratio should be .1 or lower to make sense. 

Age range V C V:C 

20-30 67 11 6.09 

30-40 120 31 3.87 

40-50 209 76 2.75 

50-60 436 185 2.36 

60-70 1029 450 2.29 

70-80 2133 1133 1.88 

80+ 6266 3458 20.81

26. Although my work has not been peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal, the results are consistent with two papers published in peer-reviewed medical journals showing the same results: the vaccines kill more people than they save, they don’t make sense for any age group, and the younger you are, the more pronounced the harm (Kostoff and Walach papers previously mentioned).

DISPROVING THE RESULTS

27. I have over 100,000 followers on social media (Twitter, Gab, and Substack) and my analyses have attracted worldwide attention. Despite this, to date, there is not an alternative estimate that I am aware of that is more credible than what I have developed. If there was, I would have adopted it. I am more interested in truthful information being spread than being right. I am happy to be proven wrong. 

28. I also publicly offered a $1M reward to any researcher who could find an error in one of the 8 methods I used to determine the 150,000 deaths caused by the vaccine that would significantly change the results. No one has come forward showing an error. 

IMPACT OF FINDINGS 

29. The most important conclusion from my work establishing that over 150,000 people have been killed by the COVID-19 vaccines means that the COVID-19 vaccines are more deadly than any vaccine in human history. 

30. The normal “stopping condition” of a vaccine is around 50 deaths. For example, in 1976, we stopped the H1N1 vaccine after just 35 deaths (see https://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/30/ swine.flu.1976/index.html). These vaccines should have been stopped for all ages in January 2021. However, the FDA has not set a stopping condition for the vaccines. 

31. I am friends with FDA acting commissioner Janet Woodcock and she refused to answer the stopping condition question. 

32. I don’t know of anyone who knows what the stopping condition for the COVID-19 vaccines is. This is unheard of for a clinical trial. A clinical trial without a stopping condition would never be approved by the institutional review board (IRB). Before the COVID vaccines, this was unheard of.  

33. The second most important conclusion from my work establishing that over 150,000 people have been killed by the COVID-19 vaccines is that, because the vaccine kills more people than it saves for every age group, it is nonsensical to vaccinate kids because you are much more likely to kill the child than to save his life. 

34. A careful risk-benefit analysis for children 5 to 11 was done by Dr. Toby Rogers who found that we will kill an estimated 117 kids from the vaccine for every child we save from a COVID death. (See “What is the Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNTV) to prevent a single COVID-19 fatality in kids 5 to 11 based on the Pfizer EUA application?” published October 31, 2021.  I have read his analysis and are not aware of any flaws. He used the best data from all sources for all of the values. (Ibid.) I believe it would be hard for anyone to dispute it. Over 20,000 people have viewed his analysis and there has been only praise in the comments that were posted. That is the ultimate peer review.

REFUSAL OF MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITIES TO ACCEPT RESULTS

35. Early treatments are extremely effective against COVID. Nobody has to lose their life from COVID if they are treated early. Uttar Pradesh in India uses early treatments, not vaccination. Their COVID death rate is now nearly zero. Uttar Pradesh’s population is 204 million, which is just 1/3 smaller than the United States’ population of 329M. Here is the most current data from Johns Hopkins University : 

36. There are people inside the CDC that know all of this is happening, but they are told that if they speak out, they will be fired. I know this because I have spoken to a trusted source who explained to me that that is how he knew to avoid taking the COVID vaccines in January.

37. I have made multiple offers to the CDC and FDA to discuss my findings, but they refuse to have a meeting to discuss any of the results from the team of 29 experts that I collaborate with. 

38. I attempted to get the attention of the members of the outside committees of the FDA and CDC by offering any of these members $1M just to have a recorded, on-the-record discussion of my results for a few hours. If I was wrong, they could correct our errors – this would significantly reduce vaccine hesitancy – no member was interested in my offer.

THE VACCINES DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD: RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSI WEIGHS 

AGAINST VACCINATING CHILDREN

39. No one in the world can produce any evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines reduce all-cause mortality (death) or morbidity (disability). In fact, all the evidence I am aware of shows the reverse. 

40. In US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint, “All Cause Severe Morbidity,” published August 25, 2021, the peer-reviewed medical article points out the statistically significant rise in all-cause morbidity for all vaccines. 

41. The CDC examined the cause(s) of death of 14 children who died shortly after vaccination and were reported in the VAERS.  In all cases, the causes of death were consistent with the causes of death elevated by the COVID vaccine, including pulmonary embolism, intracranial hemorrhage, suicide, and cardiac arrest. The causes of deaths of these children were not consistent with “natural causes” of death. Despite this, the CDC stated the cause of death with absolutely no commentary whatsoever regarding possible vaccine injury, and changed the topic. (Ibid.)

42. We would typically expect only 1.6 deaths in that age group to be reported in VAERS and we got 14, confirming my 12 “excess deaths” conclusion. The 1.6 was derived using VAERS queries over the period from 2015 to 2019 looking at deaths in that age range.

43. The VAERS database is approximately 41 times under-reported according to the CDC’s own methodology,  so the 12 excess deaths actually represent 492 child deaths that were excess and caused by the vaccine. 

44. The vaccines also are linked to prion diseases, a family of rare progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect both humans and animals, that are distinguished by long incubation periods, neuronal loss, and a failure to induce inflammatory response.  Once prion disease starts in the brain, it is not treatable and always leads to death. 100% of the time. No exceptions.  

45. Finally, these vaccines are based on the original “wild type” virus. It is unknown how effective these vaccines will be against the new Omicron or any other variant, especially in kids where we do not even have data regarding vaccine efficacy from the original vaccines. 

46. Based upon my analysis, research, and understanding of the data described in greater detail herein, above, mandating a vaccine for kids for an unknown risk that kills 117 kids within 6 weeks of vaccination, and/or causes brain damages in order to save 1 COVID life is nonsensical, unethical, and immoral. If these vaccine mandates are not halted immediately, kids will unnecessarily lose their lives. That is irreparable harm.

47. Since we couldn’t cost-benefit justify vaccination with the current variants, it will be even harder to conduct with respect to the newest variants, which appear to be very different from the original wild-type variant. Furthermore, Omicron is rapidly spreading and yet very mild, making vaccination even more unnecessary. 

CONCLUSION

48. There are clear, significant dangers and a dubious benefit to vaccines, generally but especially now due to Omicron, and especially of children. COVID-19 vaccination clearly is killing people, and administering a vaccine designed for the “wild type” variant against what will soon be a pandemic of Omicron without clear scientific proof in double blind randomized trials of a positive all-cause mortality benefit is unethical. It is experimenting on our kids. 

49. The failure to disclose the risks of adverse events (including death) violates California Health and Safety Codes, Federal laws against human experimentation and relating to emergency use authorizations, and the Nuremberg Code, among other things. 

50. The mandated vaccination of our children is reprehensible and should be halted immediately.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on this 1st day of December, 2021. 

 ______________________________

STEVEN T. KIRSCH

Freedom Protests In Los Angeles California Over Mandates

Freedom protest at Los Angeles City Hall

LA County Sheriff Alex Villanueva Warns Of 'Mass Exodus' Over Mandates

Hundreds of Angelenos against COVID-19 vaccine mandates gathered at Grand Park in downtown Los Angeles Monday for the "March for Freedom" rally. https://t.co/VBNHGu5rC0

— FOX 11 Los Angeles (@FOXLA) November 9, 2021

Text FREEDOM at 53445: The Nationwide Walkout starts Monday, Nov 8th for 4 straight days! Spread the word! #AxetheVax

CLICK FOR DETAILS: https://t.co/Qd9gQCklmS pic.twitter.com/vVj3uYfGrP

— Börje Melin (@BorjeMelin) November 6, 2021

LA County Sheriff Alex Villanueva Warns Of 'Mass Exodus' Over Mandates

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva spoke out against the vaccine mandate for members of the police force.

Here the woke LA County Board of Supervisors is making these ridiculous mandates.  It turns out LA County is the only county that is trying to defund the police. 

Monday CA School Walkout Against COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

SURVEY: A campaign swirling across social media calls on parents who oppose COVID-19 vaccine mandates to keep their children home Monday.

Parents organized to keep their children home from school Monday to oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom's COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Parents who oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom's vaccine and mask mandates for schoolchildren are organizing a statewide school walkout for Monday.

School districts and families across California are making plans to deal with the peaceful protest.

The protest is the latest move by parents and voters dissatisfied with both on-campus mask-wearing and vaccine mandates in California schools.

Here are five things you need to know about the upcoming California school walkouts.

1. The statewide walkout (also called a "sit out" on social media flyers) encourages California parents to keep their children home Monday. The flyer asked parents not to call their child in sick or otherwise excuse the absence to keep schools from reaping average daily attendance funds from the state.

2. The walkout affects elementary, middle and high schools. The walkout also calls upon California teachers and other district employees to stay home from work Monday. "Parents and concerned citizens all over CA are taking action against the forced COVID-19 vaccine mandate for our children in state schools. We demand parental choice over the bodily autonomy of our children," one Twitter flyer said.

3. The protest is a response to Newsom's state mandate Friday in which he made California the first state in the nation to require all children attending in-person instruction at every school to get vaccinated against COVID-19. California residents could see the enforcement of this mandate as early as January. Since the Food and Drug Administration has not authorized COVID-19 vaccines for children under 12, it will affect students in grades seven through 12 to start. Any student who refuses to take the vaccine will be forced to complete an independent study program at home, officials said.

4. California will also require teachers to be vaccinated or tested weekly, effective Friday. Some educators against the mandate will participate in Monday's walkout, forcing some campuses —including Oak Run Elementary in Shasta County — to close, CalMatters reported Friday. Los Angeles Unified School District, one of the state's largest, vowed to prohibit teachers from returning to classrooms on Monday if they do not receive at least one vaccine dose by Friday.

5. Across California, 50,896,327 vaccine doses have been administered, and 71.7 percent of Californians are fully vaccinated, CalMatters reported. As of Wednesday, California had 4,565,279 confirmed cases of COVID-19 (up 0.1 percent from Tuesday), and 70,010 COVID-19 related deaths (up 0.2 percent from Tuesday), the report said.

Answer the survey below to share how you and how your district will handle the Monday walkout.

Unvaxxed LAUSD Teacher Reporting From Behind Enemy Lines

I decided to provide an update on the situation at the school that I will be leaving today because some interesting things are going on. A meeting was held with the entire organization this week. I called in sick that day since I want to use up some of my sick days, but while I was out a lot of changes were announced.

More teachers and staff than I expected are leaving after today. So many teachers and other employees are leaving that they have to make drastic changes to the organizational structure of the entire company. Classrooms are being combined with one another because there will now be a lack of teachers. Also, because enrollment has dropped and continues to drop, due to vaxx mandates no doubt, they are firing a large amount of staff due to budget shortages.

To sum it up, the school is in chaos. They are losing massive amounts of money, over $1 million in just the special ed budget alone. I have no idea how much they are losing in total, but it is likely several million dollars. People are fleeing the school district in large numbers. Schools are scrambling to find replacements. Staffing companies that provide substitutes are stretched extremely thin, and there aren't many prospective employees who want to work in LAUSD.

I can't help but feel a small amount of schadenfeude. I feel bad for the people who are left to deal with the fallout, but they should have resisted the mandates when they had the chance. Now, the entire district is in turmoil with no easy solutions to their problems. The sad thing is that it will be the students who will suffer the most. Not only did they have a disaster of a school year during distance learning, where many students fell massively behind, now they will have to go get through a school year with long term subs and other temporary staff.

Anyways, I'm glad I'm getting out now, some of the other teachers have told me that I'm leaving at a good time. Thanks for reading, say a prayer for all the students who will have to suffer through another difficult school year.

Los Angeles Sheriff Says He Will Not Enforce Vaccine Mandate

This is an interesting situation, because the elected Sheriff is the highest constitutional officer in Los Angeles County.  While city/county administrators can attempt to make life miserable for LA Sheriff Alex Villanueva, the dynamic of enforcement is another kettle of fish entirely.

According to CBS local, “In early August, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors unanimously ratified an executive order requiring all county employees, regardless of department, to be fully vaccinated by Oct. 1, with exemptions only for medical and religious purposes.”

Additionally, a county mandate went into effect midnight Thursday, requiring proof of at least one dose of the vaccine to enter bars, clubs, breweries, and attend events such as concerts, sporting events and theme parks. Proof of full vaccination will take effect Nov. 4, with enforcement mechanisms still not determined.

LA Sheriff Villanueva said, in a Facebook live post on Thursday, he will not enforce the mandate for his department with roughly 18,000 employees.

Vaccine Mandate Cease & Desist Letter to School Sample Letter

School Board Members

Address

City, State, Zip 

RE:   School Board Lack of Authority to Mandate New Vaccine Requirements for School Attendance and violations of state, federal, and Constitutional law  

Dear Superintendent and Members of the School Board:   

As a parent two children in the School District, I am hereby asserting my child’s right to an in-person education as guaranteed by our California Constitution, free of any unlawful and coercive new vaccination requirements. School Board lacks legal authority to add any new vaccine requirement in order for my child to attend in-person school.  

Under existing California law, the Board of City is not the proper authority to add a new vaccine to the childhood immunization schedule.    

California Health & Safety Code Requirements for Adding New Vaccines 

There is a list of ten childhood immunizations required in order for students to gain admittance to public schools in California at certain stages of their education, and this list does not include any COVID-19 vaccines.  See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120335(a)(1)-(10).   Under California Health & Safety Code § 120335(a)(11), only the California Department of Public Health (the “Dept” or “CDPH”) can add a new vaccine to this childhood immunization schedule, and at this time, the CDPH has not done so.  No matter how eagerly the School Board would like to impose a new vaccine on unwilling students, California law simply does not allow individual public schools or school districts like School Board to unilaterally decide which additional vaccines its students must take prior to being allowed to enjoy an in-person public education, an education guaranteed by our California Constitution, Article IX. Even the CDPH is expressly bound by statutory limitations on its authority to take measures to protect the spread of diseases as it can do so only when necessary and only if the measures actually work. See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120140. 

Moreover, even if the CDPH itself elected to mandate a COVID-19 vaccine under Section 120335(a)(11) for all relevant California public schools, California law also requires that both medical and personal belief exemptions be allowed.  See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120338.  Accordingly, any unilateral COVID-19 mandate that School Board purports to impose on its students, and particularly without allowance for medical and personal belief exemptions, is illegal under California law and is also unconstitutional on its face.   

Federal Emergency Use Authorization Law Requires a Right to Refuse EUA Products and Experimental Medical Trials involving Children Require Parental Consent 

In addition, while neither CDPH nor our state legislature has mandated any COVID-19 vaccine for public or private school attendance, neither authority can do so while the vaccines are still under emergency use authorization without express informed consent. 21 U.S.C. § 360-bbb-3 (the “EUA statute”).   This EUA statute explicitly states that anyone to whom an EUA product is administered must be informed of the option to refuse the product, as well as the risks and benefits of receiving it.  Although the FDA has purportedly approved one of the mRNA vaccines, in reality, the approved vaccine, the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, is not available or in widespread circulation in the United States.  Instead, the only COVID-19 vaccines being offered to members of the public in California, including students 12 years of age or older, are still under emergency use authorization, including the Pfizer Biontech COVID-19 vaccine product. There is consequently no full FDA approval of any COVID-19 vaccine that is available for students of any age in California.    In addition, all COVID-19 vaccines, including the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, remain authorized only under emergency use for ages 12-15, and thus no public entity can mandate such an experimental vaccine for students in that age range.   If neither CDPH nor our state legislature can currently mandate these vaccines due to federal EUA law and federal pre-emption issues, clearly the School Board cannot unilaterally mandate an experimental use COVID-19 vaccine for its students either.    

EUA products are defined by federal law as experimental which means the administration of them is akin to entering one into a medical trial. It is important to point out that there are legal and regulatory requirements that must be adhered to prior to entering a minor into a medical trial. Pointedly, a child cannot by law be entered into a medical trial unless there is a benefit. Even if there is only a minimal risk to children, the regulations require that the parents expressly assent to the entry of their child into a medical trial. 45 CFR 46.404, 45 CFR 46.408. If there is a greater than minimal risk, which here there is the greatest risk of death, there must be a direct benefit and the risk must be as favorable as alternative approaches. 45 CFR 46.405. With an undisputed 99.97% recovery rate for children and existing alternative treatments available, this legal threshold cannot be met.  

Unnecessary Liability for School Board for an Unnecessary Product 

Finally, it should be noted that under the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, all COVID-19 vaccine makers are provided immunity from liability for their products. However, School Board and any schools attempting to mandate an experimental use vaccine or even an FDA approved vaccine that such school lacks authority to mandate under our Health & Safety code will certainly open themselves up for lawsuits if a student is injured by an unlawfully mandated COVID-19 vaccine. 

It is also unclear why School Board believes that mandating a COVID-19 vaccine will do anything to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on school grounds.   COVID-19 vaccines appear to be failing in significant measures around the globe.  Highly vaccinated countries such as Israel and the United Kingdom are showing their own cases rising dramatically, with hospitals filling up with patients who are already fully vaccinated.   Even the CDC is warning that boosters may soon be needed for U.S. consumers of these products, as more so-called “breakthrough cases” are discovered.   It is unclear how School Board can be so blindly insistent of the benefits of a vaccine product at the same time numerous health authorities and media outlets around the globe are revealing these products to be unable to stop either transmission, infection, or even hospitalization or death.  There is also the possibility that the vaccine products themselves are causing the variants, as numerous scientists have previously warned, because they are “leaky vaccines” (they do not eradicate the virus, they are only designed to lesson severe symptoms, per their own literature). Due to that nature, since the virus is not eliminated, it is under pressure to mutate.  As these COVID-19 vaccine products are still in their clinical trial stages, there is still much unknown about their benefits or potential long-term health risks.  

Moreover, the delta variant is now alleged to be the dominant variant in California. The CDC has made it clear in recent weeks that vaccinated persons can transmit the delta variant and might even possess higher viral loads than those who were not vaccinated, particularly those who have already naturally recovered from COVID-19.   Since none of the vaccine products were ever tested for or intended to prevent infection or transmission (per the literature in their own clinical trials), choosing to get a COVID-19 vaccine must remain an individual and personal health choice, with individualized risk-benefit assessments.  

There is no legitimate public health reason to mandate that healthy children take a product that is still in its experimental clinical trials and that could cause more harm than benefit to this age cohort. School Board has no place attempting to mandate a product that does not even satisfy a rational basis, let alone a compelling governmental interest, for intruding upon significant Constitutional protections and rights to privacy, due process of law, and equal protection under the law.   

At this point, those who are vaccinated have presumably protected themselves against severe COVID or death. As numerous studies indicate, and public health authorities acknowledge, children are at little risk of developing severe COVID-19.   Accordingly, requiring any COVID-19 vaccine, especially among student populations in middle and high school, for a product that does not even prevent transmission to others, is not the answer.  It appears to be an unethical and unscientific way to use children as a shield to protect segments of the adult population who do not actually understand the limitations of these vaccine products, and who have their own option to be vaccinated. 

In conclusion, School Board lacks any legal authority to bypass our existing state and federal laws and impose a new experimental vaccine as a condition to attending school. Accordingly, my child will not be taking an experimental COVID-19 vaccine product in order to be allowed to attend in-person education within School Board, as he/she already has a Constitutional right to attend without such unlawful and coercive vaccination conditions attached.   

Any attempts to prevent my child from exercising his/her basic Constitutional rights to an in-person public education in California will be met with prompt legal action. 

Sincerely,

L.A. School Vaccine Mandate Does Not Account For Natural Immunity

The decision regarding the district's more than 600,000 students came in a 6-0 vote from school board members at a meeting on Thursday.

Despite today Dr. Fauci saying on CNN regarding natural immunity:

"I don’t have a really firm answer for you on that".  School board members mandating vaccines is medical tyranny.  

All children 12 and older in Los Angeles public schools must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by January to enter campus under an order approved Thursday by the Board of Education, the first such mandate among the nation’s largest school systems and a decision that triggered immediate pushback.

The requirement cements the standing of the L.A. Unified School District as an early adopter of COVID-19 school safety measures that are wide-reaching and aggressive. The nation’s second-largest school system has moved faster and more comprehensively than most others in testing all students and employees for coronavirus infection every week, requiring masks indoors and outdoors and ordering employees to get vaccinated.

L.A. schools Interim Supt. Megan K. Reilly said the student mandate was the next logical step to keep children, staff, and community members safer from a COVID-19 pandemic that still poses significant risks.

“We’ve always approached safety with a multilayered approach: masks, air filtration and coronavirus screening,” Reilly told The Times. “But we are seeing without a doubt that the vaccines are one of the clearest pathways to protecting individuals from getting severe sickness as well as for mitigating the transmission of the COVID virus. It is one of the best preventive measures that we have at our disposal to create a safe environment at schools.”

New York City’s school system, the largest in the nation, so far has ordered athletes in high-contact sports to begin the vaccination process before the competition starts. New York City and Chicago, the nation’s third-largest districts, are among a growing number of school systems that have enacted mandates for employees.

The L.A. district action “could provide the model for a comprehensive school response to COVID mitigation, so that schools can move on to student academic and mental health recovery plans,” said Odis Johnson Jr., executive director of the Center for Safe and Healthy Schools at the Johns Hopkins University School of Education. “Mandatory vaccination mandates move us forward toward finally addressing students’ developmental, social and academic well-being.”

One vaccine, made by Pfizer, has received full approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for people 16 and older. Those who are 12 to 15 can be inoculated under a federal emergency use authorization. L.A. Unified is not waiting for full vaccine approval for those 12 to 15 — although that approval by the FDA is widely expected in the coming weeks. And President Biden on Thursday pledged to expedite approval of the vaccine for younger children.

Reilly estimated that about 225,000 students in grades six through 12 would fall under the policy. District officials estimate that roughly 80,000 students are not yet vaccinated. Also affected would be about 17,000 students in independent charter schools that use L.A. Unified campuses.

Students who are not vaccinated by the deadline will not be allowed on campus, she said. The alternative for them would be to enter remote learning through independent study, a program that was overwhelmed at the start of the school year when more than 10,000 students signed up.

Under the district’s mandate, the first students affected would be those involved in any school-sponsored extracurricular activity, including sports, drama, chorus and band. Those students who are 12 or older must receive a first vaccine dose no later than Oct. 3 and a second dose no later than Oct. 31.

All students 12 and older would have to receive the first dose no later than Nov. 21 and a second dose no later than Dec. 19. The final day of classes before winter break is Dec. 17.

Students return to class on Jan. 11. By Jan. 10, proof of vaccination would have to be “uploaded and approved in LAUSD’s Daily Pass program” except for those students with approved exemptions, the proposal says.

The Daily Pass allows a student onto campus and tracks weekly coronavirus test results. Parents and students also use the pass to self-report whether a student has symptoms.

Vaccine exemptions can be requested for documented medical reasons, but not based on religious or personal beliefs, according to L.A. Unified.

The resolution also stipulates that younger students would have to receive their first vaccine dose no later than 30 days after their 12th birthday and their second dose no later than eight weeks after that birthday.

A Church That Defied LA County COVID Health Orders May Win $400K

LA County to pay $400,000 to settle with San Fernando Valley church that defied coronavirus orders

A legal battle between Los Angeles County, the state and a Sun Valley church that repeatedly flouted health restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic could be coming to an end, with the county Board of Supervisors being asked next week to approve a $400,000 payment to the church to settle the case.

According to a county staff report, the settlement calls for the state to pay an additional $400,000 to resolve the litigation with Grace Community Church. The report, first obtained by KNX Newsradio, indicates that the county has already spent more than $950,000 in attorneys fees and other costs related to the legal battle with the church.

The church, led by Pastor John MacArthur, repeatedly defied county health orders over the past year, most notably by continuing to hold indoor services despite a ban on such gatherings, while also refusing to enforce mask-wearing and social-distancing requirements for church-goers.

County health officials repeatedly cited the church, then took the matter to court to obtain an injunction requiring the church to adhere to health regulations, saying they were essential to control the spread of COVID-19. The church, meanwhile, sued the state and the county, claiming the COVID rules amounted to constitutional violations of religious freedom.

Last September, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff issued a preliminary injunction sought by the county, but the church essentially ignored it, continuing to hold indoor services and violating other health mandates. That led county attorneys to seek a contempt ruling against the church.

Grace Community Church attorneys fought back, filing a motion to have the injunction lifted and the contempt request dismissed, citing two U.S. Supreme Court decisions. In one, a Catholic diocese and a group of Jewish synagogues successfully challenged New York's restrictions on churches. The high court later struck down the indoor worship ban while allowing caps on attendance and a ban on singing, according to the church's attorneys.

Can Students Use Antibody Blood Tests Instead of Vaccine Proof?

 

Natural Immunity Passports for Positive Antibody Blood Tests For Children Who

Have Recovered from Covid-19

Healthy kids are being sent home from school and told they cannot go to school unless they have a negative test and prove they are vaccinated.  

Kids who are unvaccinated are told to quarantine for 10 days. This is insanity and extorsion. 

Gavin Newsom Compares Unvaccinated People to Murderous Drunk Drivers

California Gov. Gavin Newsom compares unvaccinated Americans to drunk drivers. pic.twitter.com/hEaHIN1E5T

— The First (@TheFirstonTV) July 26, 2021

 

Why Did LA County Ban Halloween Trick-or-Treating?

The One Day Everyone Wants to Wear A Mask?

LA County Bans Trick-or-Treating?

The one day everyone wants to wear a mask, the idiot Mayor of Los Angeles, Eric Garcetti believes that 'door to door trick or treating is not allowed because it can be very difficult to maintain proper social distancing,' health officials said The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health announced a ban on door-to-door trick-or-treating, carnivals, festivals, live entertainment, and haunted houses. 

Now it appears that common sense has prevailed and they have rescinded their ban and have only suggested. LA County Walks Back Halloween Ban.