Covid mRNA Shots Are NOT Vaccines, Appeals Court Rules

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has just dropped a bomb on the Covid mass vaccination agenda.

The appeals court delivered a seismic ruling on the nature of the Covid mRNA injections.

The decision could reshape public health policy across the nation.

The ruling was delivered during a contentious case involving the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs versus the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD).

While ruling on the case, the court has declared that COVID-19 mRNA injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The case revolved around the LAUSD’s COVID-19 vaccination policy.

The policy required all employees to be fully vaccinated against Covid by a specified deadline.

The plaintiffs argued that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon their fundamental right to refuse medical treatment.

They argue that the mRNA shots do not prevent the transmission of Covid but merely mitigate symptoms for the recipient, at best.

The court’s opinion was written by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins.

The judges assert that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19.

In the opinion, the judges note that the injections do nothing more than merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus.

Therefore, the injections cannot be labeled as vaccines.

Slay the latest News for free!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

This crucial distinction undermines the foundational premise of the vaccine mandates enforced by various governmental and educational institutions, as the Gateway Pundit notes.

Judge Nelson pointed out that the mandate was inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s century-old ruling in Jacobson v. Massachusetts.

The case upheld the state’s right to enforce smallpox vaccinations due to their proven effectiveness in preventing disease spread.

In contrast, the Covid mRNA shots do not offer such public health benefits.

Therefore, they fail the criteria established by Jacobson.

The ruling points out that traditional vaccines are designed to provide immunity and prevent transmission.

This is not conclusively proven in the case of Covid mRNA injections.

In addition, the Covid mRNA shots have been linked to widespread injuries and mass deaths.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had modified the definition of “vaccine” to include the mRNA shots.

Here’s the definition the CDC used on 26 August 2021:

  • Vaccine– “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
  • Vaccination– “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”

Rather than admit the Covid shots are not working as advertised, the CDC took a page out of Orwell’s “1984.”

The taxpayer-funded agency opted for a new spin on the language instead.

The CDC’s current definition is:

  • Vaccine– “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

As Slay News previously reported, Pfizer’s President of International Developed Markets Janine Small admitted during an October 2022 EU hearing that the vaccine had never been tested on its ability to prevent transmission.

This bombshell admission was contrary to what was previously advertised.

Government health officials and the media pressured the public into taking the injections by arguing that they had a responsibility to protect others.

In a concurring opinion, Judge Collins highlighted that compulsory medical treatments for individual health benefits infringe upon the fundamental right to refuse such treatments.

This perspective aligns with the constitutional principles protecting personal liberty against unwarranted governmental intrusions.

READ MORE – Renowned Expert: Covid Shots Are ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’

join telegram


Who is the best president?

By completing this poll, you gain access to our free newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.

By Frank Bergman

Frank Bergman is a political/economic journalist living on the east coast. Aside from news reporting, Bergman also conducts interviews with researchers and material experts and investigates influential individuals and organizations in the sociopolitical world.

Notify of


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x