Katie Sczesny, et al. v. Murphy refused by SCOTUS, Once again justices fail in their duty, Case loaded with legal and moral questions, Idiot NJ governor not qualified
Katie Sczesny, et al. v. Murphy refused by SCOTUS, Once again justices fail in their duty, Case loaded with legal and moral questions, Idiot NJ governor not qualified
I suggest that every SCOTUS justice read and ponder Marbury v Madison.
This case has been highlighted because the SCOTUS failed to hear it.
But it is loaded with legal and moral questions.
The SCOTUS should have heard and ruled on the case.
The Idiot NJ governor is not qualified to mandate vaccinations.
The CDC has lied about almost every aspect of vaccinations.
From The Christian Post:
“The United States Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from four nurses suing New Jersey over the state’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, allowing a lower court ruling in favor of the measure to stand.
In an orders list released Monday morning, the high court refused without comment to grant certiorari in the case of Katie Sczesny, et al. v. Murphy, Gov. of New Jersey, et al.
The refusal to hear oral arguments in the case allows for a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in favor of the now rescinded mandate to stand.
In January 2022, Gov. Phil Murphy issued Executive Order 283, which required healthcare workers and those who work in “congregate settings” to get the COVID-19 shot and booster.”
From Katie Sczesny, et al. v. Murphy:
“U.S. Const., amend. XIV § 1
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
“8. Governor Murphy and the CDC defined “up to date” differently for all time periods after June 6, 2022, even though Executive Orders 283 and 294 were purportedly premised on the CDC’s definition of “up to date” and CDC guidance. Workers subject to EO 283 worked with the threat of Governor Murphy updating the definition of “up to date” at any time, thereby requiring them to submit for a fourth shot.
9. Petitioners are four Nurses who were subject to EOs 283 and 294. They are all fully vaccinated and were employed by Hunterdon Medical Center when Executive Orders 283 and 294 went into effect. Pet.App.45a. Three of the Nurses were terminated involuntarily pursuant to EO 283 and one, Debra Hagen, resigned so as to avoid an involuntary termination on her employment record. Pet.App.10a. Two of the Nurses, Debra Hagen and Mariette Vitti, were injured by the primary series of covid shots and did not want to be injected again with a vaccine that had already injured them. Pet.App.86a-90a; 92a-93a. One Nurse, Katie Sczesny, was terminated because she did not want to take a booster dose while pregnant with her daughter (who has since been born). Pet.App.91a. Jaime Rumfield did not want to take any more shots after feeling ill after the first two and contracting covid anyway. Pet.App.90a-91a. All of the nurses experienced side effects from the first series of shots that made them feel ill. Pet.App.89a at ¶ 26, 90a at ¶ 33, 91a at ¶ 41, 90a at ¶ 92a 90a at ¶¶ 50-51. Each Nurse asserts her liberty to make her own medical decisions about her body and to decline unwanted medical procedures. The specific rights that the Nurses assert are infringed are privacy, bodily integrity, and the right to decline medical procedures. Pet.App.11a.”
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”…Marbury V Madison