Grotesquely Incompetent Judge Won’t Suspend Mandatory Vaccination

By Jon Rappoport

“Hey, let’s just make up stuff in court, it’s a party.”

I’ll keep this as simple as I can.

The infamous SB277, passed into CA law in 2015, made vaccines mandatory for school children in the state.

Last month, a lawsuit was filed, with the purpose of overturning the law. The lawyers asked Federal Judge Dana Sabraw to keep the law from going into effect while the case moves forward.

Sabraw just said no.

Among the reasons he cited for his decision (LA Times, 8/28): “U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego wrote that state Legislatures have ‘a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge’.”

I don’t see how Judge Sabraw’s opinion could be more ridiculous. Or ludicrous. Or incompetent. Or wrong.

Why? Because ‘the long history’ he refers to is quite different.

The states have always upheld exemptions from vaccination on several grounds: medical waiver, religious objection, philosophical objection. THAT’S the tradition.

SB277 goes against the tradition, to say the very least. SB277 breaks new ground in allowing the state to operate as a medical fascist in the area of vaccinations.

Under SB277, a parent’s only option, aside from a hard-to-obtain medical exemption, is to home school her child. And obviously, not all parents can afford to exercise that option, because they have to work to pay the bills.

From what source is Judge Sabraw getting his information about “long history” and tradition? From a CDC PR pamphlet? From a drug company? From aliens on the moon?

His considered opinion in this case is on the order of saying, “Look, all states have always had strict rules about crossing the street on Thursdays. You can’t do it or you’re breaking the law.”

Maybe the Judge just decided to make up his version of history out of thin air.

Actually, it appears he did that in a prior case. The issue there centered on what lawyers can and can’t say during their closing arguments. They can’t go off and say anything. They definitely can’t refer to “facts” that were never presented during the trial. They can’t just make stuff up.

The website, abovethelaw.com, has the story. Joe Patrice colorfully writes:

The case arose in 2010, when a guy was stopped by border agents and Skippy the Wonder Dog managed to uncover 112 sealed packages weighing 321.33 pounds (or 146.06 kilograms if you’re Canadian or otherwise a Communist) of marijuana. The defendant claimed he was set up. In the government’s rebuttal closing, the prosecutor, Steve Miller, pulled some Hocus Pocus and started telling the jury about a number of reasons why the defendant’s story couldn’t be believed. That would be par for the course, except none of these ‘facts’ were brought out during the trial itself.

When defense counsel objected, Judge Dana M. Sabraw responded ‘with the admonition that this is counsel’s argument, it is up to the jury to determine the facts.’ Stellar judging. I wish I’d known about the “you can assert whatever you want in closing because it’s ‘up to the jury to determine facts’” rule.

Yes, let’s just invent the law as we go along. Make up the law out of thin air. Make up tradition and history out of thin air. Make up whatever you need to make up, in order to deny the people of California a fair hearing on a fascist law that forces them to vaccinate their children with the full CDC load of toxic chemicals and germs.

Well, the rabid pro-vaccine forces have their Judge. He’s perfect.

His bias, even before the lawsuit has gotten off the ground, is sufficient reason for him to recuse himself.

“I’m stepping away. I was making up history out of nothing. Let another Judge take over who actually knows a little about the past.”

Get Sabraw out of there. He’s doing fiction.

Bad fiction.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.