Skip to main content may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on the site. Read our full Disclosure here.

Supreme Court WON’T Hear Case to New York COVID-19 Jab Mandate for Healthcare Workers


“The Supreme Court declined Thursday to take up a legal challenge brought by health care workers in New York who oppose the state’s vaccination mandate on religious grounds,” NBC News reports.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said the court should have taken the case.

Does that mean Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett permit required inoculations developed with aborted fetal cell lines as a condition of employment?

Even if you religiously object to allowing these toxic injections to poison your temple, these two justices won’t uphold your constitutional rights to religious freedom?

That’s how it sounds.

NBC News provided background details:

When the requirement was first imposed in August to help prevent the spread of the latest coronavirus variant, it allowed exceptions based on medical reasons or religious objections. But the religious exemption was later removed.

Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is Roman Catholic, said that she wasn’t aware of any “sanctioned religious objection from any organized religion” and that religious leaders, including the pope, were encouraging people to get vaccinated.

Sixteen health care workers sued, saying they had religious objections because fetal cell lines were involved in the testing, development or production of Covid vaccines. They said the mandate violated their religious freedom because it allowed others who were unvaccinated to continue working.

Lawyers for the state said the Covid mandate was similar to long-standing rules requiring health care workers to be vaccinated against measles and rubella. Those requirements, too, allow exemptions only for medical reasons. Laboratory-grown stem cells, which derive from cells collected from a fetus nearly 50 years ago, were also used to test the rubella vaccine, the state said.

“The presence of a single, limited medical exemption to a vaccine requirement does not require the State to provide a blanket religious exemption from vaccination,” they said in their written submissions.

Writing for the three dissenters, Thomas said confusion remains about a mandate that provides no religious exemption, like New York’s. He said the court should have taken the case now to head off similar confusion in the future.

In December, the High Court declined to temporarily block the vaccination requirement in the case.

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch said then that the court should have granted the request to put the mandate on hold.

The Supreme Court refuses to block other COVID-19 jab mandates that don’t allow religious exemptions, including New York teachers, Maine & Massachusetts healthcare workers, Navy sailors, and college students in Indiana.

I want to address an issue noted in the NBC News report.

Gov. Kathy Hochul said she wasn’t aware of any “sanctioned religious objection from any organized religion” and that religious leaders, including the pope, were encouraging people to get vaccinated.

The opinions of corrupted ‘religious leaders,’ such as the pope, DO NOT determine your individual religious beliefs.

The use of aborted fetal cell lines to develop inoculations, including the COVID-19 shots, is well documented.

Yet, mainstream media will claim it as “misleading” or “debunked.”

SIGN THE PETITION: We Need National Voter ID!

It’s an outright lie to dismiss constitutional rights that protect individual religious freedom.

Read the dissenting opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas and its implications for religious rights.


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Thanks for sharing!