Justice Gorsuch says Court Should Require 12-person Juries. 'Smaller juries are less likely to include non-white people and May Prevent Defendants from Having a Jury Representative of the Community'

From [HERE] The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to review Arizona's use of eight-member criminal juries over the fierce objection of Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote in a dissent that the smaller panels flout centuries of formerly "inviolable" precedent (article available here(link is external)).

Justice Gorsuch said the court should have taken up the case of Ramin Khorrami, an Arizona man convicted by an eight-member criminal jury of fraud and theft. Arizona is one of six states that allow six- or eight-person juries to hear felony cases.

"By the time of the Sixth Amendment's adoption, the 12-person criminal jury was 'an institution with a nearly 400-year-old tradition in England,'" the justice said. The dozen-member jury was "long and justly considered inviolable," he said, suggesting the framers may have taken it as so obvious and accepted they didn't think it needed spelling out.

Smaller juries are "less likely to include members of 'minority groups' and thus threaten to deprive defendants of a fair possibility of obtaining a jury composed of a representative cross-section of the community," Gorsuch wrote Monday.

Monday's dissent noted that Justice Brett Kavanaugh also would have voted to take up the case.

The other five states that allow felony juries of fewer than 12 are Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Massachusetts and Utah, according to the Supreme Court petition.

The case is Khorrami v. Arizona, case number 21-1553, in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judge Rules Black Woman Can't Watch Missouri Authorities Murder Her Father. Kevin Johnson's Execution Set for Tuesday, Convicted for Murdering White Cop in Racist Trial Conducted by White Liberal DA

White Judge Denies Gov Request to Stop Kevin Johnson's Execution for Killing White Cop. The Same White Liberal DA from Michael Brown's Case Struck Black Jurors and Sought Death on the Basis of Race

From [HERE] A 19-year-old Black woman is too young to witness Missouri authorities execute her father, who was sentenced to death for killing a white police officer when he was a teen, a federal judge ruled.

Khorry Ramey requested to be present for Kevin Johnson’s final moments, but US District Judge Brian Wimes, who is Black, said in a ruling that execution witnesses need to be at least 21 years old, NBC News reported.

Missouri and Nevada are the only states that require witnesses to be 21, Ramey’s attorneys argued.

“I’m heartbroken that I won’t be able to be with my dad in his last moments,” Ramey said in a statement, adding that he “has worked very hard to rehabilitate himself in prison. I pray that [Gov. Mike] Parson will give my dad clemency.”

Johnson, now 37, is scheduled to die by lethal injection Nov. 29 for the 2005 killing of Kirkwood Police Officer William McEntee, a crime he committed when he was 19 and Ramey was 2.

He selected his daughter as one of the five people permitted to witness his death, but the Missouri Department of Corrections rejected the request, a move the ACLU argued violates both the First and Fourteenth amendments.

“Missouri executes people, like Mr. Johnson, for crimes committed as adults but before their 21st birthday illustrates the irrationality of the statute’s requirement that execution witnesses not only be adults but also at least 21 years old,” the filing states.

Missing her father’s execution will cause Ramey “irreparable harm,” her attorneys said.

Last week a Special Prosecutor appointed to review death row inmate Kevin Johnson’s case filed a motion to vacate Johnson’s death sentence – a highly unusual move in a system where prosecutors always push to uphold convictions and sentences. It asked the court to vacate his conviction due to the pervasive racism in his trial. His trial was prosecuted by Robert McCulloch, the same racist suspect liberal DA who sabotaged the Michael Brown grand jury and declined to file any charges against the white cop who murdered him the street. A white judge denied the request.

Shawn Nolan, attorney for Kevin Johnson, said, “The Special Prosecutor’s investigation and motion to vacate raise serious concerns about whether Mr. Johnson received the death penalty because he is Black.”

“That should concern everyone about the integrity of this sentence, but it should especially disturb judges tasked with protecting the integrity of the legal system, a responsibility that is at its apex when a death sentence is on the line. Instead, the motion was summarily denied in just a few hours.”

Nolan said Johnson’s appeals have not ended.

“Our hope is that the court will reconsider that ruling or that the Supreme Court of Missouri will order the evidentiary hearing that is required by law in this circumstance. There is no reason for this execution to go forward without this process,” Nolan said.

“To do so would make a nullity of the statute authorizing prosecuting attorneys to file such motions when the facts at their disposal compel them to do so.”

According to Nolan, the State argued that “at every stage of the capital prosecution overseen by former Saint Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch, race played a decisive factor. The Special Prosecutor concluded that as a result, the State’s prosecution violated the Equal Protection clause.”

The Special Prosecutor also included these facts:

-Of the five police-killing cases that occurred during his tenure in office, McCulloch sought the death penalty for four Black defendants and declined to seek it against the one white defendant charged with killing a police officer.

-In that case, McCulloch’s office sent a written invitation to defense counsel to submit mitigating evidence and granted the defense nearly a year to prepare their arguments against the death sentence. However, in the cases with Black defendants, McCulloch never issued an invitation to submit mitigating evidence that might convince him to not seek death.

According to the motion to vacate, the Special Prosecutor attempted to contact McCulloch several times during his investigation into the case during the past month. McCulloch did not acknowledge any attempts at contact “all while giving a two-hour news media interview.”

The Special Prosecutor’s investigation also showed that no one on Mr. Johnson’s prosecution team could justify their actions to pursue death for cases with Black defendants and not in a case with a white defendant.

The Special Prosecutor also argued that Mr. Johnson’s prosecutors “intentionally discriminated against Black jurors,” based on his discovery of a prosecution memo that revealed an intent to impermissibly strike jurors based on race.

McCulloch and his team’s racial discrimination against jurors only highlights the pervasive racism underlying the entirety of Mr. Johnson’s trial. 

“The harmful effects of eroding individual rights under the pretext of law and order are real-and they are rampant all over the country.” HBCU Files Claim After GA Cops Stop/Search Bus for No Reason

QUALITY OF BLACK CITIZENSHIP IN THE FREE RANGE PRISON AT NEW LOWS. BRAZEN COPS SO FREQUENTLY ABUSE THEIR POWER THAT NO BLACK SHOPPER, PEDESTRIAN, MOTORIST, JUVENILE, ADULT OR BLACK PROFESSIONAL OF ANY KIND—COULD MAKE A COMPELLING ARGUMENT THAT SO-CALLED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AFFORD ANY REAL PROTECTION FROM COPS.

From [HERE] Shaw University announced Monday that it has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice seeking a review of a a traffic stop in South Carolina last month in which students on a bus were forced to have their belongings searched by law enforcement.

Paulette Dillard, the president of the historically Black university, has accused law enforcement officers in Spartanburg County of racially profiling the 18 students traveling on the contract bus from Raleigh to a conference in Atlanta in early October.

Two South Carolina sheriffs have denied that racial profiling played a part in the traffic stop.

But at a news conference Monday, Dillard said the issue is how the alleged minor violation turned into a drug search.

“The harmful effects of eroding individual rights under the pretext of law and order are real — and they are rampant all over the country,” she said. “Let’s be clear: Racism is about power and systems, and just because there isn’t a knee on someone’s neck doesn’t mean that no harm is being done.”

At a news conference last month, Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright called the racial profiling accusations “just false.” Officers stopped the unmarked bus because it had been swerving, he said. The stop was part of “Operation Rolling Thunder,” a weeklong anti-drug campaign in which deputies and officers with agencies from around the state patrol the county’s highways.

“If anything we’re ever doing is racist, I want to know it. I want to fix it and I want to never let it happen again,” Wright said. “But this case right here has absolutely nothing to do with racism.”

A leashed dog “ran through the baggage,” turning up nothing illegal, Wright said. Police body camera footage shows officers searching several bags in the bus’ underbelly storage. The driver received a warning.

The university’s complaint states that a lane violation would be insufficient justification for a drug search and the students’ right to privacy was violated because while the driver consented to a compartment search, passengers didn’t consent to a search of their individual luggage. It also alleges that Operation Rolling Thunder disproportionately targeted Black drivers.

Most importantly, voluntary consent to a search can be withdrawn at anytime.

Steve Mueller, the sheriff of Cherokee County, said the officers “didn’t do anything wrong” and could not have known the races of the people inside the bus when they pulled it over.

Democratic members of North Carolina’s congressional delegation asked the Justice Department last month to investigate the incident.

The traffic stop comes after an April incident in Georgia, where sheriff’s deputies pulled over the Delaware State University women’s lacrosse team bus and searched it for drugs. Tony Allen, the president of the HBCU, said he was “incensed” and accused the law enforcement officers of intimidation and humiliation.

Since Declaring Racism a "Public Health Crisis" White Liberals in Milwaukee Got Sicker: Black Residents were 18X More Likely to be Frisked and 5X More Likely to be Pulled Over than Whites Last Year

COMPLEMENTARY, GULLIBLE BLACK BORGS WATCH AS a MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MASTER SYMBOLICALLY DELETES RACISM WHITE SUPREMACY IN 2019. THANKS BUDDY

Black Citizenship Low in Milwaukee, a City Dominated by White Liberal Politics From [HERE] More than halfway through a court-ordered reform process, Milwaukee police are still disproportionately searching people of color in traffic and pedestrian stops and too often doing so without justification, new reports say.

Black residents were 18 times more likely to be subjected to a frisk and 4.8 times more likely to be pulled over than white people last year, according to two monitoring reports authored by the Boston-based Crime and Justice Institute released this fall.

Hispanic and Latino residents were 2.4 times more likely than white people to be frisked after encountering police in a traffic stop, informal street interview or another kind of encounter. And even accounting for differing crime rates, Milwaukee officers conducted frisks more often in Black, Hispanic and Latino neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods, the reports found.

The results are discouraging for activists who sought to reform the department's stop-and-frisk practices. Fred Royal, a vice president of Milwaukee's NAACP branch who works closely with the Police Department, said he did not expect a major cultural change to occur in four years but was still disappointed with the progress.

"I can’t understand how they cannot do the constitutional policing that they say they’ve been so committed to doing, which would justify those stops and frisks," he said.

Police and other city officials maintain the consent decree has led to notable improvements.

In a joint statement from Mayor Cavalier Johnson’s office, the Police Department and the Fire and Police Commission, the city said it is investing more time to determine what specifically is driving the disparities and is requiring more officer training on identifying biases.

“The city is resolute that constitutional policing occurs in each and every police interaction,” the statement said. “Mayor Cavalier Johnson is committed to assisting the FPC and MPD with the appropriate resources to attain the goals of the settlement agreement.”

The reform process, known as a consent decree, stipulates that Milwaukee police must meet certain benchmarks for at least five years. Four years into the agreement, the state's largest police agency has not met all of those requirements for a single year.

Black People are More than 3X Likelier to Face Homelessness than Whites in the UK and US [necessarily includes jurisdictions dominated by liberal politics and where Black Voter Turnout is High]

THE SYSTEM OF RACISM WhiITE SUPREMACY IS A GLOBAL SYSTEM. THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE CONCERNS THE UK BUT African Americans, who represent 13 percent of the general population , account for 39 percent of people experiencing homelessness and more than 50 percent of homeless families with children. This imbalance has not improved over time. [MORE]

From [HERE] Black people are more than three times as likely to experience homelessness than their white counterparts, with a third of those who had been homeless also reporting discrimination from a social or private landlord.

The findings are from a new UK-wide study published by Heriot-Watt University, which found “overwhelming evidence” that people from Black and other minority ethnic communities face disproportionate levels of homelessness. 

The report found race, ethnicity and discrimination-related factors affect homelessness risks indirectly as well directly, through increased levels of poverty or the chances of being a renter rather than an owner. This, in turn, increases exposure to homelessness. Once the indirect effects were accounted for, the study found the relative risk of homelessness for Black and some other ethnic minority-led households grew significantly. 

Halima Begum, chief executive of the Runnymede Trust, the race-equality think-tank, said the report made for “extremely difficult reading”, but that “sadly, its findings aren’t surprising”. 

“What this research makes clear is that the heightened risk of homelessness faced by certain ethnic minority communities cannot be fully explained in socioeconomic or demographic terms alone, but is in fact down to a person’s race and ethnicity when those other factors remain a constant across all those experiencing homelessness.”

Matt Downie, the chief executive of Crisis, the homelessness charity, added that the study’s findings “should shame us as a country”.

The new report’s conclusions echo those of 2005 research for the then-Labour government, which found Black and minority ethnic households were around three times likelier to become statutorily homeless than the white population. 

Earlier in 2022, Inside Housing reported that households with a Black lead applicant accounted for 9.7% of the 268,560 households owed an initial prevention or relief duty in England in 2020-21, despite Black people making up only 3.5% of England’s population. By contrast, while 84.9% of people in England are white, 69.6% of homeless households in 2020-21 were white. 

The new study referenced almost identical data from 2021-22, with Black-led households accounting for 10% of homelessness cases and white ones 68%.

The Heriot-Watt research, which drew on a wide range of statistical sources, found Black people reported disproportionately high levels of homelessness across a broad spectrum of experiences.

This included sleeping rough (termed ‘core homelessness’), applying to a council for homelessness relief, and simply perceiving oneself as being without accommodation, having lost a settled home. 

It concluded that, in England, Black households were more than three times likelier than white ones to apply to a local authority as being homeless or threatened with homelessness. Households of mixed ethnicity were twice as likely as white ones to apply. 

While figures have tended to show Asian-led households as being under-represented in homelessness statistics, a picture that was borne out in the new study, researchers concluded that people from Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities were especially likely to experience ‘hidden homelessness’.

The study found 24% of Pakistani- and Bangladeshi-led households experienced overcrowding between 2017 and 2019, compared with 14% of Black-led households, 8% of Indian-led households and just 3% of white-led ones. 

Across the same timescale, it concluded that Black, and Pakistani and Bangladeshi households were five times likelier to experience affordability problems than their white counterparts. Black, and Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were twice as likely to be private tenants facing unaffordable rents, and three times as likely to have any form of housing need. 

Besides reaffirming evidence demonstrating the disproportionate experience of homelessness among people from Black and some other minority backgrounds, the new study also uncovered links between homelessness and discrimination. 

Drawing on data from the English Housing Survey, researchers found that 32% of Black people who had been homeless had also experienced discrimination from a social or private landlord – double the level of those who had not been homeless. A similar pattern was evident among Asian households and, to a lesser degree, among those of mixed ethnicity. 

The report suggested the finding could indicate that experiences of discrimination drive heightened exposure to homelessness, or that Black and other minoritised ethnic groups who become homeless are exposed to higher levels of discriminatory behaviour, or both.   

Glen Bramley, a professor of urban studies at Heriot-Watt and co-author of the report, said he found the apparent link between homelessness and the experience of racism “particularly distressing”, even among the other “shocking disparities” revealed. 

“This needs further investigation, and we are committed to this ongoing work,” Professor Bramley said. “In subsequent reports, with more in-depth statistical analysis and through the addition of a supporting body of qualitative evidence, we hope to better inform the housing sector and government and, in turn, help to address these stark inequalities in the most extreme forms of housing need.”

Mr Downie said the homelessness sector, as well as national and local government and society more widely, “must acknowledge and root out the injustices [uncovered] and advocate for long-term systemic solutions if we’re to ultimately end homelessness for good”.

Responding to the new report, Polly Neate, the chief executive of Shelter, the housing and homelessness charity, said that racial inequality and discrimination were “hard-wired into our housing system”. 

“The direct link between homelessness and racial discrimination cannot be ignored and more has to be done – Heriot-Watt’s work is helping to lead the way,” Ms Neate said. 

“Homelessness is a structural problem that needs major structural solutions,” she added. “Any commitment to ending homelessness and creating a fair and secure housing system must take into account the clear role that the legacy of racial discrimination has played and how it continues to plague society.”

Sandy Hoaxed 2nd Edition - The Sandy Hook Gun Control False Flag

Crisis Actor in Club “Q” False Flag Claims He was Shot 7 Times in the Back w/an AR-15, but on Video Has No Problems Constantly Raising and Waving His Arms Around

[In the Spectacle News-Actors Show You How to React to News] Biden is Still Separating NonWhite Immigrant Kids from their Families but White, Liberal Media Conceals the Story b/c It Has Dogma to Sell

From [HERE] The persecution for her work as a lawyer in Colombia had gotten so bad that Victoria and her husband, Anton, decided they needed to start lying to their son. They couldn’t stay in Colombia any longer, but they also recognized the dangers of fleeing — especially with their son, Felipe, who was 10 at the time. So they told Felipe the family was taking a vacation to Mexico. Maybe they would even get to go to the United States, they said.

It was all a ruse to keep their son calm, to protect them from people who might target them as they traveled through Mexico.

Once they hit U.S. soil in late May, the family found Border Patrol agents and gave themselves up to ask for asylum, after which they were placed in detention to await processing. 

“I’m sorry, my beautiful child,” Victoria recalled telling Felipe. 

He was upset with his parents — they had lied to him; this was no vacation — but couldn’t contain his excitement about being in the United States. 

“We weren’t running or hiding,” Victoria later said. “I brought evidence to show immigration officials in support of our asylum application and told the immigration officials about why we fled Colombia to save our lives.”

Despite her preparations, Victoria became nervous when, a few days into their detention, agents took Felipe away, saying that they were taking him to an appointment. He was gone most of the day. That evening, another agent brought him back; his mother hugged him tightly. 

One or two days later, on or about May 29 — the exact date is unclear — Victoria and Felipe were taken to another room from which they could see, but not speak to, Anton. After some paperwork and an interview, an officer told Victoria that they were taking Felipe to have a snack. 

“They opened the door, took him away, and then closed the door,” Victoria said. She had heard about family separations, but didn’t think the U.S. government was still taking kids away from their parents. 

Victoria sensed something was amiss and began asking officials where her son was. “I don’t know,” immigration officials told her repeatedly. Almost six months later, she hasn’t seen him.

More than 5,500 children, including breastfeeding infants, were forcibly separated from their parents during the Trump administration’s family separation policy, which began as a pilot program in El Paso in early 2017. On June 20, 2018, former President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials to stop separating families, but the practice continued. In 2019, the Texas Civil Rights Project documented 272 cases of family separation. Most of those cases — 223 — were extended family members, including siblings, aunts, uncles or grandparents, or legal guardians or step-parents. 

In January 2020, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) established select criteria under which children can in fact be separated from their families: Immigration authorities may only do so if they deem the parent unfit, if the parent is going to be prosecuted for a felony, if the parent is hospitalized, or other specific circumstances.

The incoming Biden administration promised to stop such separations for good and offer reparations for the previous administration’s harms.

But as the case of Felipe shows, immigration officials have continued to separate parents and children in violation of the policy. From the start of the new administration to August 2022 — the latest month for which data has been published — U.S. authorities have reported at least 372 cases of family separation. [MORE]

BE SAD ABOUT THIS. BOO-FUCKING HOO. MADDOW AND OTHER WHITE LIBERAL LIARS RIDE THE WAAMBULANCE ONLY WHEN REPUBLICANS SEPARATE NON-WHITE KIDS AT THE IMAGINARY BORDER.

Despite Eviction Papers Served on Poor Tenants by Warnocks Church, He Claims Otherwise. Rolebotic Black Media Rarely Critically Examines Black Incumbents, Supporting Them Only b/c of NonRepublicanness

From [HERE] This Vietnam Veteran Paid His Past-Due Rent. He Still Faces Eviction From Ebenezer Baptist Church’s Apartment.

A Vietnam veteran says he still faces eviction from the low-income apartment building owned by Sen. Raphael Warnock's (D., Ga.) church, even though he paid his past-due rent.

Columbia Residential, which manages Ebenezer Baptist Church’s low-income apartment building in Atlanta, served a dispossessory notice to Phillip White on Sept. 20 for $192 in unpaid rent. White, an African-American Marine veteran who served two combat tours in Vietnam, provided money order receipts to the Free Beacon on Thursday showing he made a $542 rent payment on Nov. 2. But Columbia Residential hasn’t filed a motion to dismiss its case, indicating it still intends to evict White.

It’s not clear why Columbia's dispossessory notice against White remains open following his Nov. 2 rent payment. Warnock said in October that no one had been evicted from his church’s property, a claim undermined by court records showing that authorities have carried out two court-ordered writs of possession against residents since the start of the pandemic.

White said he expects the building to resume evictions after Warnock is clear of his Dec. 6 runoff election against Republican Herschel Walker.

"He said there would be no evictions," White, 69, said. "He knew that was a lie. What he was really saying is there would be no evictions until after the election."

Warnock has repeatedly dodged questions about evictions from his church’s apartment building since the Free Beacon broke the story in October. On Thursday, Warnock refused to tell reporters if he thought the eviction notices were wrongly sent, or if he had even looked into the issue. Earlier, on Sunday, the Democrat railed against the "vicious and venomous" critics of his church, saying they "attack the church of Jesus Christ."

Ebenezer Baptist Church, which pays Warnock a $7,417 monthly housing allowance, owns 99 percent of the dilapidated Columbia Tower at MLK Village. The church tapped Columbia Residential, one of the nation’s leading eviction filers, to manage the property on its behalf.

Walker launched an attack ad on Friday accusing Warnock of preying on the poor while lavishing himself with lucrative benefits from his church. The Republican has also offered to pay the past-due rents of the more than a dozen residents of Columbia Tower who have faced eviction since the start of the pandemic. But White said Thursday he didn’t want the help.

"I help me. I got to tighten my belt and do the things I need to do," the veteran said. "If I do that, I'll feel good. I'll sleep better at night, sleep real good."

Warnock called his opponent’s offer to pay the back rents a cynical ploy to "exploit" the residents facing eviction from his church’s apartment building. He also accused Walker of sullying the name of civil rights icon Martin Luther King Jr. for "short-term political gain."

Thursday was the second time White spoke with the Free Beacon. White, who doesn’t own a phone, told the Free Beacon in early October the building managers at Columbia Tower treat him "like a piece of shit."

The Free Beacon had unfettered access to Columbia Tower and spoke with residents inside the building when this reporter first visited the property in early October. On Thursday, however, a security guard who identified himself as Jones was on site to keep reporters out.

"They don’t want no media in the building," he said.

Feds: 31 Kids Found Working Overnight On Meat Plant “Kill Floors”

From [HERE] Federal investigators are moving against a massive sanitation company that’s accused of employing children as young as 13 on dangerous overnight shifts at food processing plants. The Department of Labor requested a temporary injunction Wednesday against Wisconsin-based Packers Sanitation Services after investigators found at least 31 children employed to clean industrial equipment. A Labor Department complaint said at least two child workers suffered caustic chemical burns and other injuries while working on the floor where cattle are butchered at a plant in Grand Island, Nebraska. Investigators said they found child workers also at two plants in Minnesota.

Unlikely that child labor at JBS went un-noticed by world’s largest meat company

From [HERE] Children working overnight at the JBS meat packing plant in Grand Island, Nebraska were required to clock in and out of their shifts by entering their ID number into a biometric time lock. The time clock takes pictures of each employee’s face, using facial recognition technology to log in and out each employee for each shift.

Upon clocking in, the children would trade their normal street clothes for JBS badges, raincoats, waterproof overalls, or paints along with hard hats, goggles, gloves, and earplugs. 

After overnight shifts, the child laborers report being tired at school the next day.

The child labor services JBS was reportedly buying are specifically prohibited but were being acquired in significant quantities. JBS got its child labor from Packers Sanitation Services Inc., LTD, a labor contractor based in Wisconsin with offices in Grand Island. 

For the meat industry, Packers Sanitation is a source of cleaning and sanitation services. While the ID badges and work attire may all say “JBS,” they are Packers Sanitation employees. The numbers involved are not insignificant. Packer’s Sanitation was providing 190 workers at JBS in Grand Island.– 64 on the kill floor and 126 on the harvesting side. At the JBS pork plant in Worthington, MN, another 110 Packer’s Sanitation employees were reporting for work.

Of those, the DOL. an investigation has found that a total of 31 children between the ages of 13 and 17 have worked for PSSI at the JBS USA plants in Grand Island, Nebraska, and in Worthington, Minnesota, as well as a Turkey Valley Farms plant in Marshall, Minnesota,

Packers Sanitation at a Tyson Foods plant in Sedalia, Missouri is also under a similar investigation. According to an unsealed search warrant application, DOL investigators conducted overnight surveillance at Tyson’s Sedalia plant and saw people entering the plant that was likely children.

Packer’s Sanitation is under a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that restricts its use of child labor and orders it to cooperate with the Department of Labor (DOL) investigation. The TRO continues until Nov. 23 when the Packer’s Sanitation must present a corporate officer who is cleared to answer questions.

At the conclusion of that hearing, the most likely outcome will be making the TRO permanent.

Packers Sanitation is sending two lawyers to clean up for the corporation. They are Gillian G. O” Hara of the Kutak Rock law firm in Omaha, and J. Randall Coffey of Fisher, Phillips in Kansas City.

JBS is not yet represented in the legal action, and that may not be required.

The Fair Labor Standards prohibits an employer from employing “any oppressive child labor in commerce or in production of goods for commerce or in any enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of foods for commerce.”

“Oppressive child labor” includes any child under 16 years of age or between 16 and 18 years of age in any occupation, the Secretary of Labor declares to be particularly hazardous or detrimental to the children’s well-being

The Labor Secretary. has declared several occupations in the operation of power-driven meat-processing machines and occupations involving slaughter and meat and poultry packing, processing, and rendering to be hazardous and detrimental to children between 16 and 18.

Food and agriculture are among the sectors of the economy experiencing labor shortages. 

Hawaii plaintiffs join contaminated drinking water lawsuit against US government prompted by Navy fuels leaks. The Navy Knew It Contaminated Residents' Water But Didn't Notify Public for Over 6 Months

From [HERE] As of Thursday, more than 100 people have joined a lawsuit against the US government concerning water contaminated with jet fuel. The plaintiffs seek legal remedy under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which provides for compensation for personal injury, death, or property loss or damage from a negligent or wrongful act of an employee of the federal government.

The suit was originally brought in August by four plaintiffs living in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii at the time of the contamination. The complaint states that the US Navy negligently released jet fuel and other toxic substances into the Navy water line in May 2021 and in November 2021, resulting in the contamination of the drinking water near the World War II-era naval fuel storage facility in Red Hill, Hawaii. The Navy allegedly did not report the issue until December 2, 2021.

Plaintiffs report symptoms including seizures, gastrointestinal disorders, neurological issues, migraines, rashes, burns and thyroid issues, and some have undergone surgeries to ameliorate health issues caused by the ingestion of the jet fuel. The complaint also stated that at least one adult in each affected family had to halt their employment or military service to deal with the illness their families experienced as a result of ingesting the contaminated water.

Approximately 9,715 households were affected by the spill.

USA’s Military Empire: A Visual Database. Unlike any other nation, the US maintains a massive network of foreign military installations around the world

The United States of America, unlike any other nation, maintains a massive network of foreign military installations around the world. 

How was this created and how is it continued? Some of these physical installations are on land occupied as spoils of war. Most are maintained through collaborations with governments, many of them brutal and oppressive governments benefiting from the bases’ presence. In many cases, human beings were displaced to make room for these military installations, often depriving people of farmland, adding huge amounts of pollution to local water systems and the air, and existing as an unwelcome presence.

To explore this database go [HERE]

Obedient Free Range Slaves Confuse Love for Their Country with Worship of Their Government: John Mellencamp Sparks Outrage By Sitting, Eating Popcorn During National Anthem

From [HERE] American rock legend John Mellencamp sparked a firestorm of criticism on Sunday after he was photographed sitting down and eating popcorn in his seat while the rest of the stadium stood for the National Anthem at the start of the Indianapolis Colts’ home game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

The picture posted to Twitter during the game at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis on Nov. 20 showed the “Ain’t that America?” singer seated and actively eating popcorn while those around him held their hands to their hearts and sang “The Star-Spangled Banner” before kickoff, FOX News reported.

Mellencamp, 71, has openly expressed admiration for former National Football League (NFL) quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who hasn’t been hired to play professional football since he led players in taking a knee on the field during the National Anthem in the 2016-2017 season. [MORE]

Billionaire Eugenist Bill Gates is Pre-Occupied with the Destruction of the Universe, Control of the World and Weiteko (an inversion of life)

Who are the Eugenicists Mandating Genocidal COVID Shots for Children? CDC’s So-Called ‘Independent’ Vaccine Advisors are Tied to US Health Agencies, Big Pharma

From [HERE] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) “independent vaccine advisers” voted 15-0 on Oct. 20 to add COVID-19 vaccines to the 2023 childhood, adolescent and adult immunization schedules, prompting Americans to question the integrity of the agency’s panel tasked with making vaccine recommendations for kids.

Schools and state legislatures use the CDC’s immunization schedules to set vaccine requirements for students who wish to attend school, which will inevitably force millions of children across the U.S. who live in states where there are no religious or philosophical exemptions to receive COVID-19 vaccines. Only 21 states have explicitly banned mandating the shots for students.

According to the CDC, its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) committee consists of medical and public health experts who develop recommendations on the use of vaccines in the U.S.

Their recommendations form the basis of the CDC’s public health guidance for the “safe use of vaccines and related biological products,” and set the agency’s immunization schedule.

Since the first COVID-19 vaccine was authorized on Dec. 14, 2020, people have witnessed what can only be described as shocking guidance issued by the CDC, which not only signed off on COVID-19 vaccines for kids but recently authorized bivalent boosters for children that have not been subjected to human clinical trials.

Although the CDC and corporate media claim the agency’s vaccine advisory panel making COVID-19 vaccine recommendations are independent experts capable of rendering objective opinions, and by extension, objective votes, this is simply not true. Every single panel member has ties to either U.S. regulatory agencies or the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the vaccines they’re tasked with regulating.

What is the ACIP committee and who decides who’s on it?

The ACIP was established under Section 222 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. §2l7a) and is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App 2).

The ACIP provides advice and guidance to the CDC’s director on the use of vaccines. If accepted, the recommendations are published as official recommendations by the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

According to the CDC’s website, the ACIP includes 15 voting members tasked with making vaccine recommendations for the entire country. Members are selected by the secretary of HHS following an application and nomination process.

This is the same HHS that gave billions of U.S. tax dollars to pharmaceutical companies to develop and manufacture COVID-19 vaccines, gave billions to Pfizer and Moderna to purchase vaccine doses, collaborated with Johnson & Johnson to produce millions of “investigational” vaccine doses, was given $10 billion by the Biden administration to “expand access” to vaccines, launched a public education campaign with only positive messaging to increase confidence in and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, gave $3 billion to the CDC to fund similar initiatives, and through public relations agencies, contracted with the corporate media to advertise only positive messaging about COVID-19 vaccines — depriving the American people of informed consent.

Currently, 14 members of ACIP have expertise in “vaccinology, immunology, pediatrics, internal medicine, nursing, family medicine, virology, public health, infectious diseases and/or preventive medicine. One member is a “consumer representative” who provides insight on the “social and community aspects” of vaccination.

In addition to 15 voting members, ACIP includes eight “ex officio members,” who have their position simply because of the office they hold. These ex officio members represent other federal agencies with “responsibility for immunization programs” in the U.S.

Ex officio members are expected to “represent the position and views of their sponsoring organizations, and to contribute to Committee discussions when issues of importance to their organization are being discussed and when they possess information important to the discussion.” Ex officio and liaison members also may serve on work groups to “provide expert advice” and apprise the work group of the position their organization endorses.

According to the CDC, ex officio members generally do not vote; however, if fewer than a quorum of ACIP members are eligible to vote due to absence or other conflicts of interest, the designee can temporarily designate the ex officio member — with obvious conflicts of interest — as a voting member.

There are also 30 non-voting representatives of “liaison organizations” with “related immunization expertise,” such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, America’s Health Insurance Plans, American Immunization Registry Association, American Medical Association, American Pharmacists Association, Association for Prevention Biotechnology Industry Organization and National Medical Association.

Although the 15 voting members and representatives serve on the ACIP committee voluntarily — allowing the CDC to claim they are an “independent” panel of vaccine advisors — these members have conflicts of interest with both the CDC and pharmaceutical companies whose products they are regulating.

The one member of the current ACIP committee with no medical expertise runs an organization founded in the name of her child who allegedly died of pertussis and is funded by the CDC to promote vaccines for kids.

Excluded from these meetings are experts and scientists who have questioned COVID-19 vaccines and treatment protocols, organizations like the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, America’s Frontline Doctors and the almost one million doctors and experts who signed on to the Great Barrington Declaration.

There is not one member of the committee representing the thousands of vaccine-injured children, nor any organizations advocating for the millions of reported COVID-19 vaccine injuries represented.

It would seem on its face, that the CDC’s “independent” committee of vaccine advisors is biased and financially incentivized in other ways toward creating recommendations that favor a particular outcome. The only challenges to scientific consensus they receive come from the handful of public submissions — both for and against vaccine policy — that are allowed to be featured during a meeting.

Although thousands of public comments are posted for ACIP on the CDC’s website and agency guidelines state “comments will be addressed as soon as possible,” public commenting appears to be a mere formality, giving the public a false impression their voices are being heard.

As quickly as the CDC moves, and given the fact they had published an interim 2023 immunization schedule prior to the meeting that included the COVID-19 vaccines, it’s likely most of these comments joined the internet abyss of the millions ignored before them.

CDC ‘independent’ vaccine advisors have ties to CDC and Big Pharma

According to the CDC, the 15 members of its ACIP committee making the COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for U.S children and adults include:  

1. Lynne Bahta is a registered nurse and the immunization program clinical consultant for the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). In the fiscal year 2021, MDH received $11.6 million in Public Health Emergency Preparedness funding from the CDC and $34 million in crisis response funding for COVID-19.
   
   The CDC on Sept. 20, 2022, announced $90 million in funding to establish the Pathogen Genomics Centers of Excellence (PGCoE) network. The PGCoE network is a genomic surveillance program designed to “foster and improve innovation and technical capacity in pathogen genomics, molecular epidemiology, and bioinformatics to better prevent, control and respond to microbial threats.”
   
   MDH, where Bahta is employed, is one of five recipients of the $90 million CDC grant.

2. Dr. Beth Bell is a clinical professor in the Department of Global Health at the University of Washington School of Public Health; however, she spent most of her career in “government service” at the CDC before joining the CDC’s “independent” panel of vaccine advisors.
   
   Bell started working with the CDC in 1992 and is the former director of the agency’s National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases.
   

3. Dr. Oliver Brooks is the chief medical officer at Watts Healthcare Corporation in Los Angeles, California. He is a past president of the National Medical Association, chairman of the Immunize LA Families Coalition and past president and current director of the California Immunization Coalition — which worked with Vaccinate California to secure the passing of SB 277 that removed the religious vaccine exemption for children.
   
   According to Dollars for Docs and Open Payments, Brooks received thousands of dollars as a consultant and promotional speaker for vaccines prior to joining the CDC’s “independent” committee of vaccine advisors.
   
   Brooks received payments from Sanofi Pasteur, Inc. for Pentacel (DTaP-IPV/Hib 5-in-1 vaccine), Menactra (meningococcal conjugate vaccine), and influenza vaccines (Flublok Quadrivalent and high-dose Fluzone), GlaxoSmithKline for SHINGRIX (shingles), Merck for Gardasil and RotaTeq, Adacel for its Tdap vaccine and PREVNAR 13, manufactured by Pfizer.
   

4. Dr. Wilbur Chen is a professor of medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and director of the University of Maryland Baltimore Travel Medicine Practice. Chen is also an investigator within the Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Unit and Collaborative Influenza Vaccine Innovation Centers, both of which are funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) run by Dr. Anthony Fauci.
   
   The University of Maryland has received millions of dollars in grants from the NIAID and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The university’s “Prevention Research Center” (PRC) is one of 26 PRCs funded by the CDC’s 2019–2024 funding cycle.
   
   According to the CDC, in April 2021, the agency funded all 26 PRCs to form the PRC Vaccine Confidence Network (VCN) to support the agency’s vaccine strategy for COVID-19. [MORE]

Unelected Ruler Fauci "Can't Recall" Much During 7-hr Deposition by State AG’s Alleging Collusion to Censor Info About the Dangers of COVID Shots. Defended Lockdowns that Destroyed Jobs/Businesses

From [HERE] and [HERE] Dr. Anthony Fauci was subjected to a seven-hour-long deposition Wednesday when he was grilled about his knowledge and/or involvement in the Biden administration’s collusion with tech oligarchies to censor speech regarding COVID-19. 

Dr. Anthony Fauci faced questions from Attorneys General Eric Schmitt (Missouri) and Jeff Landry (Louisiana) in their lawsuit against the federal government for allegedly colluding with Big Tech platforms to censor content critical of COVID-19 vaccines and countermeasures.

Fauci sat for a deposition one day after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily halted the depositions of three other Biden administration officials.

The lawsuit, filed in May by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, alleges a “collusion enterprise” based on previously revealed internal emails between the federal government and social media companies. Judge Terry Doughty ruled in favor of deposing top Biden officials, including former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, current White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and Anthony Fauci. 

While the deposition will be sealed under court order, some of the attorneys have already dropped teasers on social media about their deposition with the 81-year-old public health chief. 

“One thing is clear from the 7 hour deposition of Dr. Fauci today: When Fauci speaks — social media censors,” wrote Attorney General Eric Schmitt on Twitter Wednesday. 

Some takeaways from the deposition of Fauci: 

• Fauci knew the Lab Leak theory had merit but it’d come back to him & sought to immediately discredit it

• He defended lockdowns

• The rest of us ‘don’t have the ability’ to determine what’s best for ourselves

“More to come—Stay tuned,” Schmitt added. 

“Wow! It was amazing to spend 7 hours with Dr. Fauci,” tweeted Louisiana AG Landry. “The man who single-handedly wrecked the U.S. economy based upon ‘the science.’ Only to discover that he can't recall practically anything dealing with his Covid response!” [MORE]

In a statement released Tuesday in advance of Fauci’s deposition, Schmitt said:

“Tomorrow, along with my colleague from Louisiana, my Office and I will depose Dr. Anthony Fauci in our lawsuit against the Biden Administration for allegedly colluding with social media companies to censor freedom of speech.

“Since we filed our landmark lawsuit, we have uncovered documents and discovery that show clear coordination between the Biden Administration and social media companies on censoring speech, but we’re not done yet. We plan to get answers on behalf of the American people. Stay tuned.”

Schmitt and Landry sued President Biden, Fauci and others on May 5. New Civil Liberties Alliance, a nonprofit group representing outspoken critics of COVID-19 vaccines and countermeasures, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, Aaron Kheriaty and also Jill Hines, joined the lawsuit in August, as did Jim Hoft, founder and editor-in-chief of The Gateway Pundit.

According to the complaint, government officials colluded with and coerced Big Tech and social media platforms to “suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints and content” relating to COVID-19.

Several officials named in the suit, including former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, argued they shouldn’t be required to be deposed, but a federal judge on Monday denied a request to quash Psaki’s subpoena.

The same judge, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, on Oct. 21 ordered Fauci and other government officials to provide depositions under oath.

In addition to Fauci and Psaki, other government officials slated to be deposed include:

• FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan

• Carol Crawford, chief of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Digital Media Branch

• Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly

• White House Director of Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty

• Daniel Kimmage, an official at the State Department’s Global Engagement Center

• U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy

Two lower-level officials were listed as alternates: Lauren Protentis of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in place of Easterly, and former White House COVID-19 adviser Andrew Slavitt in place of Flaherty.

A previous ruling had forced the above-named individuals to provide written testimony.

Judge rejects ‘self-serving blanket denials’

In his Oct. 21 ruling, Judge Doughty agreed with the plaintiffs that Fauci’s prior “self-serving blanket denials” regarding his role in censoring certain types of content and viewpoints on social media could not be taken at face value, necessitating a deposition.

Fauci challenged the order to sit for a deposition, arguing the communications in question are protected by executive privilege. But Judge Doughty ordered Fauci to turn over the documents within 21 days and to answer the plaintiffs’ questions in full.

Landry and Schmitt filed a request for depositions Oct. 10. In a statement released at the time by Schmitt, he said:

“After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath.

“It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise and force these officials to come clean to the American people, and this ruling will allow us to do just that. We’ll keep pressing for the truth.”

Depositions of three Biden administration officials on hold

In an order issued Monday, the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit temporarily halted the scheduled depositions of Easterly, Flaherty and Murthy.

According to Politico, the three-judge panel unanimously found Judge Doughty had erred in approving the depositions without first examining whether there were “other means” of obtaining the information the plaintiffs are seeking.

The court sent the case back to Doughty for further review. According to the order:

“Thus, before any of the depositions may go forward, the district court must analyze whether the information sought can be obtained through less intrusive, alternative means, such as further written discovery or depositions of lower-ranking officials.

“Written findings as to the availability and sufficiency of alternatives need to be entered.”

In a statement provided to The Defender by Landry’s office, Landry said, “These developments do not change my pursuit of the truth. We respect the court’s decision and will continue in the discovery phase of this case.”

Thursday’s court order came after lawyers for the government argued the plaintiffs should not have the ability to depose the three officials in question, on the basis that they are high-ranking government officials, and that the depositions would “unavoidably distract” them from “their important and time-sensitive duties,” which would “cause irreparable harm.”

However, the federal government’s motion for a partial stay of Judge Doughty’s deposition order was denied. The Nov. 21 order stated, “We make no ruling on the petition … at this time.”

Easterly, Flaherty and Murthy were scheduled to be deposed in early December.

On Wednesday Judge Doughty, in a separate ruling, ordered Psaki to sit for a deposition and rejected an attempt to shield FBI Agent Chan from answering questions under oath.

Plaintiffs in the case argued that none of the officials were “high-ranking,” and Judge Doughty agreed, finding that the “burdens” the officials would face as a result of sitting for depositions were outweighed by the necessity of gathering more information regarding the allegations in question prior to ruling on a motion for a preliminary injunction.

According to the 5th Circuit’s order:

“It is not enough, as the district court found, that these officials may have ‘personal knowledge’ about certain communications.

“That knowledge may be shared widely or have only marginal importance in comparison to the ‘potential burden’ imposed on the deponent.”

According to the court, the government already produced “extensive written discovery.” The government claims that these documents do not reveal any violations of the First Amendment, while the plaintiffs claim otherwise.

Politico also reported that the 5th Circuit asked Judge Doughty to consider ruling on the overall viability of the lawsuit before allowing the depositions to proceed.

The 5th Circuit said Judge Doughty should have not issued a ruling regarding the depositions until the courts decided on the government’s motion to dismiss — even though that motion was withdrawn after plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and the government has not filed a new motion to dismiss.

According to Politico, the 5th Circuit’s order is not final: Judge Doughty may still decide, based on a newly clarified analysis, that depositions of Easterly, Flaherty and Murthy are needed.

Politico also reported that the 5th Circuit’s order may strengthen efforts by Psaki and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to halt her deposition.

At a recent hearing, Psaki’s lawyers claimed there is no evidence she had met or had been in contact with any social media executives regarding purported “misinformation,” although she did express critical remarks about social media platforms during White House press briefings.

In his Nov. 21 order, Judge Doughty rejected that claim, writing:

“Despite the fact that Psaki is a former high-ranking official, the potential burden upon Psaki was outweighed by the need to determine whether free speech had been suppressed.”

Previously, a federal judge in Virginia rejected the arguments made by Psaki and the DOJ, including that sitting for a deposition would place an “undue burden” on her, taking her away from her family and her new job at MSNBC for several days.

Magistrate Judge Ivan Davis of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia passed the issue to Judge Doughty. Davis dismissed Psaki’s claims, arguing that Psaki and the DOJ were attempting an “end-run” around the deposition order.

Judge Doughty previously found “that Plaintiffs have proven that Jennifer Psaki has personal knowledge about the issue concerning censorship across social media as it related to COVID-19 and ancillary issues of COVID-19.”

“Psaki has made a number of statements that are relevant to the Government’s involvement in a number of social-media platforms’ efforts to censor its users across the board for sharing information related to COVID-19,” Judge Doughty added. “Any burden on Psaki is outweighed by the need to determine whether free speech has been suppressed.”

Wave of Litigation Over COVID Mandates — Nike, Others Face Suits from Fired Workers who Declined to Take Deadly, Experimental Shots Granted Immunity by Government for Any Injury or Death Caused

From [HERE] Nike and Washington State University (WSU) are two of the latest employers to face lawsuits from employees who lost their jobs over COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Three former senior employees last week sued Nike, demanding punitive damages for religious discrimination, medical discrimination and battery after they were fired or lost their jobs due to Nike’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate.

On Nov. 11, Nick Rolovich, former WSU football coach, sued the university, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and WSU athletic director Pat Chun seeking damages after he was fired last year for refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

The two lawsuits came on the heels of another suit filed last week by three former National Basketball Association (NBA) referees who sued the NBA after they were fired for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine on religious grounds.

It’s all part of a “wave of vaccine mandate litigation” that has grown to more than 1,000 lawsuits challenging vaccine mandates and filed primarily against employers in the last several months, according to the National Law Review.

Individual employers have had success on some of the claims made against them, but the increase in litigation is having an effect, according to the National Law Review, which reported:

“With worker shortages, changing attitudes toward COVID-19, updated CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] guidance and the litigation risks, many employers who are not required to have vaccine mandates have decided to move forward without them.”

Nike: a diverse, equitable and inclusive employer, except when it comes to COVID

Nike presents itself as a “diverse, equitable, and inclusive employer,” but when it came to its COVID-19 mandatory vaccination policies, it “displayed blatant disregard for its own privacy policies and violated state and federal law,” according to the Health Freedom Defense Fund, which is helping the former Nike employees sue the company.

In February 2022, Nike began terminating employees for failing to demonstrate vaccination against COVID-19, implementing one of the strictest vaccine policies in Oregon where its headquarters are located.

In their complaint, filed Nov. 15 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in Portland, three former senior employees allege Nike “enforced its mandatory vaccine policy aggressively,” refusing to consider reasonable accommodations for some employees who declined vaccination.

Nike continued its mandatory vaccination policy, begun in October 2021, after it was apparent that the vaccines did not stop transmission of COVID-19 and after the U.S. Supreme Court had struck down the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s mandate that large employers require their employees to get the vaccine, according to the claim.

The lawsuit alleges Nike fired two of the claimants, Doug Kerkering and Hannah Thibodo, because they had a “perceived disability” — their immune systems did not sufficiently protect them from COVID-19.

The plaintiffs’ attorney Scott Street told The Defender:

“Since the COVID shots do not prevent infection or spread, we contend that Nike viewed the unvaccinated as having inferior immune systems with respect to COVID which prevents them from being able to work. That is a perceived disability protected from discrimination under federal law.”

The plaintiffs proposed accommodations such as testing, masking or working from home, but Nike fired them instead.

The lawsuit also alleges Nike disregarded “sincerely held religious beliefs or practices” of the third claimant, Wanda Rozwadowska.

According to Street, Rozwadowska applied for religious accommodation and was denied. She appealed, and eventually, the company granted the accommodation — but only after business hours on the date of the vaccine deadline, so she was coerced into getting the shot before her accommodation was approved.

Rozwadowska suffered a severe autoimmune response to vaccination that rendered her unable to work and compelled her to leave the company.

“We are helping the plaintiffs to sue Nike because we want to send a loud and clear message to corporate America that their employees’ rights are not negotiable and that their employees are not disposable,” said Leslie Manookian, president of Health Freedom Defense Fund.

This is not the first time employees sued Nike over its vaccine policy. In August, an Oregon judge ruled that an employee who refused to document his COVID-19 status should have been eligible for unemployment benefits after the company fired him.

It is unclear how many employees Nike fired in total for its vaccine mandate, which the company rescinded last week. 

‘Ugly conversations’ with WSU administration preceded Rolovich’s termination

Rolovich filed his lawsuit against WSU in Whitman County Court, alleging “breach of contract, discrimination against religion, wrongful withholding of wages and violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as the First and 14th Amendments.”

WSU fired Rolovich and four assistant coaches in October 2021 for failing to comply with the state’s vaccine mandate, even after Rolovich, who is Catholic, applied for a religious exemption.

The university fired Rolovich for cause, which prevented him from collecting the remaining $9 million on his contract.

Rolovich’s attorney, Brian Fahling, said at the time his client would take legal action for religious discrimination. He filed a 34-page letter with the university appealing the university’s decision to fire Rolovich, but the appeal was denied.

In April 2022, Rolovich filed a $25 million wrongful termination tort claim against the school — a prerequisite to filing a lawsuit against a state agency.

Rolovich seeks unspecified damages from the university, the governor and the athletic director for lost past and future income, liquidated damages from his employment, punitive damages and legal costs.

WSU Vice President for Marketing and Communications Phil Weiler told The Seattle Times in an email that Rolovich’s lawsuit “is wholly without merit” and that in denying Rolovich’s exemption request, the university enforced the vaccine mandate “in a fair and lawful manner.”

In an interview with The Daily Wire’s BreakAways series in September, Rolovich spoke publicly for the first time about the lawsuit, detailing the “ugly conversations” he said went on with school administrators prior to his firing, ESPN reported.

He told host Allison Williams that he refused to take the vaccine because of the “lack of answers, lack of dialogue” about the effects of the vaccines and because of his beliefs as a Catholic.

Rolovich said when he informed WSU Athletic Director Pat Chun that he planned to request a religious exemption, Chun responded, “We’re not going to believe you, you know, the governor’s not happy with you.”

Rolovich also alleged that the human resources department approved his exemption, but that Chun wrote a memo challenging Rolovich’s right to an exemption.

Responding to William’s question about how losing his job would affect him financially, Rolovich said:

“What about all the people who lost and that were going check-to-check? Those people deserve credit for having conviction in their beliefs too, more than me … firefighters that I know, or police officers, or frontline doctors and nurses, it’s like, those people, in my opinion of what they gave up, was more than mine. I just happened to have a higher-profile job.

“The hypocrisy of the last two years, just all over, it’s just not a real good look on our society.”