An Los Angeles Superior Court judge on Tuesday rejected the Los Angeles County Unified School District (LAUSD) COVID vaccination obligation for students. The judge wrote that the district had exceeded its authority, and that the resolution that approved the requirement is in conflict with the law of the state by not allowing exemptions in the case of personal convictions.
The decision is a significant loss for LAUSD (really it's an insult to their teachers' union UTLA. We'll get to that in a moment) as well as a win for various advocacy groups like “Reopen the California School” and “Let Them Breathe.”
The Los Angeles Times notes that the decision won't be immediate in its impact:
The decision, however, does not have any immediate impact on the L.A. Unified School District since the district postponed in May its vaccine requirement until July 2023 -a decision which was in line with the state's decision to suspend its own school vaccination requirement until then.
But, the ruling is crucial because it establishes precedent and puts the power-hungry LAUSD and the tyrannical County Public Health Director Dr. Barbara Ferrer on notice. If you've been following how disastrous the school closings were and how they impacted students, you'll be aware of the fact that Ferrer is a single-minded mask and vaccine enthusiast who would maintain Los Angeles County in a constant state of lockdown if she could. Contrary to the majority of other areas in which public schools were shut down, Barbara Ferrer extended her orders to private schools in L.A.
The lawsuit was filed by a father and son of 12 years who were identified by the letters G.F. and D.F. in court documents. The vaccine mandate stipulated that all students enrolled in classes be vaccinated with the COVID vaccine, or be transferred into an at-home learning program. Also, they were subjected to a distinct, however clearly different, education. G.F. strongly opposed giving his son medical treatment that he did not need.
“I worry that vaccinating him could prove even more dangerous now that he has had COVID-19,” the father wrote in a formal declaration. “Among other things, I fear that the vaccination could overexcite his immune system and antibodies.”
In response to the complaint, LAUSD lawyers said that the relief requested from G.F. “asks this court to ignore the life-threatening risks presented by COVID-19 and the corresponding threat it poses to public education.”
Judge Mitchell Beckloff was in agreement against the son and father insisting that the only state has the authority to make such a broad rule:
“Although LAUSD is arguing that the court's ruling should be applicable to D.F. solely, it is the case that this court concludes that there is no basis for this restriction due to the board's inability to approve the resolution.” Beckloff wrote.
Arie L. Spanggler, who was a part of the team who pursued this case was delighted by the outcome:
Judge Beckloff's ruling affirms that school districts in their own jurisdiction are not authorized to enforce local vaccination requirements that go beyond the scope of the requirements statewide. We are extremely pleased with the decision, since it guarantees that no child is removed from the classroom because of their COVID-19 vaccination status.
Why is this decision important? Because the unions representing teachers in the public sector which are led by the likes of Randi Weingarten, have pushed for school closings as well as mandates, but they aren't doing anything with your children. The N.E.A.'s final aim is to achieve universal mandatory vaccination and masking
The mandates for vaccination have impacted education within the Golden State. According to our report, the enrollment rate has fallen like a rock. Also, one Granada Hills school cruelly prevented students who were not vaccinated from attending graduation in June despite the fact that the ceremony was outside.
The judge's decision, though not a major shocker, is an important step towards the correct direction. If the state wishes to adopt a law that requires vaccination mandates or mandates, then that's fine. The decision-making process should not be left to elected officials in the local area with no responsibility.
