Tag Archives: Supreme Court

SB277 Opponents: Why Hold a Referendum on an Unconstitutional Law?

united-states-constitution

By Jake Crosby

If a law is unconstitutional, why hold a referendum on it? The constitution is meant to prevent the passage of laws that infringe on individual rights, even when such laws have support of 99% of the population. With 82% of Californians supporting SB277 which aims to revoke vaccine exemptions, a referendum will not strike down the law. Instead, the referendum will give rise to the perception that opponents view the law as constitutional when it is not.

Although the US Supreme Court has ruled that police powers of the state can trump individual liberties in its 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts ruling, it also put limitations on those powers. In its decision, the court stated that “general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence.”

Because SB277 seeks to mandate the routine immunization schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for anyone seeking to attend a public or private school in California, the CDC should be legally considered to be part of the state. CDC’s conduct therefore reflects on the constitutionality of SB277, or rather its lack of constitutionality.

CDC has proven its lack of integrity on vaccine safety issues, having concealed proof of harm from mercury in vaccines. CDC’s top immunization official has lied to Congress, and the CDC has covered up evidence linking autism to the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine among other vaccine dangers according to a senior CDC scientist.

Despite CDC’s conduct and lack of integrity, SB277 fully mandates CDC’s immunization schedule and revokes all parental choice exemptions to it in California. Far from addressing the issues with CDC, Senator Richard Pan, a primary co-sponsor of SB277, sought to deny them by calling the senior CDC scientist who became a whistleblower against his own federal agency a “fraud.” So SB277 is unconstitutional, and is therefore illegal even when considering the police powers of the state as they pertain to individual rights.

Unfortunately, some lawyers have not considered the constitutionality of SB277 from every angle. Attorney Alan Phillips who specializes in vaccine exemptions stated that “courts can’t second-guess the legislature with respect to vaccine and infectious disease facts” in a letter addressed to “Concerned California Citizens.” Although Phillips was correct in saying that the right to attend school would probably not be a viable legal basis to strike down SB277, he was wrong to state that legislatures have carte blanche to invoke their police powers by revoking school vaccine exemptions. The Supreme Court’s 1905 ruling forbade exactly what SB277 will do: mandate a dangerous immunization schedule produced by a federal agency proven to lie about vaccine dangers as a punitive measure against those resisting the CDC’s vaccination policies.

A lawsuit that makes the previously described case against SB277 is how the law should be fought. Lawsuits predicated solely on parental rights, religious rights or the right to an education will likely be no more successful than a referendum for not addressing how SB277 constitutes an abuse of the state’s police powers. Such cases are perhaps the only the kinds of lawsuits SB277 opponents have approached attorneys with, hence their reluctance to take on SB277 and Attorney Phillips’ preference for a referendum.

Nonetheless, attorneys should examine SB277 with the understanding that there are limits on how a state can invoke its police powers via mandatory vaccination while also taking into consideration the behavior of federal agencies whose misconduct shows SB277 is an abuse of such powers. The case for SB277’s unconstitutionality and that of a similar law revoking the secular choice exemption in Vermont needs to be argued correctly to effectively maximize the possibility that these laws will die and never return from the dead.

As long as a referendum is in the works, however, such lawsuits may not happen. People will wrongly believe that opponents view SB277 as constitutional for organizing a popular vote on it, and an overwhelming vote in favor of SB277 is likely. Unlike judges, the majority of constituents will not have the chance to hear cases against SB277 – only support for SB277 from a media trained to lie by the CDC.

Judges, however, will have to hear cases against SB277 – if a lawsuit against SB277’s constitutionality is filed. The referendum could delay that and will end in failure. Properly argued lawsuits against SB277 and similar legislation are necessary to strike them down.

Kennedy’s Ghostwriter Defended Thimerosal

adam hadhazy

ghostwriter: A person whose job it is to write material for someone else who is the named author. – Oxford Dictionaries

By Jake Crosby

As surprising as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. chopping out the chapters on autism from his book “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” while saying there is no proof thimerosal causes autism, is the identity of one of the professional writers he hired to write his book for him. The creator listed in the file properties of Kennedy’s unpublished manuscript had actually defended the neurotoxic vaccine preservative thimerosal, which appears to shed light on Kennedy’s decision to strike the chapters.

Adam Hadhazy is a “freelance science writer” with his own professional website and linkedin account. He also authored a piece for Popular Mechanics in 2010 defending thimerosal, titled “The Truth About 9 Anti-Vaccine Studies.” In it, he quoted millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit as summarizing Dr. Mark Geier’s research on thimerosal and autism “junk.” Hadhazy also called Dr. Andrew Wakefield “discredited” and wrote that his 1998 Lancet paper on children with autism and bowel disease “largely launched the dangerous anti-vaccination movement.”

Adam Hadhazy further cited the letter former CDC researcher  Thomas Verstraeten wrote to Pediatrics falsely stating that CDC did not conceal any evidence  thimerosal causes autism. Citing Paul Offit, Hadhazy suggested that infants can “conservatively handle thousands of vaccines simultaneously”. The take-away point from all this is that Hadhazy is an all-purpose defender of the vaccine program, and he’s written Kennedy’s book for him. Hadhazy’s “substantive, behind the scenes role” in Kennedy striking the chapters connecting thimerosal to autism is more than evident.

In the Washington Post, Dr. Mark Hyman – celebrity doctor who wrote the book’s preface – takes credit for convincing Kennedy to remove the chapters. Yet Dr. Hyman is an awfully strange person to have done so, given that he has no history of writing about thimerosal. Dr. Hyman further echos a familiar pharma talking point: “Yes, there’s been an increase in autism, even as we take out thimerosal” (Ironically, the CDC data Dr. Hyman relied on to defend thimerosal is not even considered reliable by thimerosal defenders). Hadhazy’s piece for Popular Mechanics on thimerosal and vaccines is heavily laden with pharma talking points.

In Kennedy’s officially released book, the entire part on autism is removed including a chapter titled “Autism Rates Decline When Thimerosal Exposure Levels Are Reduced” and another on the government’s concession that vaccines caused autism in Hannah Poling. The entire part critiquing media coverage was removed as well. Even chapters in remaining parts were pulled. Those include chapters on CDC and AAP’s conflicts of interest, the Breusewitz v. Wyeth Supreme Court decision siding with drug companies, the Homeland Security Rider seeking to protect thimerosal maker Eli Lilly and CDC’s intimidation tactics against scientists such as Dr. Mark and David Geier and Prof. Richard Deth. Those chapters were apparently “too combustible” to keep as well, as was the word “Causative” that was taken out of the chapter title that formerly read “The Verstraeten Study – Causative Links between Thimerosal and Neurological Damage.”

Meanwhile, Age of Autism continues to ardently defend Kennedy, saying on its Facebook page: “If you’d like to piss in the cornflakes, find another bowl.”

It looks like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has already done that to his own bowl.

Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a Bachelor of Arts in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy and a 2013 graduate of The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services with a Master of Public Health in Epidemiology. He currently attends the University of Texas School of Public Health where he is studying for a Ph.D. in Epidemiology.