One of the most outrageous stories that we covered during the COVID-19 pandemic was how schools across the country forcibly jabbed children with the mRNA vaccines without the consent of either the children or their parents. One of those teens was Tanner Smith, who was a 14-year-old football player at Western Guilford High School in North Carolina.
Tanner was forcibly jabbed at his school. The North Carolina Supreme Court has finally given Tanner’s family some good news. They can sue the school district and the clinic that violated Tanner’s rights.
Back in August 2021, Tanner’s family received a letter from the Guilford Board of Education. Tanner and his football teammates may have come into contact with a COVID-19 “cluster.” For the safety of the players, the letter stated that the school district was holding a free COVID testing clinic with the Old North State Medical Society.
Tanner’s stepfather drove him to school for the free clinic. When he got there, Tanner was surprised to learn that the clinic was also jabbing his teammates with the experimental mRNA shots. He informed them that he was just there for a free COVID test and that he didn’t want the jab.
The clinic tried to call his mom to get her verbal consent over the phone to give him the shot. They were unable to reach her and they didn’t bother to ask his stepfather, who was waiting in the car outside. Tanner let the clinic staff know that he did not want the shot and he did not have a signed permission slip from his parents, who also did not want him to receive the shot. He was just there for a COVID test.
“Give it to him anyway,” said one of the A-holes working at the clinic.
The school district and the clinic committed battery against the 14-year-old and gave him a Pfizer jab without his consent or his parents’ consent. They violated the constitutional and parental rights of Tanner’s mom and dad. And they the boy’s bodily autonomy.
This set off a years-long court battle that every American should care about. It’s an important question. Do public schools have the authority to forcibly administer medicine to your children without your knowledge or consent?
To most Americans, this just seems like common sense. We don’t want schools experimenting on our kids with untested medicines any more than we want them secretly transitioning our children without our knowledge or consent.
The initial lawsuit from the family was tossed out. The North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld that decision, saying that the family can’t sue the school district or the clinic that forcibly jabbed Tanner.
Even though the Court of Appeals ruled that the actions of the clinic and the school were “egregious,” they found that the family didn’t have standing to sue under the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act).
North Carolina state law requires written consent from the parents before a school or health clinic can administer any vaccine to a child. But the courts held that the PREP Act preempts the state law.
The family appealed the case to the North Carolina Supreme Court and received a favorable decision last week. The justices ruled that because the family is suing for their constitutional and parental rights—and not for tort damages—the school district and the medical clinic don’t have immunity from the PREP Act.
Tanner’s family is not trying to sue for monetary damages. They’re suing because they believe the clinic and the school district violated their rights. If they prevail, it will set a legal standard for all the other parents in North Carolina for the next time some fake pandemic comes along. Schools and doctors should not be allowed to forcibly vaccinate children against the parents’ will just because the Democrat Party is flexing its authoritarian muscles.
Chief Justice Paul Newby wrote in the majority decision that North Carolina parents have the right to refuse forced, nonmandatory medical treatment for their child. Two of the justices wrote in a separate opinion that the federal PREP Act is too broad to begin with and provides too much immunity to medical professionals.
The one liberal justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court objected to the majority opinion and feels that parents should not have the right to refuse consent for vaccines. That perfectly sums up the liberal mindset when it comes to vaccines, don’t you think?
