Ninth Circuit Court Rules Correctly COVID-19 mRNA Injections Are Not Legitimate State Interest Due To Being A Treatment, Not A Preventative | This Is All We Need To DESTROY WHO & FDA

We can’t stop here with this huge win – this is way too close to being a lynchpin – This ruling ALMOST makes the core point that and now it can be made


Big Congrats to HFDF! IOJ is using this new ruling as evidence in our cases!


The court declined to give any deference to pronouncements by the CDC that the “COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.” As the court asked rhetorically, “safe and effective” for what? The majority pointed to HFDF’s allegation that CDC had changed the definition of “vaccine” in September 2021, striking the word “immunity” from that definition

IOJ is very happy to hear this ruling come out of the notoriously corrupt Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is well known to have the worst record for bad rulings that get overturned. We do NOT think this ruling will be overturned because it’s correct. In fact, it will help set precedent and is EXACTLY what we argued in our Nuremberg Hearing last year (which is set to make it’s way back into court shortly and now thankfully strengthened with this ruling that its a treatment, not a vaccine). Well done. Bravo. One step forward for taking the whole thing down.

IOJ will use this ruling against the WHO, and the whole cabal pronto.


Good job HFDF & Ninth Circuit! May JUSTICE PREVAIL!

This ruling, if we all use it right, can stop it everywhere.

Because the underlying argument cuts straight to key issues of JURISDICTION, that so far no court has addressed, despite many cases saying the same things. Somehow, ALL courts worldwide wiggled out of this argument when presented, but now a judicial circuit has recognized the realities laid out in the case.

IOJ’s non vaccine case is almost finished drafting and near ready to file, but now we will add a few more arguments and this new evidence & ruling from today.

Let’s take em down. Timing is right. IOJ is REALLY happy about how much this ruling will set our own case forward faster.

Blessings – Keep the faith! The courts still work – even 9th Circuit is apparently functioning in a big ruling.

Wonders never cease-IoJ


Official Press Release:


Health Freedom Defense Fund (HFDF), California Educators for Medical Freedom, and individual plaintiffs have won their appeal in the Ninth Circuit on  LAUSD’s Employee Covid Vaccination Mandate.

Health Freedom Defense Fund et. al have won a significant victory in the Ninth Circuit, which reversed dismissal of their lawsuit challenging the Los Angeles Unified School District’s (“LAUSD”) mandatory vaccination policy for all employees.

Reversing the decision of the Central District of California in Los Angeles, the Ninth Circuit majority held that, first, the case was not mooted by LAUSD’s rescission of the mandate after oral argument last September, 2023. The majority called out LAUSD’s gamesmanship for what it was – a bald-faced attempt at avoiding an adverse ruling by trying to create an issue of mootness.

Unfortunately for LAUSD, they had already done this once in the trial court. Applying the voluntary cessation doctrine, the majority doubted LAUSD’s sincerity in rescinding the mandate immediately after an unfavorable oral argument in September of last year.

On the merits, the majority ruled that the district court had misapplied the Supreme Court’s 1905 decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts when it dismissed LAUSD’s lawsuit on grounds that the mandate was rationally related to a legitimate state interest. In Jacobson, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a smallpox vaccination mandate because it related to “preventing the spread” of smallpox.

The majority, however, noted that HFDF had alleged in the lawsuit that the COVID jabs are not “traditional” vaccines because they do not prevent the spread of COVID-19 but only purport to mitigate COVID symptoms in the recipient. This, HFDF had alleged in its complaint, makes the COVID jab a medical treatment, not a vaccine.

The court recognized that mitigating symptoms rather than preventing the spread of disease “distinguishes Jacobson, thus presenting a different government interest.” Based on this reasoning, the majority disapproved the trial court’s contention that, even if the jabs do not prevent the spread, “Jacobson still dictates that the vaccine mandate is subject to, and survives, the rational basis test.”

The court held that “[t]his misapplies Jacobson,” which “did not involve a claim in which the compelled vaccine was ‘designed to reduce symptoms in the infected vaccine recipient rather than to prevent transmission and infection.”’ Jacobson does not, the majority concluded, extend to “forced medical treatment” for the benefit of the recipient.

The court declined to give any deference to pronouncements by the CDC that the “COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.” As the court asked rhetorically, “safe and effective” for what? The majority pointed to HFDF’s allegation that CDC had changed the definition of “vaccine” in September 2021, striking the word “immunity” from that definition. The court also noted HFDF’s citations to CDC statements that the vaccines do not prevent transmission, and that natural immunity is superior to the vaccines.

In a separate concurrence, Judge Collins wrote that the district court “further erred by failing to realize that [HFDF’s] allegations directly implicate a distinct and more recent line of Supreme Court authority” for the proposition that “a competent person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment[.]” Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Washington v. Glucksberg, Judge Collins noted that the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment is “entirely consistent with this Nation’s history and constitutional traditions,” and that HFDF’s allegations in this case “are sufficient to invoke that fundamental right.”

HFDF president, Leslie Manookian stated,

“The Ninth Circuit ruling today demonstrates that the court saw through LAUSD’s monkey business, and in so doing, it made clear that American’s cherished rights to self determination, including the sacred right of bodily autonomy in matters of health, are not negotiable. This is a great  triumph for the truth, decency, and what is right.”



Interest of Justice is FINALLY able to accept paid Substack subscriptions to help us pay for the complex global lawsuits to stop the covid vaccines and hold WHO and their cohorts responsible. Your monthly support will ensure Dr. Yeadon and other top experts get heard by a judge with a brilliant law team behind them.