A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit that alleged that the State of California exceeded its powers when it passed a law removing all but medical exemptions to mandatory vaccination laws.
In June 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 277 into law, removing the ability of parents to claim religious belief exemptions to otherwise mandatory vaccination laws. In August 2016, a group filed a rambling 73-page pro se lawsuit (PDF) against individual legislators and even their spouses under a RICO and Clayton Act theory that they said could allow them to act as “private attorneys general” to address “racketeering activity.” This approach was very unusual and required a lengthy logical detour.
During the course of the litigation, the plaintiffs added a magistrate judge in the case to the list of defendants following an adverse ruling in which the magistrate had found that “Mandatory vaccination laws are within the scope of a state’s police power.”
On January 25, 2018, Judge Stephen Wilson dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it is closed.
Middleton v. Pan, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13254 (CD CA, Jan. 25, 2018)
3 thoughts on “Pro se “RICO” case against CA mandatory vaccination law dismissed”
If it helps, I explain the problems in the lawsuit in detail here.
Hi Dorit, Thank you so much for sharing your analysis of this, well, interesting . . . case.
Yes the lawsuit is clearly flawed, but so is so-called vaccine science. The heavy US vaccine schedule is wreaking havoc with the health of infant Americans. Every vaccine is an assault on their God-designed immune system – which includes the brain and it’s amazingly complex neurological/biochemical systems. Dr Russell Blaylock, a now retired neurosurgeon and visiting professor has been vehemently anti-vaccine for at least a decade and has published medical papers on the effects of the toxic and traumatic shocks to the brain from vaccines and other forces.
Comments are closed.