Ninth Circuit Affirms Montana's Medical Freedom Lawsuit Victory
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 3 hours ago
**Victory for Medical Freedom: Ninth Circuit Upholds Montana's Vaccine Law**
In a significant ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reaffirmed the rights of individuals to make their own medical choices by upholding Montana's House Bill 702 (HB 702), which protects citizens from discrimination based on their vaccination status in healthcare settings.
This decision comes as a breath of fresh air for those who have long resisted overreaching federal mandates imposed during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
In 2021, Montana's HB 702 emerged as a robust response to what many viewed as a serious federal overstep, curbing the government's authority in personal medical decisions. The law explicitly makes it unlawful for any entity—be it a government agency, employer, or otherwise—to deny services or employment to individuals based on whether they choose to be vaccinated or possess immunity passports.
The Ninth Circuit dismantled arguments from plaintiffs, including healthcare providers who claimed the law conflicted with federal regulations. Judge Daniel Bress noted that their claims were speculative and not substantiated by the text or intent of existing federal laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act).
Rather than finding conflict with federal law, the Ninth Circuit emphasized that HB 702 maintains the balance between safeguarding public health and protecting individual rights and privacy. The law permits healthcare facilities to request vaccination information voluntarily while ensuring that no individual can be coerced into revealing their status or receiving a vaccine under emergency use authorization.
Critics had argued that the bill would lead to unequal treatment across healthcare settings. However, the court dismissed this claim, affirming Montana's right to establish regulations that reflect varying levels of risk and public health needs.
This ruling signals a trend of increasing pushback against authoritarian vaccine mandates and reinforces the critical notion that medical choices reside with the individual, not the government. The court's decision is a notable example of states exercising their rights to protect individual freedoms, a principle that resonates deeply within conservative values.
As more individuals across the nation demand personal liberties and question the government's role in public health, this ruling sets a pivotal precedent for similar legislation in other states. The Ninth Circuit's affirmation of HB 702 could embolden more states to stand up against federal overreach and pave the way for greater autonomy in medical decision-making moving forward.
Sources:
redstate.com
thegatewaypundit.com
headlineusa.com
In a significant ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reaffirmed the rights of individuals to make their own medical choices by upholding Montana's House Bill 702 (HB 702), which protects citizens from discrimination based on their vaccination status in healthcare settings.
This decision comes as a breath of fresh air for those who have long resisted overreaching federal mandates imposed during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
In 2021, Montana's HB 702 emerged as a robust response to what many viewed as a serious federal overstep, curbing the government's authority in personal medical decisions. The law explicitly makes it unlawful for any entity—be it a government agency, employer, or otherwise—to deny services or employment to individuals based on whether they choose to be vaccinated or possess immunity passports.
The Ninth Circuit dismantled arguments from plaintiffs, including healthcare providers who claimed the law conflicted with federal regulations. Judge Daniel Bress noted that their claims were speculative and not substantiated by the text or intent of existing federal laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act).
Rather than finding conflict with federal law, the Ninth Circuit emphasized that HB 702 maintains the balance between safeguarding public health and protecting individual rights and privacy. The law permits healthcare facilities to request vaccination information voluntarily while ensuring that no individual can be coerced into revealing their status or receiving a vaccine under emergency use authorization.
Critics had argued that the bill would lead to unequal treatment across healthcare settings. However, the court dismissed this claim, affirming Montana's right to establish regulations that reflect varying levels of risk and public health needs.
This ruling signals a trend of increasing pushback against authoritarian vaccine mandates and reinforces the critical notion that medical choices reside with the individual, not the government. The court's decision is a notable example of states exercising their rights to protect individual freedoms, a principle that resonates deeply within conservative values.
As more individuals across the nation demand personal liberties and question the government's role in public health, this ruling sets a pivotal precedent for similar legislation in other states. The Ninth Circuit's affirmation of HB 702 could embolden more states to stand up against federal overreach and pave the way for greater autonomy in medical decision-making moving forward.
Sources:
redstate.com
thegatewaypundit.com
headlineusa.com
Latest News