And Justice For the Vaxxed

Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed Battles Erupting in Courtrooms Across the Country

by Matt Hale

Battles are now erupting in Court rooms across the country related to whether or not the unvaxxed will be allowed in a courtroom. Worse than virtual Zoom trials, this trend threatens the entire justice system in the United States, and threatens to completely exclude due process for those who don’t get a jab.

Judges across the United States are starting to require jurors be vaccinated. This recently happened in Orange County California. In that case, the jurors are asked their vaccination status and the attorney’s stipulated- a legal term for agreed-to dismiss any juror who is “unvaccinated.” The agreement between the attorney’s was based on the risk of “unvaccinated people” getting the Delta variant and leading to a mistrial. This issue also came up in the Theranos trial. This led to the dismissal of jurors, who had not been vaccinated.

Its really not surprising to see the Judiciary following the vaccine mandate push. The Washington State Supreme Court recently ordered that it’s employee’s be vaccinated as well. In addition, the Court urged that the lower courts do the same. The same holds true for court systems across the country. This raises the obvious question as to whether or not a court requiring its employee’s to be vaccinated will rule against a mandate imposed by a governor. Do they really want to admit that they might be wrong?

Fights are erupting in courtrooms across the country between trial lawyers. In a recent event, a lawyer was trying to figure out how to get his opposing counsel excluded from the courtroom over his vaccination status. Some judges are ordering that everyone in the courtroom be vaccinated, including the lawyers. These orders are based on the same recycled facts that the unvaccinated are somehow a threat to the vaccinated. The article goes on to state, “Lawyers, parties and witnesses who can’t be vaccinated for medical reason must provide a doctor’s note, a negative COVID-19 test, and wear a mask in the courtroom.” Maybe they should also wear a scarlet letter.

The 7th Circuit and the 10th Circuits are now requiring complete vaccination status for in-person courtroom appearances. ⅷ ⅸ Lawyers who are not vaccinated must appear remotely. So, to recap, a lawyer who refuses to get jabbed must appear remotely because they are unvaccinated, while their opponent is able to by physically present. If you have ever been in a Federal Court of Appeals courtroom, there is no way that any of the litigants or their attorney’s come within six feet of any of the judges. The courtrooms are large, and the judges sit high above behind the bench. Would you want to hire a lawyer, who will be excluded from the courtroom?

Whether everyone in a courtroom will be required to be vaccinated will have an impact on the entire judicial system of the United States. It is not inconceivable that every misdemeanor court will require everyone to be vaccinated or appear remotely. As was cited in a previous article about virtual trials, studies clearly show that bail increased for those defendants who appeared remotely. It will be assumed that anyone appearing remotely will not only be guilty, but will also be part of the “filthy unvaccinated”, for whom justice will be met out by the “fully vaccinated.” I cannot imagine a more unfair system. In short, we have to ask, will justice be reserved only for those with a vax pass?



ⅱ. Id.





ⅶ. Id.



ⅹ .