Court Rules You Can Be Forced To Wear Masks

In a blow to freedom and science, a federal appeals court on Monday ruled against New Jersey residents who alleged they'd been punished for refusing to wear masks.

A group of parents claimed that they'd been retaliated against for not complying with masking rules at school board meetings during the COVID pandemic. Those parents had filed suit on the grounds that not wearing a mask should constitute protected free speech.

In two related suits, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the case should be sent back to a lower court, with the other ruling saying the plaintiff hadn't shown she was retaliated against. Most concerning though, was the federal court's reasoning behind the ruling. 

"A question shadowing suits such as these is whether there is a First Amendment right to refuse to wear a protective mask as required by valid health and safety orders put in place during a recognized public health emergency. Like all courts to address this issue, we conclude there is not," the court wrote.

Not only did they unquestioningly, and inaccurately, accept that masks are "protective," but they appealed to the apparently limitless, endless "emergency" authority.

Anthony Fauci must be thrilled.

WASHINGTON - Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, adjusts a Washington Nationals protective mask while arriving to a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on June 30, 2020. (Photo by Al Drago - Pool/Getty Images)

Inaccurate Claims Of Masking Efficacy Causing Permanent Damage

It's the height of absurdity for courts, or anyone for that matter, to still claim that masks work. The evidence base disproving universal masking or mask mandates is overwhelming. Multiple studies have shown that masks don't work, and the highest quality evidence review available also showed that masks are likely ineffective at stopping respiratory viruses.

READ: New Study Confirms That Masks Likely Don't Work To Stop COVID

But federal judges, like so many others, have outsourced their thinking to incompetent "experts" who committed to misleading the public about masks once it became politically convenient. There's no interest in examining the evidence or the data, just blind repetition of disproven narratives. 

Beyond the frustrating acceptance of inaccurate "expert" propaganda, it's frustrating to see the court rule that a recognized "public health emergency" seems to give government agencies, or even school boards, unlimited power and authority.

Does this mean that anytime a jurisdiction or governing body wants to compel behavior, they can simply declare an emergency and enforce whatever nonsensical rules they want, as long as they want to? 

That seems to be what this court believes should be the case, despite it being antithetical to America's founding principles. Apparently, those principles are easily discarded whenever there's an evidence-free mandate to be enforced.