Jackson Jambalaya

Just say no, to rGO!

Yet not a damn word on state and county mandates !! Not a damn word !! WTF is wrong with these jerks ? Folks are being mentally bullied over this crap ! To the polls we go ..voting out EVERY elected who stood by while out of control mandates continued for no reason other than someone got some fed dollars.

This is certainly hypocritical: a woman can't choose whether to carry a fetus to term without the Government's assistance, but everybody gets to choose whether they take a vaccine in the midst of a global pandemic. GIVE ME A BREAK, MS. FITCH.

I thought she was suing China?

Sid Salter's comments about MSU employees says it all. Some of you sheep deserve what's coming . I am NOT A LESSER BEING because I believe in the right to choose. The fed mandates used MONEY as it's tool ! Damn people...can you not see ?

I wonder how many unvaccinated people are out there that receive money from the government IE SS, Medicare,unemployment, welfare, food stamps etc. I'm certainly not advocating this but wouldn't they be the easiest to "mandate" of all ? Would that group include too many of the Dem "core voters" ? This gets more odorous every day.

She’s a stupid one for sure.

She sues to overturn American democracy and now she has a hard time finding all the Supreme Court cases which allow for vaccination requirements.

Maybe her boy toy Nick who is all up in her communication department filed this for her?

That would make make sense….cause he ain’t a lawyer.

3:25 Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. Asinine post of the month!

IHL voted not to mandate the covid shot. Then two weeks later when they learned the Feds might withhold a couple hundred million in grant money, the IHL voted to mandate shots for all employees of state universities. So much for values and integrity. Money always trumps.

I have never been a fan of Lynn Fitch. But I am starting to warm up to her.

What manner of psychosis must a person suffer to make the equivocation that 3:25 and 3:53 make between killing the unborn and forcing healthy people to submit to an experimental injection that has so been shown to not prevent the virus, not prevent the spread of the virus, and MAY only marginally help those with co-morbidities?

Definitely spiritually ill, if not mentally ill.

@3:42 pm
Could you post all the Supreme Court rulings that say vax mandates are okay?
Case names, rulings, pleading attorneys, judges votes, majority votes, who wrote the majority opinion snd who wrote the dissenting opinion and what not…

Seriously, I did not know, and would appreciate the information and education.
Thanks in advance.

She needs to look closer to home. Seems the universities are requiring useless jabs to keep working there.

Stupid twit.

I can assure you all Fitch did was sign the letter. She doesn’t have a clue re the legality of a mandate. As an aside, public school children in MS are mandated to have 8 different vaccines. Why is this one so different?

4:21

You have the google?

Use it and read….super fun.

Google? Don't all you lawyers have access to Westlaw and several other case reporters?

Seriously, I did not know the Google and I really am not an undereducated troll antivaxxer. Fitch is my hero. She will send AG Agents to disarm North Korea, too. You go gurl.

5:43 - Of course you know we know you have no idea how to answer the question.

I ain't using 'the google' to answer this either, but, has Fitch come out against the employers (including state employers) who have issued mandates. Of course she did nothing but sign a faxed copy of a copy...just like KF copied and pasted a copy and paste.

Time for somebody with a set to spill the beans on Nick. Ain't got 'em? Fine. Don't pretend you do.

As to your 'aside', 5:42, it hinges on who's doing the mandating. The feds are not mandating school vaccines in the Sip. Although I'm against the fed mandate, this is nothing but pie in the face of the Biden regime, sliced 21 ways, if you count Lynette.

Biden, being an ice cream guy, pays no never-mind to pie.

3:40

I don’t care who you are, that was funny.

Bravo!

The "universities" have an inherent communist lean, so of course they lockstep.

Has it occurred to anyone that all Lynn Fitch does is jump on other AGs' bandwagons? From the China suit (a thing floated by Missouri--but is Missouri still trying to sue China) to this thing, all Fitch does is parrot somebody else's line. Her comments on these issues do not seem to be her own thought-out ideas, just soundbites taken from others. As if she gets all of her political and legal acumen from talk radio. She just repeats positions and conclusions, but has anyone ever heard her actually explain or defend them? It is true that her office is handling the abortion case that will be argued in December in the USSCT. But she inherited that case from the last AG. And it may be that Fitch has screwed that up well, if it was she who decided to make the case about "overruling Roe v. Wade" instead of the issue the USSCT actually granted review on. People need to understand that Fitch has never tried a case, never argued a case, never had much of anything to do with the law beyond getting a law degree. She is out of her depth on almost everything the AG's office handles, and, stupidly, she fired or ran off most of the staff who knew what they were doing. So now her staff is explaining that they don't have the expertise to handle matters that the AG used to routinely handle.

8:15 pm

Indeed she did fire all the experienced litigators.

She tried to hire some back “part time” to train the new hires who have no idea what they are doing.

She’s not had much success.

But for the record what Rs wanted was a valid lap dog who would not sue big corporations.

Hood brought in ten of Millions in fees (mind you be cut and pasted a lot as well) and the legislature got to spend those funds when money got tight.

No more.

I will say she has some particular taste in exotic movie star body guards she hires and puts in her office who are not lawyers…..keeps it spicy it seems.

8:15

I was told that the last two AGs supported her because they thought she would keep that litigation gravy train going. It may be that the "R"'s supported her because they thought she would not, but then again they would have had a better bet in that regard with Andy Taggert (who entered the primary too late) and maybe Mark Baker. But from what I hear, the "R"'s aren't too happy about her, know that she is an airhead basically, but they will support her, at least publically. You know, like family supports a member who just ain't that good.

Fitch had an easy time in the general election since the Democrats somehow supposed that the director of the State ACLU was a viable candidate for AG. However, I do hope for the State's sake that the "R"s will challenge her in the primary next election cycle. This individual should not have become AG and needs to be replaced with someone who at least understands the work of the office and the need to have lawyers who can do it. But, hey, they say that Fitch wants to be governor, so maybe she'll run against Tater and the problem will take care of itself!

Here is a very good article on COVID-19, from of all places, Yahoo:

news.yahoo.com/florida-now-has-americas-lowest-covid-rate-does-ron-de-santis-deserve-credit-090013615.html

It isn't quite this simple and straightforward from a medical perspective, but as general information for the public, it is surprisingly accurate and balanced, at least in broad terms. People should be very careful with reading or quoting out-of-context snippets from it. The fact - yes, the fact - remains that from a medical/virology/public health standpoint, vaccines are a safe and effective way to vastly reduce the effects of COVID-19. Time will tell but I strongly suspect that the politicians who have taken strong anti-vax or even anti-mandate, anti-mask, etc. positions have all but ended their national political viability and many have damaged their in-state political future.

Are there any new developments on her hissy fit with her father's widow? Fitch isn't even competent to handle that little snafu, let alone sue the government over vaccine mandates. Oh, and by the way, is she vaxed? Was her daddy vaxed? I bet the answer is yes to both questions.

@4:21, The purple-haired, social-reject, antifa fondrenite will probably say Jacobson vs Mass, but they would be wrong.

It was a local mandate and it allowed for a fine vs taking the poison

Lynn Fitch
For Mississippi

This was her campaign sign. I assume it's generic so she can use it again for something else.

Regarding the eight other vaccines required for enrollment in schools and universities, the difference between the coronavirus vaccine and those eight is that those other eight have long-standing safety profiles that have been established over years or decades of use.

There is no long-term safety data associated with the coronavirus vaccines. This may not be important to some people here but it is definitely important to other individuals.

Oh good God, not another "debate" about whether or not mandates are Constitutional. First and foremost, until the Supreme Court of the United States grants cert or review and then issues a decision (not an "opinion," a _decision_) finding otherwise, it is legal and enforceable by the Federal Courts. That aspect is a cold, hard fact.

As to what such a SCOTUS decision might say and why, anyone who is an attorney can easily hop on Westlaw and anyone who isn't can go to Google Scholar, FindLaw, etc. and search to find the numerous cases that touch upon the subject. Just like the COVID-19 debate between laypeople who think they know or understand medicine and doctors who actually do and can cite in support, specifically-educated lawyers, especially those with Constitutional practice experience, who do know what they are talking about and can cite in support largely lean toward such mandates, in general, being Constitutional as long as there are some narrow exceptions, particularly religious exemptions for those who can demonstrate pre-mandate adherence to that religion. While laypeople (or even lawyers with no such experience) who don't have a clue about Constitutional law are certainly entitled to their opinion, unless they can make a properly-cited legal argument to support it, it is meaningless in a debate on the topic. Perhaps of note as to Mississippi law and mandates, the MSSC eliminated religious exemption for the state's numerous vaccine mandates long ago.

As for the occasional commenter who claims to be and actually is a "practicing Mississippi attorney," out of the last 200 or so members of the both appellate courts and among current and recent chancellors, there are maybe 3-5 justices and 1 - ONE - chancellor that might be considered "learned" (I'll allow that I don't _know_ all of the chancellors but I am generally familiar with much of the work-product via the appellate record). The state court judges are much the same. As to the attorneys, there are maybe 50 in the entire state that garner any respect outside the state but those who do are damned good. There are a lot of decent honest people, who could and would be better given the opportunity, in the above groupings but, well, Mississippi. There are also a fair number of ignorant sorry sumbitches who aren't fit to have bar cards, including on the appellate courts. Again, well, Mississippi. The bottom line is that merely offering your status as a practicing Mississippi attorney as the complete support for your legal opinion is about like saying you are the most experienced Bugatti mechanic in Batesville and you've never actually been convicted - not even once - of a crime.

@9:48, they do now, but did not when first mandated. In any event, the safety data accumulated to date re the Coronavirus vaccines is overwhelmingly positive. The opposition to mandates is based on politics, not medicine.

@11:40, In what fucking world (especially the world of vaccines or any other medication) is 10 months considered long term safety insight? Did you see the FDA review? 6 hours in, one literally said "we wont know how safe they are until we begin giving them." You good with that for your child? This is RNA poison that is causing heart inflammation and blood clots in HEALTHY people, especially the young. For a virus that poses very little risk for adults and near zero for children.

The opposition to mandates is due to the fact that NO medication should be forced on ANYONE with the threat of losing their livelihood.

This is absolute madness. This is a fuckin cult.

My cat is throwing up right now He can read.

I'm opposed to: speed limits, seat belts, stop lights, food labels, limits on alcohol content, ordinances that restrict what I can have in my own yard (i.e. broken down autos), licensing of all types, ordinances that limit how much noise I can make on my property, requirements that medical professionals wear masks when performing surgery on me, regulation of aircraft, uninvited inspections of restaurants, and law enforcement of all types. I have my rights and they should be respected.

12:36PM wrote, "This is RNA poison that is causing heart inflammation and blood clots in HEALTHY people..."

I'm not 11:40, but no. It isn't "RNA," it's mRNA, which are different things. If you don't know the difference, you cannot possibly know or understand anything about them or the subject.

Second, the very mild myo- and pericarditis that occurs a tiny, tiny number of young males isn't because of the "COVID-19" aspect of the vaccine, it is a result of the immune system reaction, so some of that very small number will have incidents regardless of COVID-19 or vaccines (COVID-19 or others). There is a slight risk that a COVID-19 vaccine will be a trigger, but again, it could be anything else. However, the risk for those rare few susceptible people is greater from the viruses and the diseases they cause, in this case COVID-19, than with the vaccines, including these, intended to immunize people against them. In other words, it is a simple medical fact that a tiny number of people are susceptible to mild cases from ANY trigger to their immune system, and if they are in that category, the bigger the trigger, the worse their reaction, and the diseases are a much bigger trigger than vaccines.

Instead of taking bits and pieces of misunderstood information from people who do not know what they are babbling about, and further misunderstanding it yourself, why don't some of you actually do some reading about the underlying medical facts, exclusive of the COVID-19 and vaccine aspects, and you might - MIGHT - develop some understanding of how COVID-19 and vaccines fit into the overall clinical picture. No, you won't suddenly become doctors but at least you won't sound so foolish and won't do any harm to others, if that matters at all to you.

12:36 - well, everything has some risk, but if you have choices it is best to take what is associated with a lower risk. And for that the data is crystal clear by now: vaccinating wins. (Hint: some statistical knowledge helps)

Btw, the f-word gets old. You have of course the right to use it, but I have the right to judge you by it.

12:36PM wrote, "This is RNA poison that is causing heart inflammation and blood clots in HEALTHY people..."

I'm not 11:40, but no. It isn't "RNA," it's mRNA, which are different things. If you don't know the difference, you cannot possibly know or understand anything about them or the subject.

Second, the very mild myo- and pericarditis that occurs a tiny, tiny number of young males isn't because of the "COVID-19" aspect of the vaccine, it is a result of the immune system reaction, so some of that very small number will have incidents regardless of COVID-19 or vaccines (COVID-19 or others). There is a slight risk that a COVID-19 vaccine will be a trigger, but again, it could be anything else. However, the risk for those rare few susceptible people is greater from the viruses and the diseases they cause, in this case COVID-19, than with the vaccines, including these, intended to immunize people against them. In other words, it is a simple medical fact that a tiny number of people are susceptible to mild cases from ANY trigger to their immune system, and if they are in that category, the bigger the trigger, the worse their reaction, and the diseases are a much bigger trigger than vaccines.

Instead of taking bits and pieces of misunderstood information from people who do not know what they are babbling about, and further misunderstanding it yourself, why don't some of you actually do some reading about the underlying medical facts, exclusive of the COVID-19 and vaccine aspects, and you might - MIGHT - develop some understanding of how COVID-19 and vaccines fit into the overall clinical picture. No, you won't suddenly become doctors but at least you won't sound so foolish and won't do any harm to others, if that matters at all to you.

Jacobsen v Massachusetts (U.S. Sup.Ct 1905) said a government can impose a vaccine mandate as a function of police powers. It has been upheld many times, e.g., polio.

For those interested, read the SCOTUS docs on the denial of injuctive relief, _Does 1-3 v. Mills_, October 29, 2021, and note that Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas dissented based on the lack of religious exemption, with Kavanaugh and Barrett concurring on the denial of relief. There is no way to know absolutely what the Court intends with this, but I'd say those who observe the Court certainly see the hint: with some reasonable (medical, religious) exemption, mandates are unanimously good to do with this Court. Without one it'll still _probably_ fly albeit with dissent...but don't get too cute. And again I'll point out that the MSSC did away with religious exemptions because of what it saw as the overarching public health interest in the state's numerous vaccination mandates many years ago.

Court cases aside - about which Fitch knows nothing - you people had a chance to vote to put a lawyer in this position, but, for whatever reason, chose a different course.

Fitch, who has never practiced in a courtroom, has bounced from agency to agency (propelled by Haley), never understanding the mission or policies of any of them, has now fired any employee with substantial legal ability in her current agency and some of you fools continue to click your heels regarding her existence in the group who runs this state?

If you don't like Taggart, that's fine, but...My God...Fitch?