Featured Image
U.S. Supreme CourtShutterstock

(LifeSiteNews) — The American Medical Association (AMA) has submitted an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court of the United States to uphold the Biden administration’s controversial COVID-19 injection mandate for large private businesses, arguing “[t]he only way to truly end this pandemic is to ensure widespread vaccination.”

In its brief the AMA – the largest professional association of physicians, residents, and medical students in the United States – asked the nation’s highest court not to block the Biden administration’s sweeping mandate which has been slammed with a bevy of legal challenges from states, companies, and religious groups.

The mandate, which would utilize the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to force companies with 100 or more employees to require their employees to get inoculated against COVID-19 or submit to frequent testing and other requirements, was temporarily stalled by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in November 2021 just days after it was published.

The rule is now set to take effect January 10, 2022 after the Fifth Circuit Court’s stay was dissolved by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit last month.

In its brief submitted to the Supreme Court, the AMA argued that the mandate should be allowed to take effect. To support its case, the AMA made a series of controversial claims about the safety, efficacy, and necessity of the experimental COVID-19 injections.

According to the AMA, the hastily-produced COVID-19 jabs are both safe and effective with efficacy ranging from 72% to just over 91%. The assertion comes despite widely available data indicating that the effectiveness of the injections actually disintegrates considerably over a short timeframe.

In November WebMD reported that the efficacy of the Moderna jabs had plunged from 89% effectiveness to 58% over six months, while the efficacy of Pfizer/BioNTech shots fell from 87% to 45%. Meanwhile the reported effectiveness of the Johnson & Johnson shots nosedived from 86% to 13%.

And the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently wrote in a press release, ”Data from South Africa and the United Kingdom demonstrate that vaccine effectiveness against infection for two doses of an mRNA vaccine is approximately 35%.”

“A COVID-19 vaccine booster dose restores vaccine effectiveness against infection to 75%,” the CDC continued.

The AMA went on to compare the experimental COVID-19 injections – which do not prevent vaccinated individuals from getting or spreading the virus – with measles vaccines, which the CDC says do stop both infection and transmission of disease.

The group also asserted that natural immunity (which studies show is more effective and durable than vaccinated immunity) is “not an adequate substitute for vaccination” since people may become ill or die after contracting the virus. Meanwhile, the AMA downplayed the risks posed by the experimental injections themselves, which have been implicated in over a million adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) including over 20,000 deaths.

Further, while arguing that “widespread vaccination” is “[t]he only way to truly end this pandemic” and that “COVID-19 presents a severe risk to public health,” the AMA admitted that “most people infected with the virus will experience mild to moderate symptoms.”

“This stunningly ignorant amicus brief, filed by medical organizations in favor of the OSHA vax mandate, is the end of the credibility of public health,” wrote Stanford University Medical School professor and epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya in a January 1 tweet.

“Is it really possible that scientists in those organizations are so unaware of the underlying science about which they write?” added Bhattacharya, who co-authored the October 2020 Great Barrington Declaration challenging the crippling COVID-19 mitigation strategies undertaken globally.

It’s unclear how much weight the Supreme Court will give to the AMA’s amicus brief asking it not to grant the stay requested by groups challenging the legitimacy of the OSHA mandate. Opponents of the rule argue that it exceeds the authority of the federal government and violates the U.S. Constitution.

The Court is scheduled to hear arguments against the mandate on Friday.

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.