FREE Now Foundation’s powerhouse legal team at Facts Law Truth Justice recently filed an appeal in their Santa Clara University (SCU) lawsuit, arguing that the September 2022 dismissal of their lawsuit was unfounded, an act of “abuse of judicial discretion.” This lawsuit centers around the fact that SCU permitted faculty and staff to obtain religious exemptions, but not students. The appeal also argues that SCU has no legal basis for continuing to enforce a Covid-19 vaccine requirement in light of evidence pointing to the fact that these shots do NOT stop transmission or infection.

Pictured below are attorneys Jessica Barsotti, Nicole Pearson, and Rita Barnett-Rose

by the FREE Now Foundation Team

On June 14, 2023, attorneys for Free Now Foundation (formerly Children’s Health Defense – California Chapter) and student plaintiffs Harlow Glenn and Lyle Kosinski filed their opening brief appealing the dismissal of their lawsuit against Santa Clara University (“SCU”) for their illegal COVID-19 student “vaccine” mandate.

In their opening brief, FNF attorneys argued that the September 13, 2022 dismissal of their lawsuit without leave to amend by Santa Clara superior court Judge Christopher Rudy, a graduate of SCU’s own law school, was an abuse of judicial discretion. Dismissing a complaint without giving any opportunity to amend a single cause of action is extremely unusual for a trial court, and Free Now Foundation’s attorneys believe this decision will be reversed on appeal.    

The initial lawsuit alleged sixteen causes of action against SCU arising from its unlawful COVID-19 student shot mandate, which required students to take experimental and non-FDA approved mRNA shots in order to attend or continue to attend SCU. SCU did not allow any religious exemptions to its student shot mandate, but allowed religious exemptions for faculty and staff. One of the student plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Harlow Glenn, submitted to the initial dose of an mRNA shot as required by SCU, but immediately suffered partial leg paralysis, urinary bleeding, all over body pain, and severe menstrual dysregulation. Several studies and Pfizer’s own clinical reports have now revealed that severe menstrual dysregulation is a known side effect of the mRNA shots,  an adverse impact which might indicate serious future fertility issues for an entire generation of college age women coerced into taking these experimental shots. (Please reference Dr. Naomi Wolf’s Substack and the Daily Clout Pfizer Book)

This appeal is particularly important given SCU’s strange insistence on continuing its student jab mandate, despite the fact that the shots admittedly do not stop infection or transmission and that the COVID-19 emergency has already been declared “over” by both federal and California authorities, removing all possible ethical justifications for these mandated medical interventions. Many colleges that had previously enacted a COVID student shot mandate in 2021 have now rescinded them, with only about 150 colleges stubbornly clinging to their unscientific student mandates. SCU remains one of these tragic outliers. On May 1, 2023, SCU announced that its students must now either prove that they have already taken three doses of the monovalent series (the original two-dose series, plus a third “booster” dose) or get the newest bivalent booster shot. This bivalent shot was the shot tested on a total of 8 mice, all of which contracted COVID after getting the shots. The bivalent booster is also believed by many scientists to be even more ineffective and harmful than the original monovalent series, leading to “negative efficacy” or an increased likelihood of contracting COVID after getting the shot. Notably, SCU’s announcement came a day after most students had committed to attending the school for fall 2023, likely foreclosing (by design) other college choices for any students who would have chosen otherwise had they known in advance. As even “The Science” clearly does not support mandating COVID-19 shots for anyone, particularly young healthy college age students, SCU appears to be committed to keeping this mandate in place not to legitimately protect the health of the SCU community, but rather out of spite for FNF’s lawsuit against it. SCU’s close and collusive relationship with Santa Clara County’s public health officials, and the County’s desire to be the most vaccinated county in the entire nation, as well as the millions of dollars of governmental COVID-19 relief funding with onerous conditions attached, also appears to be influencing the decision-makers at SCU. 

Now that FNF’s attorneys have filed their opening brief, SCU’s attorneys must submit their response.  Oral arguments are likely to be set for Winter 2023. A long process, to be sure, but one necessary to take to try to restore individual autonomy in the wake of unprecedented COVID overreach.

Please help FNF continue this important work in fighting against the illegal removal of informed consent for our cherished college students by making a donation to FNF’s legal fund.  

About the Author, Aria Morgan

Aria Morgan, a UCLA Honors graduate, is a passionate advocate for civil rights, medical freedom, and free expression. As the Director of Content at Free Now Foundation and former Managing Editor of Children’s Health Defense-CA, she brings a wealth of experience to her role. Beyond her role at Free Now Foundation, Aria is a health and wellness educator, helping individuals with injuries and chronic conditions. Her diverse professional experiences are underpinned by her unwavering commitment to protecting individual freedoms and promoting wellness for all.