In today’s school landscape, children need parental consent for virtually everything. Kids need a parent’s signature to see a movie at school, to go on a field trip, or even to be administered Tylenol for a headache.

Yet, in New York, one teacher figured it wouldn’t matter whether they had parental consent or not. They jabbed a minor student with the COVID-19 vaccine, knowing good and well that they were doing it without consent.

Obviously, this teacher is in one heap of trouble. So, why did they risk their career over it?

There are so many questions about this story, but let’s start from the top.

A high school science teacher from Long Island, New York by the name of Laura Russo gave a dose of the Johnson & Johnson shot to a 17-year-old male student. And it was done inside of her home.

Russo told him, “You’ll be fine, I hope.”

Russo isn’t a medical professional. She most certainly isn’t authorized to give out the vaccine, and that it was done inside of her home raises even more questions. It’s not quite clear how she got her hands on the vaccine.

There’s another issue, too. Johnson & Johnson isn’t approved for anyone under the age of 18. If he was going to get vaccinated, it should have been Pfizer or Moderna.

The student wanted the vaccine, but his parents were against it. This means that he went around his parents and, somehow, asked a teacher to help him out.

The problem with all of this is two-fold. One, the teacher should have known this was wrong. Two, the parents are in the dark about it all, which means that if he had a bad reaction, they wouldn’t have known about his vaccine status.

WNBC reported from Dr. Aaron Glatt of Mount Sinai that besides this being illegal, “it’s just not a smart thing to do. An authorized, licensed professional should be providing vaccines to know how to give them properly to make sure if there’s a complication that can be dealt with immediately and very efficiently.”

Russo may have helped to vaccinate someone, but she’s also facing a felony charge as a result of it. She could see up to four years behind bars because she was unauthorized to practice medicine.

We also have to ask the question as to why a male student was inside of a female teacher’s home. Apparently, no one really wants to ask that question. One felony charge is probably enough for Russo.

The school has removed Russo from the classroom. Meanwhile, the Nassau Police Commissioner is still looking at how she was able to come into possession of the vaccine. This is crucial – if one person can get their hands on a vaccine, others are likely to be able to do the same.

At the age of 17, the student should have just waited until he turned 18. And that’s the advice that the teacher should have offered, too.

Now, the only thing that we can hope for is that there are no negative effects of giving the J&J shot to a minor. As for what the parents are going to do, they certainly have all that they need to launch a full lawsuit against Russo as well as the entire school district.

We’ve seen enough of teachers and schools deciding what’s best for our kids but deciding on a child’s vaccination status is going entirely too far.

(RepublicanWire.org) – Just moments ago, the Supreme Court ordered expedited oral argument on the Biden Administration’s vaccine mandate cases to be held on January 7th.

In an unusual move, the Supreme Court set an expedited oral argument on the emergency stay requests in the Biden Administration’s vaccine mandate cases – both the employer mandate challenged by numerous petitioners, including by the ACLJ on behalf of our client The Heritage Foundation, and the health worker mandate.

The ACLJ filed an emergency stay request with the Supreme Court on Saturday night in an effort to block the Biden Administration’s mandate that private employers of 100 or more employees be required to force their workers to obtain and prove that they have received the COVID-19 vaccine. This mandate not only impinges on the constitutional rights of employees but creates onerous burdens on employers, including enforcing the mandate, storing private medical information of all employees’ vaccine status, and conducting onsite weekly COVID testing. Quite simply, it is an unconstitutional federal power grab.

As we’ve explained. .. :

[T]he ACLJ is representing The Heritage Foundation in a new lawsuit challenging President Biden’s vaccine mandate for all employers with 100 or more employees, regardless of whether they work remotely. The Biden mandate also directs larger businesses to require employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccine or undergo regular testing and mask-wearing.

The mandate has been promulgated by the Biden Administration’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). After OSHA issued this mandate, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal temporarily blocked it. However, all legal challenges were then consolidated in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On Friday, Dec. 17th, the Sixth Circuit reinstated President Biden’s vaccine mandate . . . .

In response, our legal team immediately filed an Emergency Application for Stay of Agency Action Pending Judicial Review and Petition for a Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment on behalf of The Heritage Foundation to defeat this unconstitutional mandate.

Not only is this mandate unconstitutional, it could actually put more employees at risk for exposure to COVID-19 and its variants, as it requires regular testing, administered by a designated employee, requiring that person to come into close proximity with the employee who may or may not test positive. Not to mention the added financial burden it is to these employers, many of which barely survived the pandemic and enforced lockdowns that ensued during 2020.

As stated in our emergency filing:

“If upheld, the vaccine mandate will fundamentally change the relationship between employer and employee by forcing employers to compel and regulate the personal medical decisions of their employees. The vaccine mandate will also impose significant financial and other burdens on private employers and result in predictable economic chaos.”

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court ordered the Biden Administration to file a response by December 30th. With oral argument at the Supreme Court in these critical cases now set for less than two weeks away, our legal team will be working tirelessly through the end of the year to prepare for the next round of legal arguments as we urge the Supreme Court to strike down this draconian and unconstitutional mandate. We will keep you updated as this critical case progresses.