Over 660,000 courses of Pfizer’s latest bonanza drug, Paxlovid, have been administered so far in the United States alone, with almost 200,000 in the last few weeks. Pfizer earned $1.5 billion from Paxlovid in the first quarter of 2022 and has great expectations for the drug’s future; <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/pfizer-ceo-constant-waves-covid-19-coronavirus-complacency-albert-bourla-2022-5" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">CEO Albert Bourla said </a>just a few days ago that he believes antiviral drugs will replace vaccines as the first-line defense against severe COVID and added that his company is “doubling down” on production.But does Paxlovid work?The first answer to that question is: yes, it does. It apparently does have some anti-viral activity and can help people recover without becoming seriously ill.The second answer is: yes, but… not for long. (In other words: no.)More and more reports are coming in of a phenomenon common enough to have been named: COVID rebound. Paxlovid is a drug designed to be administered over five treatment days. People experiencing rebound say that their symptoms returned almost immediately after concluding treatment, and when they took a COVID test it came back positive. The CDC has now <a href="https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2022/pdf/CDC_HAN_467.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">issued emergency guidance</a> on the rebound phenomenon.<blockquote>Official CDC Health Advisory on COVID-19 Rebound After Paxlovid Treatment... to update healthcare providers, public health departments, and the public on the potential of recurrence of COVID-19 or “COVID-19 rebound.”... rebound has been reported to occur between 2 and 8 days after initial recovery and is characterized by a recurrence of COVID-19 symptoms or a new positive viral test after having tested negative...</blockquote>Pfizer claims just one to two percent of those treated experience rebound and have admitted that it occurred during the drug’s clinical trials. Rebound after treatment was even described in <a href="https://www.fda.gov/media/155194/download?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Pfizer’s submission to the FDA</a> when seeking approval in December of 2021; interestingly, it was omitted from Pfizer’s <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2118542?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">New England Journal of Medicine </a>paper, and therefore, the general public had no way of learning of it.In an <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-05-04/pfizer-s-advice-for-when-paxlovid-isn-t-enough-take-more" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">interview</a> conducted on May 3, Bourla appeared to blame those experiencing rebound for not being strong enough to complete the job his drug started:<blockquote>Paxlovid does what it has to do: it reduces the viral load. Then your body is supposed to do the job. [If it doesn’t] then you give a second course, like you do with antibiotics, and that’s it.</blockquote>A day later, the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/news-events-human-drugs/fda-updates-paxlovid-health-care-providers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">FDA issued a response</a> of sorts, noting that “there is no evidence of benefit at this time for a longer course of treatment (e.g., 10 days rather than the 5 days recommended in the Provider Fact Sheet for Paxlovid) or repeating a treatment course of Paxlovid in patients with recurrent COVID-19 symptoms following completion of a treatment course.”“There is no evidence of benefit at this time for a longer course of treatment,” said FDA Office of Infections Diseases Director John Farley, “or for repeating a treatment course of Paxlovid.”However, not to worry, Dr. Fauci may be coming to the rescue. Several weeks ago he <a href="https://www.biospace.com/article/pfizer-nih-in-talks-to-begin-study-of-longer-paxlovid-dosing-regimen/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">announced</a> that the National Institutes of Health are already in discussion with Pfizer regarding conducting trials for longer courses of Paxlovid – to prevent rebound.Indeed, the rebound phenomenon is garnering an inordinate amount of media attention considering that officially, it only affects one to two percent of people who take the drug. Anecdotal reports, however, indicate that rebound is far more widespread than that, and a closer study of the Pfizer trial results suggests that the one to two percent cited is a cunning manipulation of the numbers.Twelve people in the trials were documented as experiencing rebound, apparently out of the 1,120 people in the study cohort (those who took Paxlovid rather than a placebo). But only 97 people had their virus levels tested subsequently by PCR. Twelve out of these 97 gives a rate of 12.3 percent. Based on informal polls, the figure is probably far higher, even approaching 30 percent or more.Why might this be happening?Aside from Bourla’s “explanation,” <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-03/pfizer-says-patients-who-relapse-after-covid-pill-can-take-more" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Yale University immunologist Akiko Iwasaki </a>suggested a reason. “If you start treating the patients very early during the infection, they may not generate much of an immune response to the virus,” she said, because Paxlovid shuts down production of viral proteins, the very proteins that the immune system responds to.But there are other possible explanations. How many of those experiencing rebound are vaccinated against COVID? You might think that’s an irrelevant question; after all, the drug was already tested in clinical trials and presumably the effect of vaccination was controlled for or at least studied.It’s not irrelevant, though, because Paxlovid has never been tested on vaccinated people. Correction: Pfizer has never released any trial results for the effects of Paxlovid on vaccinated people. Has the FDA asked Pfizer to correct this seeming oversight? Apparently not.<a href="https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/did-pfizer-know-that-paxlovid-will?s=r" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Vaccinated people were excluded</a> from Pfizer’s initial Paxlovid trials. In December, Pfizer announced that it was enrolling participants in a follow-up study for people not considered at high-risk of developing severe COVID. A few months later, they quietly altered the eligibility criteria for trial participants, barring anyone who had received a COVID shot in the prior 12 months.Are vaccinated people more likely to “rebound” into COVID infection?Or, more pointedly, are vaccinated people more likely not to respond to Paxlovid at all?On June 1, 2022, researchers from the Israeli Clalit Health Fund, the largest health insurer in Israel, published extremely worrying <a href="https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1705061/v1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">data</a> related to Paxlovid's efficacy. For those over the age of 65, they found, Paxlovid reduced hospitalization by 67 percent and COVID-related mortality by 81 percent, significant figures though not quite as impressive as the numbers Pfizer presented to the FDA and the general public. However, for those between the ages of 40 and 64, the reduction in hospitalization rates was just 22 percent, and COVID-related mortality rates actually increased, by 64 percent.The researchers also divided the data according to “immunity” status. Unfortunately, their categories are somewhat blurry, given that they defined “immune” as two or more shots, or prior COVID infection, or both. Those presumed not to be immune were people with one or no shots and no documented prior infection. (All the same, it is certainly refreshing to see authorities recognizing natural immunity as equivalent to vaccine-induced.)Analyzed this way, Paxlovid still appeared beneficial for those over the age of 65, but for those “with prior immunity,” the reduction in hospitalization rates dropped to just 60 percent. &nbsp;(Those without immunity saw a 86 percent drop.)For those between 40 and 64, however, people with prior immunity were 18 percent more likely to be hospitalized if they took Paxlovid, as opposed to 79 percent less likely if they were “immune.”Could this be why Pfizer chose to confine their clinical trials to the unvaccinated?But even for vaccine-naïve trial participants, the presentation of the results provokes a good deal of skepticism. The “fact” that Paxlovid reduces the risk of hospitalization or death by 89 percent compared with placebo was all most people noticed in the media’s portrayal of this drug. How did Pfizer come up with that stunning figure?There were just over 2,000 people enrolled in the trial, 1,120 in the treatment cohort and 1,126 in the placebo cohort. 6.5 percent of people who were given a placebo experienced severe COVID or death as opposed to 0.7 percent who were given Paxlovid. For some unstated reason, these results only refer to those people whose course of Paxlovid began within three days of displaying symptoms, even though people were included in the trial if they commenced treatment up to and including the fifth day.So Pfizer moved the goalposts during the trial. Did the FDA ask why? Apparently not.People taking Paxlovid have complained about a terrible taste in the mouth throughout the entire period of taking the drug. Pfizer claims that less than 10 percent of people experience this; anecdotal evidence suggests that the phenomenon is common enough to be described as almost universal.Why does this matter? It matters because it essentially unblinds the study. Did Pfizer somehow craft a placebo that mimics this effect? Presumably not, or they would have told us about it.And then there’s the question of the big O - Omicron. Paxlovid was trialed between July and December, 2021, when Delta was the prevailing variant. No longer – but is Paxlovid effective against Omicron (and its subvariants)?“It is also expected to be effective against the Omicron variant,” says the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/news-events-human-drugs/fda-updates-paxlovid-health-care-providers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">FDA’s John Farley</a> (italics added). But does he know? No more than anyone else, it seems.Lots of questions, no answers. Meanwhile, doctors continue to prescribe Paxlovid, generating ever more profits for one of the most successful companies in the world. And lo and behold, Paxlovid is now being touted for the treatment of another illness: Long COVID!A <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/case-testing-pfizers-paxlovid-treating-long-covid-2022-04-18/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Reuters</a> article from April 18, 2022, describes reports of two patients who supposedly experienced relief from long COVID after taking Paxlovid. Neither of them should have had access to Paxlovid in the first place based on the timing of their symptoms, but never mind that.Long COVID is a curious diagnosis for a disease that has yet to be proven to exist. According to Reuters, “More than 200 symptoms have been associated with the condition ... estimated to affect up to 30 percent of people infected with the coronavirus.”“Drug companies tend to discount single-patient case studies,” Reuters continues – and well they might, especially as they discount even multi-patient case studies when the drug concerned isn’t one that might prove lucrative. But according to one Dr. Steven Deeks, a professor of medicine at the University of California (UCSF), these two cases “provide really strong evidence that we need to be studying antiviral therapy in this context.”What’s more, Reuters also informs that Pfizer has two large clinical trials underway to investigate whether Paxlovid can prevent initial COVID infection. No details forthcoming on how people would know when to start taking this new prophylactic – or should they just take a daily dose?The idea of using Paxlovid – a combination of two powerful drugs – as a prophylactic is quite bizarre. Paxlovid is made up of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, one new drug and one older one. Ritonavir is what’s known as a “booster,” because it inhibits the activity of liver enzymes. Pfizer paired it with its new anti-viral drug, nirmatrelvir, because the ritonavir stops the body from clearing the anti-viral too soon and thus “boosts” its effect. But ritonavir is a nasty drug with a long, long list of side effects. Just glance below at what WebMD has to say about ritonavir – no need to read it all, but you get the picture:<blockquote><figure class="image"><img src="/uploads/webmd_ritonavir1_821dd4c83e.png"></figure></blockquote><blockquote><figure class="image"><img src="/uploads/webmd_ritonavir2_a2a9017a6a.png"></figure></blockquote>WebMD also has an entry for Paxlovid, which, as we just noted, is a combination of this nasty, dangerous ritonavir, and Pfizer’s nirmatrelvir. Here it is:<blockquote><figure class="image"><img src="/uploads/webmd_paxlovid_20d42bece1.png"></figure></blockquote>If any Frontline News readers contact WebMD and ask for an explanation, please let us know what they reply.

iStock-1368013938.jpg

Paxlovid

Pfizer

But what happens on day six?

Paxlovid, the five-day wonder

Bank of America is mourning the loss of a young employee who died suddenly Thursday, the second one to do so this month.<h2>25 years young&nbsp;</h2>25-year-old Adnan Deumic was playing soccer with some of his colleagues from Bank of America’s London office when he suddenly collapsed. CPR was administered but failed to save the young trader. While a cause of death has not yet been revealed,&nbsp;The New York Post&nbsp;has&nbsp;<a href="https://nypost.com/2024/05/17/business/bank-of-america-trader-dies-following-death-of-leo-lukenas/">reported</a> that Deumic is believed to have suffered a sudden cardiac arrest.“The death of our teammate is a tragedy, and we are shocked by the sudden loss of a popular, young colleague,” a Bank of America spokesman said. “We are committed to providing our full support to Adnan’s family, his friends and to our many employees grieving his loss.”<h2>Former Green Beret</h2>The tragedy came exactly two weeks after another Bank of America employee, 35-year-old Leo Lukenas III, also died suddenly. The father of two and former Green Beret&nbsp;<a href="https://nypost.com/2024/05/09/business/wall-street-bankers-death-ignites-anger-at-long-workweeks-could-prompt-walkout/">reportedly</a> died from acute coronary artery thrombus, a blood clot in the heart that causes heart attacks.&nbsp;While difficult working conditions are being blamed for the two deaths, social media netizens are suggesting the COVID-19 vaccines may have played a part.<h2>What the Science Says</h2>In 2022, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-10928-z#Sec14">discovered</a> a direct correlation between the COVID-19 shots and a 25% rise in cardiac events among young people. The State of Florida, in a&nbsp;<a href="https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221007-guidance-mrna-covid19-vaccines-analysis.pdf?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=govdelivery">statement</a> warning against COVID-19 vaccination for males aged 18–39, attached its own study conducted by the Florida Department of Health. The study found an 84% increase in cardiac-related deaths among males in the 18–39 age group within 28 days of receiving an mRNA shot.<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27332903/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Studies</a> before COVID-19 estimated the annual number of sudden cardiac deaths among people under 35 to be 1.3 cases per 100,000.<h2>Former CDC director: ‘We have to be honest’</h2>Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Robert Redfield last week called for a public discussion about significant side effects from the COVID-19 shots.“Nobody wanted to talk about the potential there was a problem with the vaccines because they were afraid that would cause people to not want to get vaccinated,” Dr. Redfield told Chris Cuomo on&nbsp;News Nation.“We have to be honest, some people got significant side effects from the vaccine. I have a number of people that are quite ill and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine. And we just have to acknowledge that,” he added.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">This is huge: The former director of the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) admits Covid shots caused ‘significant side effects’ among young healthy people. He also admitted that the vaccine wasn’t really “necessary” for people under 50 years old. He THEN… <a href="https://t.co/YR9yFlYtwV">pic.twitter.com/YR9yFlYtwV</a>— DiedSuddenly (@DiedSuddenly_) <a href="https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1791989489658691991?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

heart attack chest clutching.jpg

Vaccine Injury

Two sudden deaths this month; both attributed to cardiac events

Another Bank of America employee dies suddenly

Governments need to roll out digital identity programs to fight climate change, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) said last week.<h2>Digital ID: A tracking system</h2>In an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.undp.org/blog/why-legal-identity-crucial-tackling-climate-crisis">article</a> titled “Why legal identity is crucial to tackling the climate crisis,” UNDP officials made the case for why digital identity is a key weapon against climate change. If governments assign digital identities to citizens, they explained, authorities can track populations more easily in an environmental disaster.The UNDP further argued that countries which roll out digital identity programs will have more data about their taxpayers that can then be used in an emergency. Governments should know the income and health status of every taxpayer, as well as their education level. This would help authorities have a more “targeted response” to citizens during, for example, a weather disaster, according to the world body.<h2>Digital ID: A way to ‘change behaviors’</h2>But digital identity is not only for tracking taxpayer movements and backgrounds. It can also be used to track how much energy taxpayers are consuming, says the UNDP. Once a government has this data, it can force citizens to change their energy consumption habits, or what the UNDP calls “inspiring behavior change.”“Leveraging digital legal ID data to track energy consumption, inspire behaviour change, and enhance sustainability measures can mitigate climate-related disasters,” the UNDP officials wrote.This push for digital ID, however, is not a new one. The UN has had a years-long objective to ensure that every person is assigned a digital ID. One of the organization’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is to register all children under five with digital legal identities.<h2>Digital ID: The center of a taxpayer's life</h2>According to the UN’s vision, each individual’s digital identity will be tied to other aspects of his or her life, creating a kind of digital web. At the center of this web would be the ID, which would be accessible to government authorities.&nbsp;Frontline News&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/un-aims-to-tie-vaccinations-to-legal-identity-says-biometric-firm">learned</a> last year, for example, that GAVI, a UN-sponsored vaccination body, began pilot testing a program in Ghana that immediately registers the biometric data of every newborn. At birth, infants’ fingerprints are scanned, as are the voices of their parents or caregivers. These data are used to create digital identities that track each baby’s vaccinations and allow him or her to receive government benefits.In May 2023, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres&nbsp;<a href="https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/our-common-agenda-policy-brief-gobal-digi-compact-en.pdf">called</a> for universal welfare, which he said governments should distribute to citizens according to their&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/governments-tech-giants-began-developing-digital-i-ds-in-2020-report-reveals">digital IDs</a>. Those IDs, he explained, should be linked to private bank accounts:<blockquote>Digital IDs linked with bank or mobile money accounts can improve the delivery of social protection coverage and serve to better reach eligible beneficiaries. Digital technologies may help to reduce leakage, errors and costs in the design of social protection programmes.</blockquote><h2>Digital ID: Surveillance State</h2>But the concept raises concern among opponents of digital ID, which is known as the&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/canada-minister-confirms-vaccine-passports-paved-way-for-digital-id">successor</a> to vaccine passports. Critics say that digital ID increases the&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/cbdc-will-not-be-anonymous-fed-chair-confirms">probability</a> of government surveillance and totalitarian overreach. For example, while a government can use a taxpayer’s digital ID to deposit money, it could also use it to lock their bank account if they haven’t paid their carbon taxes, another proposed reform by Guterres.

Digital ID.jpg

Climate Change

Technology

Digital identity to fight climate change

UN to 'inspire behavior change' with digital IDs 

Climate vaccine developer ArkeaBio has raised $26.5 million in Series A funding, the company&nbsp;<a href="https://live-arkea-bio-corp.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/ArkeaBio-Raises-26.5M-to-Reduce-Greenhouse-Gas-Emissions-with-Methane-Vaccine.pdf">announced</a> last week. ArkeaBio aims to fight climate change by vaccinating livestock.&nbsp;<h2>Suppressing methane emissions</h2>A vaccine being developed by the company is designed to prevent animals from releasing methane emissions. Once vaccinated with the AkreaBio shot, an animal’s immune system is supposed to create antibodies that will target methane-producing microbes.&nbsp;The Boston-based startup&nbsp;<a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/breakthrough-energy-ventures-leads-12m-seed-investment-in-arkeabio-to-develop-and-commercialize-technology-reducing-on-farm-methane-emissions-301699932.html">secured</a> its first major investment in late 2022 from Breakthrough Energy Ventures, an investment fund founded by billionaire Bill Gates.&nbsp;“Our vaccination-based approach allows for much-needed decarbonization of global meat and dairy products across multiple geographies, supporting greater sustainability in agriculture,” the company explains on its&nbsp;<a href="https://www.arkeabio.com/">website</a>.<h2>Pharma industry eyes climate vaccines for humans</h2>While ArkeaBio hopes to deploy the vaccines worldwide for livestock, it has not yet announced plans to develop climate vaccines for humans.But human-targeted climate vaccines do appear to be in the works. Researchers at Gingko Bioworks, a biotech firm also backed by Gates, have&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/gates-backed-scientists-predict-deadly-climate-pandemics">floated</a> mRNA injections as a measure to mitigate the impact of global warming. The World Economic Forum has also&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/world-economic-forum-pushes-climate-vaccines">expressed</a> support for climate vaccines.The biggest push, however, is coming from the pharmaceutical industry, as vaccine makers&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/vaccine-maker-declares-climate-change-public-health-crisis">claim</a> vaccines are a “critical response to the climate crisis.” In December, pharmaceutical giant GSK wrote on its&nbsp;<a href="https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/behind-the-science-magazine/vaccines-climate-change-health-economy/">website</a> that “[i]n the face of climate change, vaccines play a crucial but underestimated role.”AstraZeneca last year declared climate change to be a public health crisis, sparking concerns that the pharma industry may play a role in climate mandates. The declaration came two months after drugmaker Sanofi’s Executive Vice President of Vaccines Thomas Triomphe penned an article titled “Vaccine innovation is a critical response to the climate crisis.”<h2>Climate vaccines required for vaccine passports?</h2>Pharma industry chatter about climate vaccines comes as the World Health Organization (WHO), which has warned of an impending climate pandemic, is developing global vaccine passports. If climate vaccines for people are developed, the WHO could demand that the vaccine passports display a person's climate vaccine status together with other so-called “immunizations.”A status showing that passport holder one is not up to date on any scheduled vaccine could lead to the denial of that person's right to travel between nations or even within a nation. &nbsp;<h2>Efficient system … for denying travel rights</h2>In June last year, the WHO&nbsp;<a href="https://www.who.int/news/item/05-06-2023-the-european-commission-and-who-launch-landmark-digital-health-initiative-to-strengthen-global-health-security">announced</a> the launch of its “digital health partnership” with the European Commission. The joint program will involve the development of global vaccine passports among other “digital products to deliver better health for all.”According to the WHO, the passport system will allow “global mobility” and protect people not only from “future health threats” but those that are “on-going”.“In June 2023, WHO will take up the European Union (EU) system of digital COVID-19 certification to establish a global system that will help facilitate global mobility and protect citizens across the world from on-going and future health threats, including pandemics,” announced the WHO in a statement.The globalist organization clarified that this will likely include a global vaccine passport, much like many Western countries used during the COVID-19 pandemic:<blockquote>This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitisation of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.</blockquote>As a “first step”, the WHO and European Commission will “ensure that the current EU digital certificates continue to function effectively.”&nbsp;<h4>Related Articles</h4><a href="https://frontline.news/post/gates-backed-scientists-predict-deadly-climate-pandemics" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Gates-backed scientists predict deadly climate pandemics</a>

Climate change vaccine globe.jpg

Vaccines

Company develops climate vaccines for livestock as drugmakers eye climate vaccines for humans

Gates-backed startup raises $26 million for climate vaccines 

Little firms protecting the little guyAn amendment to the New York State constitution that would have severely curtailed the rights of normal New Yorkers has been <a href="https://www.empirecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/000778_2023_Marjorie_Byrnes_et_al_v_Marjorie_Byrnes_et_al_DECISION___ORDER_ON_81.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">taken off</a> the November 5, 2024 ballot, thanks to the concerted efforts of two attorneys from a small legal firm, Cox Lawyers PLCC.The amendment concerned is usually referred to as Proposition One or the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). As things stand, discrimination based on race, color, creed, and religion is already banned in New York State. The ERA would have added ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes and reproductive health care and autonomy (additions to the current constitution are in boldface in the extract below):<figure class="image"><img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1715854344/ERA_4697ee5496.png"></figure>&nbsp;The only people without a protected category are “normals”While protecting people sounds like a noble intention, the ERA, if passed, would have in practice led to certain people in these categories being “protected” at the expense of others — &nbsp;who, in most cases, would be the majority of New Yorkers. For example:<ul><li>Protecting “gender identity and expression” would lead to an inability to bar men (that is, “transwomen”) from women's dormitories, sports, locker rooms and showers, public bathrooms, etc..</li><li>Banning “age-based discrimination” would potentially allow minors to take charge of their medical decisions and sideline their parents or guardians, barring them from intervening even in the event that they chose to undergo life-altering procedures.</li><li>Protecting “reproductive autonomy” would have the practical effect of enshrining in the constitution the right to have an abortion at any stage of pregnancy, right up to birth.</li></ul>This is why people such as Lee Zeldin, gubernatorial candidate for New York in 2022, have described Proposition 1 as an unprecedented threat to women's rights:<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">In New York, there has been no greater threat to women's and girls’ rights in our lifetimes than Kathy Hochul and the Dems attempting to enshrine their far-left, woke agenda into the State Constitution through Proposition 1, which is on this November’s ballot. To defend your… <a href="https://t.co/NfUzFf7hBK">pic.twitter.com/NfUzFf7hBK</a>— Lee Zeldin (@leezeldin) <a href="https://twitter.com/leezeldin/status/1787622930593067394?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 6, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;Arrogance came before a fallGiven that New York is a solidly Democratic state, the ERA will almost certainly pass if it appears on the November ballot. Attorneys <a href="https://attorneycox.substack.com/p/victory-we-just-won-another-big-case?utm_source=substack&amp;amp%3Butm_medium=email" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bobbie Anne Cox</a> and Chris Browne attacked the proposed amendment on procedural grounds, as it was advanced in an unconstitutional manner.<ul class="todo-list"><li><label class="todo-list__label"><input type="checkbox" disabled="disabled">Senator George Borello excoriated politiicians for their arrogance in assuming that they could get away with cutting corners in pushing their agenda:</label></li></ul><blockquote>The Democrats that control state government think the rules don’t apply to them, which is why we repeatedly see them cut legal and ethical corners in order to achieve their political aims. While the Democrats will appeal, I urge the appellate judges who will make the next determination to be guided by the dictates of the state constitution and not politics. We all lose when the authority of our constitution is weakened, which is why I am optimistic this ruling will stand.</blockquote>&nbsp;Those who oppose woke ideology labeled ‘extremist’According to <a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-new-york-amendment-election-2024-4d3815708ef78c11599e1ebbb35ef896?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">media</a> accounts, Democrats had been “counting on the measure to help generate voter turnout." The Democrats have a $20 million <a href="https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2024/03/building-strategy-pass-equal-rights-amendment-new-york/395147/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">budget</a> to promote the ERA, and Attorney-General Letitia James has <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/new-yorks-abortion-rights-amendment-knocked-off-november-109994832" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">insisted</a> that her party will appeal the ruling;&nbsp;<blockquote>The Equal Rights Amendment was advanced to protect New Yorkers’ fundamental rights, including reproductive freedom and access to abortion care. This is a disappointing court decision, but we will appeal because New Yorkers deserve to be protected by their Constitution, especially as our basic freedoms and rights are under attack.</blockquote>Governor Kathy Hochul expressed similar sentiments, and also went as far as <a href="https://www.wxxinews.org/new-york-public-news-network/2024-05-07/ny-dems-confident-equal-rights-amendment-will-be-back-on-nov-ballot-after-ruling-strikes-it-down" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">calling</a> the judge who ruled in the case, Justice Daniel Doyle, an “extremist judge”:<blockquote>Our decades-long fight to protect equality and reproductive freedom will not be thrown off track by one extremist judge and I look forward to casting my ballot for the Equal Rights Amendment in November.</blockquote>

atty.jpg

Legal News

US News

Constitutional amendment curtailing freedoms for majority in favor of minorities off the ballot, for now

Small law firm takes on New York State and wins

Paxlovid, the five-day wonder

But what happens on day six?

Related Articles

MIT Drops Forced DEI Statements: “They Don’t Work”

Will our next pandemic be a Tamiflu pandemic? Tamiflu's adverse events mimic bird flu

NY bill granting minors full power over medical decisions withdrawn. Defeat, or tactical retreat?

'Conspiracy theorists' are on the 'psychosis continuum' —Yale psychiatrist

Latest Articles

Another Bank of America employee dies suddenly

UN to 'inspire behavior change' with digital IDs

Gates-backed startup raises $26 million for climate vaccines

Small law firm takes on New York State and wins