Challenging the Norm: German Family Court Judge’s Stance on School Mask Mandates

In a significant turn of events, a German family court judge has recently been handed a two-year suspended sentence for his attempt to challenge face mask mandates in Weimar schools two years ago.

Questioning Constitutionality: Unmasking the Verdict

Back in April 2021, the presiding judge of the Weimar District Court made waves by deeming mask mandates unconstitutional. Beyond that, he boldly asserted that these mandates not only lacked efficacy but also posed risks to the mental and physical well-being of children.

Upholding Children's Well-being: Judge's Pronouncement

The judge's ruling resounded with conviction: "Such a peril is undeniable. The imposition of face masks during school hours and the enforcement of social distancing not only jeopardizes the mental, physical, and psychological welfare of the children but have also inflicted harm already."

Rights in Peril: Uncovering the Legal Violations

Moreover, he underscored, "Simultaneously, this situation infringes upon the rights of children and their parents, both according to the law and under international agreements and the constitution."

He further elaborated, "The children's physical, psychological, and educational development is compromised, their rights infringed upon, and this transpires without yielding any advantages to the children themselves or any third parties."

Countering the Norm: Scientific Claims and Court's Verdict

Reports from InfoWars reveal that the court's decision was underpinned by scientific findings indicating that mask-wearing and social distancing failed to curtail COVID-19 infections or transmissibility; rather, they caused harm to individuals.

The court's stance was resolute: "No credible evidence supports the notion that different types of face masks contribute significantly, if at all, to lowering the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This assertion pertains to all age groups, including children and adolescents, regardless of whether they are asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or symptomatic."

They went on to argue, "Contrarily, the constant contact between hands and the face due to mask usage could heighten the risk of self-contamination or transmission. There is no substantiated proof that wearing face masks (or implementing other measures) reduces the risk of infection for the general population, in public or private settings. Likewise, adhering to distancing protocols has not demonstrated efficacy in diminishing infection risk across age groups, including children and adolescents."

Overturned Conviction: The Unraveling of a Judgment

The Weimar court's decision, however, was later nullified by higher courts during the "Plandemic" period.

Fast forward two years, the Thuringian Higher Regional Court recently concluded that the Weimar judge had overstepped his jurisdiction in delivering such a ruling. Consequently, he was found guilty of "perversion of justice."

Unveiling Motives: Unearthing the Judge's Intent

Reports indicate that the public prosecutor had pushed for a three-year prison term, while the defense sought acquittal. During proceedings at the Erfurt Regional Court, the public prosecutor contended that the family judge had orchestrated a clandestine and "highly criminal" child protection process to challenge the mask mandate. Allegedly, his intent was to protest against the prevailing state measures of that time, as reported by the Teller Report.

"The subsequent instances overturned the judge's decision. It was determined that the lawyer had no authority to address the query put forth, a ruling upheld by the Thuringian Higher Regional Court. According to this body, the assessment of state-mandated COVID protection measures lies solely within the purview of administrative courts. The Federal Court of Justice subsequently reaffirmed this perspective."

Ongoing Struggles: Reviving COVID Measures

This development coincides with efforts by the Biden administration and other governments to reintroduce COVID protocols, including mask mandates. Emerging reports highlight the spread of new COVID subvariants in the U.S. and UK, thus renewing concerns about the ongoing battle against the pandemic.

In conclusion, the journey of the Weimar judge's conviction and subsequent legal debates cast a spotlight on the intricate interplay between public health measures, legal jurisdictions, and individual rights. As governments grapple with the challenges posed by evolving variants, the pendulum continues to swing between safeguarding collective health and preserving individual liberties.

Free Speech and Alternative Media are under attack by the Deep State. We need your support to survive. 

Please Contribute via GoGetFunding