BENTON – Lieutenant Colonel Carla Wiese sued the U.S. Air Force on July 10, rather than retire for refusing vaccination.
Her counsel Russell Newman of Nokomis, Fla. filed a complaint and moved for emergency relief in U.S. district court.
The Air Force had set July 10 as her deadline to obey.
Newman named President Biden, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, and Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall as defendants.
General Michael Minihan of the Air Mobility Command at Scott Air Force Base also was named as defendant.
Newman quoted a statement Wiese wrote when she requested an exemption, that abortion is a sin and aborted fetal cells are used in making virus vaccines.
“I am made in God’s image and nothing is to alter that,” Wiese wrote.
She wrote that the vaccines alter one’s genetic makeup.
“The receipt of this shot would violate my religious beliefs as stated above and I would not be able to practice my faith as a Roman Catholic,” she wrote.
“My conscience and moral beliefs would be directly violated if I receive this shot.”
Newman claimed Col. Steven Richardson interviewed Wiese and concluded that vaccination would cause great harm to her mental and spiritual health.
He claimed Richardson found no inconsistencies between her practices and beliefs.
He claimed Minihan denied her request on the basis of a compelling interest in mission accomplishment.
Newman expanded Wiese’s complaint to dispute the value of the vaccines.
To hammer his point, he placed “sic” in brackets after “vaccine” to indicate someone else’s mistake.
Newman claimed that since vaccines can’t prevent transmission, vaccination is a moot point that can’t adversely affect unit cohesion or mission readiness.
He inserted portions of testimony from Peter McCullough, who testified as a vaccine expert in a Tennessee case.
McCullough swore that Centers for Disease Control documented more than 10,000 failures before May 31 of last year, when it stopped tracking failures.
He swore that no studies demonstrated a clinical benefit in survivors or those with evidence of prior infection.
He swore vaccination doesn’t make a person less infectious or protect others. He swore that it’s dangerous to widely utilize novel biologic therapy in populations with no information from Food and Drug Administration registration trials.
He swore the risks outweighed any theoretical benefit especially among children and adolescents.
Newman claimed every procedure, surgery, medication, and vaccination must have standard right of refusal.
He claimed vaccine makers must inform potential users they have a right to refuse, and he attached a Janssen fact sheet showing such a statement.
He quoted a study of adverse reactions finding pain at injection site for 93 percent, fatigue for 72 percent, headache for 69 percent, nausea and vomiting for 26 percent, and fever for 17 percent.
He claimed the Food and Drug Administration approved license applications but has not approved any of the vaccines.
He quoted a federal regulation that no investigator may involve a human being as a research subject without informed consent.
He claimed the regulation requires an investigator to minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence.
In his motion for emergency relief, he claimed defendants have no authority to mandate a product currently being tested in a clinical trial.
He claimed that even if they had authority, they would have to accommodate Wiese’s sincere beliefs.
He asserted her rights to bodily integrity, personal autonomy, and freedom from restraint and interference.
“This is still the United States of America and we the people are still a free people,” he wrote.
The court clerk randomly assigned District Judge Staci Yandle.