TYB
>>14139127 LB
KEK
REPOST NOTABLE, SCOTUS JUSTICE SCALIA CONFIRMS, CDNA IS NOT NATURAL AND THUS A PATENT, MEANING HUMANS WHO HAVE BEEN VACCINATED ARE THEIR PRODUCTS AND NON HUMAN
------------------------------------—-
IF I AM RIGHT THIS SCREEN SHOT BELOW IS WHAT THIS US SUPREME COURT HAS RULED, - VACCINATED PEOPLE ARE NO LONGER HUMANS BUT PATENTS AND AS SUCH THEIR PRODUCTS?
SEEMS LIKE JUSTICE SCALIA TOOK THIS DECISION, TOOK SCREEN SHOT.
==
BREAKING- In the US, the Supreme Court has ruled that vaccinated people worldwide are products, patented goods, according to US law, no longer human.
Through a modified DNA or RNA vaccination, the mRNA vaccination, the person ceases to be human and becomes the OWNER of the holder of the modified GEN vaccination patent,
because they have their own genome and are no longer "human" (without natural people), but "trans-human", so a category that does not exist in Human Rights.
The quality of a natural person and all related rights are lost.
This applies worldwide and patents are subject to US law.
Since 2013, all people vaccinated with GM-modified mRNAs are legally trans-human and legally identified as trans-human and do not enjoy any human or other rights of a state, and this applies worldwide,
because GEN-POINT technology patents are under US jurisdiction and law, where they were registered.
SOURCE of the decision of the US SUPREME COURT
PDF HERE
(https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf)
To follow how / if it applies to others, outside the US.
https://media.8kun.top/file_store/f47fdb5c5935909fed5c0b4397343b5b99027bdaba9a5ff4c72e7b492110d345.pdf
IMPORTANT TO NOTE, THIS WAS SIGNED ON THE 13TH JUNE 2013 OR 13/06/1013
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 12–398
ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY,
ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD
GENETICS, INC., ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
[June 13, 2013]
JUSTICE SCALIA, concurring in part and concurring in
the judgment.
I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion
except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even
my own belief. It suffices for me to affirm, having studied
the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here,
that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state
sought to be patented is identical to that portion of the
DNA in its natural state; and that complementary DNA
(cDNA) is a synthetic creation not normally present in
nature.
13/06/2013 CORRECTION SCOTUS SIGNATURE.