Let me just make a simple point for all of you who "support" vaccine passports and similar.
The current Covid-19 CDC VAERS reporting system says that roughly 2,100 people have died closely-associated with taking these vaccines. The very same demographic -- older, sicker Americans and health care workers -- typically get nearly all of the flu shots given in a specific year. Last year 170 million of those shots were distributed (who knows how many actually went into arms) and about 25 deaths were associated with their administration.
VAERS always under-reports because it is voluntary and most reactions don't get reported. As such these are floors, not ceilings, but when given across populations with similar demographics it's clear that roughly 100x as many die associated with a Covid vaccine as a flu vaccine. To claim this is not a "safety signal" is flat-out bull****.
Let's assume you're a board member, owner or otherwise part of the "decision making" group at a university, company or other entity. You decide to mandate vaccination for employees or customers. Said people are coerced, effectively, into accepting an experimental shot -- a shot that has 100x or more the mortality risk associated with an ordinary annual flu shot.
How much risk are we talking about?
We have a lower boundary but not an upper one since VAERS always under-reports. There are about 70 million "Covid vaccinated" people in the US thus far, and about 2,000 reported deaths. That's 1 dead soul out of 35,000 individuals as a lower boundary.
Now let's assume some number greater than zero of those who you coerce has a permanent disability -- or death -- result from taking it.
What's the risk of this happening? How many people are you coercing? Got a student body of 10,000? The odds are about one in three. You can do the math on this.
Note that the vaccine maker and the entity delivering the shot have been given full immunity by the government. You, on the other hand, as a university or business have no such immunity and the EUA for vaccines in fact states in black ink that informed consent must be obtained and that use of same must be voluntary, which means there is a very clean argument that you broke the law and violated the terms under which the EUA was issued when you put forward said coercion.
Maybe the surviving family members can sue (and bankrupt) you successfully on that basis and maybe they can't. That's to be determined and there are opinions both ways on that but if said person was otherwise healthy and they do sue and win you're ****ed and you deserve to be ****ed.
Frankly, however, that's the least of your worries. Let's think this one through and give some thought to what personal level of risk you find acceptable because if you're not thinking about that long and hard you're stupid.
What do you think the odds are that said person (if they survive) or their family members (if they're dead) will decide they won't bother with courts that they know won't hold anyone responsible for killing their son, daughter, mother or father and instead they decide to take retribution directly, law be damned to Hell since the law did not protect their family member from your naked aggression -- and said naked aggression resulted in their loved one's death?
May I remind you that unlike what happens in a courtroom where there is a judge and jury those family members do not need to prove that the vaccine was responsible; they need only believe it was and know you coerced their loved one into taking it. The latter part you're doing openly and, in fact, you're rather foolishly bragging about it.
There is no immunity against The Law of Scoreboards.
Still think these sorts of "passports" are a good idea or perhaps do you think the decision to take such a shot should be a function of personal choice without any hint of coercion?
I'll leave that decision up to you.