Brownstone » Brownstone Institute Articles » The End of the Freedom to Travel 
freedom to travel

The End of the Freedom to Travel 

SHARE | PRINT | EMAIL

Is it possible the United States will lock down again? Is it possible public officials will seek to hold us captive without due process?

The World Health Organization and European Union have officially teamed up to end the freedom to travel as we know it. The EU boasts that its version of vaccine passports issued during the COVID plandemic was “a crucial element” in reopening the European economies and society. A digital smartphone application, the “Green pass” publicly displayed the subscriber’s private medical records relating to covid vaccination by displaying the subscriber’s name, date of birth, and vaccination brand and doses, and bearing a QR code to avoid fraud.

Despite this tautological brag that the pass had any impact on reopening Europe “safely,” we know the vaccines had not been tested for efficacy at the time these vax-passes were introduced. Janine Small, executive for Pfizer, testified before the European Union’s covid committee that the pharmaceutical company had never tested their product for transmission reduction prior to introducing it onto the market: 

“Did we know about it stopping immunization* before it entering the market? No! These–um, you know, we had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market; and from that point of view, we had to do everything at risk.”

*Ironically, Small said stopping immunization in reply to MEP Robert Roos’s question about whether the mRNA vaccine by Pfizer was ever tested for “stopping the transmission of the virus.” Data now publicly available demonstrates that the vaccines not only do nothing to prevent transmission, but they actually cause infection. Perhaps Small’s choice of words was not erroneous in response to the question, but rather a slip of the tongue already knowing the vaccine would suppress vaccinated patients’ immune systems, leaving them vulnerable to future infections.

Claiming the vax-pass supports the “free movement of citizens and residents,” the EU member states first primarily required the proof of vaccination application for air travelers. In this context, the governing agency admits that the vax-pass is a “tool to verify compliance with restrictions of free movement…” Nothing spells freedom like complying with restrictions on freedom!

The citizens of the EU did not all welcome the vax-pass for the obvious medical apartheid against unvaccinated persons and liberticide. Protests against the measure broke out across the continent when it was introduced, challenging the legitimacy of government action that compelled individual medical decisions and penalized those who would not or could not vaccinate.

Traditionally under US law, information about an individual’s medical treatments were considered private. However, the Office of Civil Rights issued guidance in 2020 that authorized disclosure of those private records for “public health purposes,” without the consent of the patient. Although the US federal government did not press for a digital vaccination passport, many businesses and public venues across the nation like restaurants required proof of vaccination to enter, and certain states allowed the vax-pass practice. 

Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo launched in 2021 Excelsior Pass Plus, which collected and still maintains proof of vaccination for more than 11 million New Yorkers. Recently, Governor Kathy Hochul’s administration announced it would end the program due to “reduced demand.” Although the state claimed participation was voluntary, New Yorkers were denied the ability to attend and participate in the reopening of the state without proof of vaccination. More than 150,000 businesses used the app to exclude unvaccinated patrons.

Certainly, lockdown restrictions on movements drove people to make desperate decisions that would otherwise have caused pause before acting–most especially choosing to get vaccinated. When New York instituted the Excelsior Pass, New Yorkers aching to reunite with family members and socialize in public once more jumped to download the app and shout to anyone who required it that they complied with vaccine mandates. 

The app ended up causing more distress despite it being advertised as the solution to lockdowns. For example, Spectrum Local News reported users’ vaccination proof were not updating quickly on the app. As a result, one user feared that she “was going to be under house arrest” and lamented that she would be “shut out.” The state minimized the anxiety these users felt by telling the press, “User questions are expected.” 

The ever-compliant users who feared being under house arrest when the app was not functioning did not even consider that using the app is more like wearing an ankle-monitor than the lockdowns themselves: always being tracked, data being collected, QR codes being scanned, fear that the app will not work and the “authorities” will deny you the privileges to which you have grown accustomed and crave. Moving about, yet still a prisoner–still not free.

When Scotland announced its launch of vaccine passports in 2021, Neil Oliver delivered a passionate monologue on the effect such restrictions would have on humanity. He rejected the notion that anyone should comply when asked, “Papers, please,” declaring the governments and businesses demanding such would fail in time. His cure for the prison of lockdowns and for the health and well-being of mankind is not more restrictions on movements, but rather: “Togetherness, inclusion and not exclusion. I say it is simple and that we must find ways to be together.”

If unintended scientific discoveries have taught us anything, it is certainly that humans are social beings and fail to thrive when kept from social interaction. Frederick II uncovered this phenomena when he intended to study language development in infants. Although he hoped by depriving infants of most social interaction that he would find which language is innate, he instead learned that all the children died during the experiment from the lack of human engagement. 

The covid lockdowns arguably were the largest reproduction of that social isolation study to date. A study in which all participants were coerced or terrorized by our own public officials and media to comply. A study that reaffirmed the same failure-to-thrive results of the Prussian study: suicides increased, especially among children; elderly in care homes and sick in hospitals met their demise faster without family interaction; and adverse/chronic health conditions have increased overall.

With all of this knowledge in hand, will our officials plunge us into further social division by creating a class and social credit system based on use of pharmaceutical products? “If you get a vaccine, you get to do ‘x.’” In the case of the covid shots, the scenario would be, “If you take an injection that is experimental, not on the market, not all side effects are known, and has not been tested for disease prevention, then you get to fly on an airplane. If you refuse the injection, you are not allowed to fly to visit your family.” 

Despite President Biden’s prior indication that he did not think other state agencies needed a vaccine passport, he did rejoin the US with the WHO after taking office, committing the nation to the unelected, international policy body. The WHO announced earlier this year its plan to espouse member nations to a global pandemic response treaty, which gives the WHO the power to declare pandemics, govern responses to pandemics, and financially support the WHO among other terms. Given Biden’s support of the agency, one could expect him to bring the US into accord with other member nations.

International treaties require approval for ratification by the US Senate for the international law to be binding on the US. If this agreement is approved, the WHO will then assume control of pandemic responses–including restricting individuals’ abilities to travel and participate in public society. Agreeing to allow an unelected foreign organization to dictate US citizens’ activities is constitutionally atrocious. The US Constitution authorizes each state to legislate on issues of health and public safety, not the federal government and most definitely not the WHO.

Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) introduced a bill in the House more than six months ago titled “No Vaccine Passports Act.” The bill was referred to the House Oversight Committee for review, but still has not made it to the floor. Even if it had, the bill only protects from vaccine passports for covid; it has no provisions to prohibit a vaccine passport for any other vaccines currently on the market or CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule, nor for any future vaccines.

It is high time our public servants in Congress and the executive branch recall it is We the People who govern them, not the other way around. Each elected person and federal employee upon taking office affirms that they will support and defend the Constitution since they only hold their positions per the will of the People and none would have any authority without us.

Agreeing to accord with the WHO and allow them to control US policy on matters of public health and safety is an unconstitutional delegation of state legislative authority. Any federal official advocating to enjoin the US and its states to the WHO’s agenda is violating their promise to the American people and breaching their official oath.

Recent history and current events clearly demonstrate that it is no longer a question of “is this possible” but a question of “when.” We the People must hold our public servants accountable. We must not let them strip us of our freedoms by complying when asked, “Papers, please.” We must not let division creep in under the guise of public health when We the People are healthier together. Vax passes must not pass.



Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

Author

  • Gwendolyn Kull

    Gwendolyn Kull is an attorney who coauthored the prosecutorial ethics guide for the Pennsylvania District Attorney’s Association and developed a youth anti-gun violence engagement program within her jurisdiction of practice. She is a mother of two boys, dedicated public servant, and is now zealously advocating to defend the United States Constitution against bureaucratic tyranny. A graduate of University of Pennsylvania Law School, Gwendolyn has focused her career primarily on criminal law, representing the interests of victims and communities while ensuring proceedings are fair and defendants’ rights are protected.

    View all posts

Donate Today

Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

Subscribe to Brownstone for More News

Stay Informed with Brownstone