Anyone in a public entity should be referring to this case, it can be brought to the Supreme Court and may take years to get there, if one delays it. So it there are plenty of tactics to be used in the legal system. I am not a lawyer, but it is a facile that one needs a lawyer to get results. It just recommended that one at least consults legal advice from a professional on these matters. A good resource I have found on youtube is R and R law group. He volunteers his time and also has been defunded, but does walk a person through current issues. He gets away with it as he is deemed academic in nature. Here is the source that I wish to share: Zywicki v Washington He alleges that as a public institution, GMU is obligated to follow the Constitution and its vaccine policy violates the 9th and 14th Amendments as well as the Supremacy Clause. Zywicki contends that his natural immunity from having recovered from a natural Covid-19 infection gives him equal if not superior protection than vaccines. His sentiments are supported by his immunologist, who informed him that receiving a vaccine would be “medically unnecessary”, as well as a joint declaration from Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, prominent medical professors at Stanford and Harvard respectively. They write that, “Multiple extensive, peer-reviewed studies comparing natural and vaccine immunity have now been published. These studies overwhelmingly conclude that natural immunity provides equivalent or greater protection against severe infection than immunity generated by mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna).” The declaration, found in Exhibit A of the docket, also explains that the evidence to support mitigation measures such as vaccine mandates and passports is lacking.