>>That's a different argument than a liability case Well first of all we're looking for a deterrent here, not a bag of easy money Now, do you sincerely believe that violating a federal law, doesn't eventually imply "liabilities" at some point somewhere? https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/employers-may-be-liable-for-any-adverse-reaction-from-mandated-coronavirus-shots-osha >>Furthermore, it’s also possible employers requiring these injections may be held **legally liable** for violating federal law. According to America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS), products approved for emergency use only “are prohibited from being mandated by federal law.” The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s emergency use authorization (EUA) specifically states that individuals must have the free “option to accept or refuse” these vaccines. Many argue the prospect of being terminated from one’s job by refusing such vaccines certainly undermines such necessary freedom. ...