Except for the mandates for travel that seems logical, but if you are an owner operator who must travel to deliver goods essentially those mandates change your standard of living. Any government emposed mandate is irrevocable coercion and can be considered undo duress. The supreme court many choose to go the right way once the fraud of the jabs is fully exposed especially if the government agencies were aware whitch pfizer has indicated in court is the case.

Coerced people were forced through travel bans and job losses. They have a right to be mad.

The system implied "safe and effective" but hid a fraud perpetrated by politicians, public health and media that did not disclose the negative effects. When dealing with public health if fraud is committed it vitiates any protections. Those that were aware of the fraud but hid it are now accountable.

It's interesting that pfizer is trying to get a court case thrown out based on the fact that the government were fully aware of the issues with the vaccines and flaws in the studies but did not understand that there were risks so the fraud was on the public health departments and not with pfizer. Let's see how that plays out.

The doctors have an oath to do no harm. It's on them if they turn a blind eye. They have insurance against malpractice but that does not protect them from negligence.

Nobody coerced them into accepting the lies when enough of their associates raised an issue they were fully aware of the doctors being sanctioned for questioning the narrative and choosing to defer their obligations to an unaccountable bureaucratic system like public health.