Children’s Health Defense (CHD) has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear its case against the FDA for granting Emergency Use Authorization of Covid-19 vaccines for children and infants.
CHD’s lawsuit, filed with five other plaintiffs who are parents of children ages two months to 13 years old, alleges the FDA misused its emergency power to push dangerous biologics on minors in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
The lawsuit is intended to “hold the FDA accountable for its arbitrary and capricious authorization of a harmful drug that has and continues to injure children.”
The parents allege that risks to their children from Covid-19 vaccines include severe adverse reactions and “the unrelenting and looming threat of being pushed out of society” by “the culture of mass vaccination and medical mandates.”
CHD and the parents allege the FDA “abused its emergency powers, eliminated the notice-and-comment process, ignored citizen petitions, abandoned traditional safety mechanisms for assessing drugs injected into interstate commerce and the arms of American children, ignored express legislative limits on their actions and now claims to be beyond judicial review.”
Robert Barnes, CHD’s attorney, filed the petition asking the Supreme Court to review district and appeals courts’ decisions that have prevented the lawsuit from moving forward.
“The FDA stooped so low as to use Sesame Street and Elmo to lie to kids about the safety, efficacy and necessity of the Covid-19 vaccines,” said Barnes. “When the FDA lies to kids, who can hold them accountable and stop the lies? The FDA is not above the law. That is why CHD is asking the Supreme Court to answer the question.”
In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans upheld a lower court’s dismissal of CHD’s lawsuit on the basis that CHD and the five parents in the case lacked standing to sue the FDA.
According to CHD CEO Mary Holland, “The issue of standing has been one of the most challenging problems during the Covid-19 pandemic. Federal circuits have split on what level of harm must be present for individuals and organizations to sue. This case merits review, not only because it’s a critical constitutional issue, but because circuit courts have split on the issue.”
More from Children’s Health Defense website here.
The Lemonade Mermaid Store
Unique gifts for Land or Sea Mermaids, Mer-pets and Little Mermaids!
Left: Pastel Beach Necklace $16
Big state court battle going on in North Carolina over the PREP Act. The case involves Emily Happel and her son Tanner Smith, who were involved in a lawsuit against Guilford County Schools and Old North State (ONS) Medical Society after Smith was jabbed with the vaccine without parental consent and against his objections.
The trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit based on the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) of 2005, which provides broad immunity to parties involved in administering covered countermeasures during a public health emergency.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision and justified the PREP Act immunity using a declaration from the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Kate Stephenson, News Addicts