Is Elon Musk Leaving the Trump Administration? The White House Just Responded.
Congressional Republicans Determined to Bust Up the Gavel Gestapo in the District Courts
Another Country Folds in the Face of Trump's Tariff War
Defunding Planned Parenthood’s Death Culture: A Multi-Front Strike
Guess Who Is Already Backing Down After Trump's Tariff Threats
DOJ Charges Men Over Plot to Steal U.S. Technology for Iranian Regime
A Federal Judge Just Gave NYC Mayor Eric Adams Some Good News
This Former Biden Official Just Announced Run for California Governor
Illinois Court Allows Insane Lawsuit to Go Forward
OPINION: It’s Time to Change the Pro-Life Message: Focus on Why Women Feel...
Labor Secretary Announces Unused COVID-Era Funding Returned to Taxpayers
Scott Walker Identifies the Key Factor in Wisconsin Supreme Court Race
Kash Patel Can Fix the ATF, Renew Constitutional Freedoms
'Operation Take Back America' Is in Full Force
When Journos Report a Deportation 'Sob Story,' Be Sure to Check the Context...
Tipsheet

Court Hands Down 'Unconscionable' Ruling in Case About School That Gave Vaccine to Child Without Consent

AP Photo/Ted S. Warren

The Vermont Supreme Court ruled last week that a family whose child was vaccinated against COVID-19 without consent cannot sue the school district. 

Despite the father informing a school official prior to the November 2021 clinic that he did not want his child vaccinated—and the child verbally protesting (“Dad said no”)—the child was given one dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine after accidentally wearing the name tag of another student, the ruling states. According to Crisis in the Classroom, "The second student had allegedly already received a vaccination earlier that day." 

Advertisement

Academy School officials eventually realized the error and called L.P.'s parents to apologize, who later removed their child from the school, according to the ruling. 

The Vermont Supreme Court ruled Friday state and school officials involved in the matter are protected under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which provides liability immunity. In the event of a public health emergency, the PREP Act ensures certain "covered persons" are immune from claims causally related to the use of a "covered countermeasure." A vaccine is considered a covered countermeasure.

"To avoid dismissal on immunity grounds, plaintiffs would have had to present wellpleaded allegations showing that (1) at least one defendant was not a covered person, (2) some conduct by a defendant was not causally related to administering a covered countermeasure, (3) the substance injected into L.P. was not a covered countermeasure, or (4) there was no PREP Act declaration in effect at the time L.P. was injected," the ruling reads.

The high court's ruling affirms a January 2023 decision by a state superior court. (CITC)

Advertisement

 Critics blasted the ruling.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement