Covid-19 Vaccine Manufacturers Can Harm You With Near Complete Impunity

The government axes your job but shields pharma companies from financial liability for injuries. Who does the government work for?

Imagine that in order to keep your job, the government requires you to take a pill that only protects you, and not others, and if you are harmed by that pill, you can’t sue the company that makes and sells the pill.  Seems dystopian?  Well, it is.  But it is exactly what is occurring with Covid-19 vaccines.

The federal government has given complete immunity to Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J for any injury caused by their Covid-19 vaccines.  That’s right: you cannot sue them if you are injured by their Covid-19 vaccine.  (See Note 1 to read the law yourself.)  So, while their product may not give you immunity, they are guaranteed immunity.   

And it gets even worse.  These companies are even immune for – hold your breath – willful misconduct.  That may sound crazy, but it is shockingly true.  You can only sue them for willful misconduct if the federal government first sues them for such conduct.  (See Note 2 to read the law yourself.)  And what are the odds the federal government will do so after wildly promoting the vaccine?  About as likely as the FDA ever admitting they promoted a vaccine that caused widespread harm. 

So, despite Pfizer’s history of willful misconduct, and that this is Moderna’s first product, and that they going to rake in over $100 billion selling a product millions of Americans are mandated to take, you cannot sue them for injuries.  That seems fair.  After all, we should take pity on these companies since this revenue may not be sufficient to pay for the injuries. 

What is most incredible is that we are talking about a product that does not prevent infection and transmission.  It, at best, provides personal protection.  So, you cannot say “no” to the product without losing your job, cannot sue if you are injured, cannot see the data underlying its licensure, all while it can only potentially protect … you!  What?!  

It is indeed dystopian to fire someone from their job for refusing to receive an injection that is only for that person’s “benefit.”  Let me repeat.  The government cares about you so much that in order to get you to take your medicine that will only help you, it is going to make sure you cannot earn a living until you roll up your sleeve like an obedient child and take the jab.  But don’t worry, it is so safe that the government did you the favor of making sure you cannot sue the companies that sell this medicine, even for willful misconduct.

If this form of authoritarianism is permitted to stand, there is no limit to what the government can mandate you to do in the name of public health.  If a Covid-19 vaccine can be mandated, then there is no reason the government cannot mandate every drug a doctor believes you should receive for your own good.  Why not? 

The lesson yet again is that civil and individual rights should never be contingent upon a medical procedure.  Never.  It is the last and final backstop to the dangerous authoritarianism that results when we permit the government to decide what must be injected or placed into or onto our bodies.   Whatever your views are on the Covid-19 vaccine itself, every American should reject letting the government decide what medical procedures they must engage in to have a job. 

Note 1. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d the federal government “Declaration pursuant to section 319F-3 of the Public Health Service Act to provide liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19” provides that “manufacturers” of “any vaccine, used to treat, … prevent or mitigate COVID-19” shall enjoy “[l]iablity immunity ,” including, “from suit and liability under Federal and State law with respect to all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a [COVID-19 vaccine].”

Note 2.  Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d(c)(5) “If an act or omission by a manufacturer or distributor with respect to a covered countermeasure, which act or omission is alleged under subsection (e)(3)(A) to constitute willful misconduct, … such act or omission shall not constitute ‘willful misconduct’ … if—(i)neither the Secretary nor the Attorney General has initiated an enforcement action with respect to such act or omission; or (ii)such an enforcement action has been initiated and the action has been terminated or finally resolved without a covered remedy.”