The Vibes for the US Men's Hockey Team Are So High, We Got...
Canadians Are Having a Rough Week
Iranian Students Torch Regime’s Symbols As Protests Erupt on Colleges
FedEx Wants a Refund for Trump's Tariffs – an International Court Will Decide
Watch Zohran Mamdani Fall Apart When Asked About Voter ID
Look Who Ro Khanna Is Bringing to the State of the Union Tonight
Tom Tiffany Fires Back After Evers Says Wisconsin Would ‘Implode’ Without Illegal Immigran...
Dana Bash Pulls No Punches in Her Interview With Gavin Newsom
Gun Rights Group Wants Explanation From Anti-Gunner Bloomberg Over Epstein Ties
Dan Bongino Goes Nuclear on Candace Owens
Speaker Johnson Slams Democrats for Holding Five Counter-Events to Trump’s State of the...
Dan Bongino on the Mexican Cartels: The Donroe Doctrine Is Not a Joke...
Steve Hilton Slams Newsom As a Costal Elite, Says He Is the 'Most...
SURPRISE: Guess What Thomas Massie Is Doing for the State of the Union
The Career of Tim Walz Is Over, and He Intends to Destroy Gun...
Tipsheet

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

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

Related:

COVID VACCINE

 Critics blasted the ruling.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement