Celebrating One Year of Trump's Second Term: VIP Flash Sale!
Trump Rolls Out His 365 Victories for 2025
Here Are Some of the New Taxes Coming to Virginia Under Democrat Rule....
You Can See Why That Anti-ICE Lawsuit Filed by Minnesota Was Such a...
Utah Law Banning Inappropriate Material in School Libraries Faces Legal Challenge
Pam Grier Tells The View About Her Childhood Experience With Racism in Ohio....
James Clyburn Just Said What About Republicans?
Here's How Much Money CA Is Losing As Hollywood Takes Production to Friendlier...
American Jailed by Russia Over Firearm on Boat
Bernie Sanders Served 18 Years on Holocaust Museum Board, He Never Attended a...
Danish Member of European Parliament Tells President Trump to 'F**k Off'
Gavin Newsom’s Davos Tantrum: An Embarrassing Ramble About Trump, Europe, and Greenland
Guess How Much of Every Humanitarian Dollar the US Spends Actually Reaches the...
The Second Family Just Made a Huge Annoucement
There Is a Bombshell New Report Out About Trump's Immigration Policies
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

Related:

COVID VACCINE

 Critics blasted the ruling.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos