Those that follow me know that I have discussed at length the directive by NJ governor Murphy in regards to the vaccine mandate. I pointed out that the language used by the governor was very specific and was a means for him to deflect liability away from him should SHTF. in particular, he made reference to his order being within the bounds of the ADA. He also never stated that the state (or its agencies) could actually grab health records of employees. That would be a HIPPA violation. He also stated that his
"vaccine or test" policy was the "floor" and municipalities could go "above and beyond". And boy did they. Mind you I'm not saying the policy itself was lawful as I believe that per SCOTUS rulings the testing qualifies as medical battery upon those who neither with to be injected with an experimental product NOR wish to be tested for a disease they may or may not have and in the process disclose personal medical information. But that's for another day. Today is an example of how the feds have shielded themselves via language and private (and public) entities will find out that though the "vaccine" makers are not liable and the feds may not be liable, THEY will be.
"“The cited statements were not directives. They were not mandatory. They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take ivermectin to treat COVID-19. They did not say you may not do it, you must not do it. They did not say it’s prohibited or it’s unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe ivermectin,” Isaac Belfer, one of the lawyers, told the court during the Nov. 1 hearing in federal court in Texas."
And you know what? They are absolutely correct. Mind you they made some ridiculous statements but entities were free to put the FDA on ignore. But they did not.
Plaintiffs in the case include Dr. Paul Marik, who began utilizing ivermectin in his COVID-19 treatment protocol in 2020 while he was chief of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School and director of the intensive care unit at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital.
After the FDA’s statements, Marik was told to remove the protocol from the school’s servers while Sentara issued a memorandum to hospitals telling them to stop using ivermectin against COVID-19, with a citation to the FDA.[My underline]
Now this appeal to authority is morally at the root of the problem. A lot of nasty stuff has been done with the "per CDC" and the like. But as I pointed out to many people these were never laws duly passed by any legislature and if you looked at the signage they clearly stated "mandate" or something of the sort which is not "law". When police came to arrest people who weren't wearing masks, etc. they arrested the person for things like "trespassing" and "public disturbance" not some CDC or FDA proclamation.
So the offending party here is the school. Let the school point at the FDA.
"The government has moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting plaintiffs lack standing because the injuries cannot be traced back to the FDA."
And I think they are correct. Strictly speaking. Drugs are regularly used for things not approved of by the FDA. These institutions usually don't even bat an eye. But suddenly they wanted to signal compliance and went about firing people who were looking out for their patients. Let 'em hang. Well, let THEM sue the FDA and perhaps claim that they were mislead.
"Belfer noted that the FDA’s pages say people can use ivermectin if their health care provider prescribes it, argued the statements “did not bind the public or FDA, did not interpret any substantive rules, and did not set agency policy,” and said the FDA’s position could change in the future if new data become available."
Exactly, And we saw this in another case, I believe in England where the NHS said that it was the doctor's decision to not treat with x. And notice the "if new data become available" part. Again, this is the CYA that all these agencies are going to use as the lawsuits pile up. However; private actors who took it upon themselves to directly harm people via extortion (do this or lose your job) Are going to be left holding the bag.
And we warned them about it.