by Sharon Rondeau
(Mar. 7, 2024) — On Thursday beginning at 7:00 p.m. EST, entrepreneur, inventor, former CEO and health-freedom advocate Steve Kirsch addressed an audience from the second COVID Litigation Conference taking place in Las Vegas, NV.
The broadcast is live on Twitter and Rumble.
Shortly after the COVID-19 “pandemic” was announced in early 2020, Kirsch founded the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund (CETF) seeking ways to ameliorate the virus for those stricken. He later founded the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (VSRF) with the mission “to advance COVID-19 vaccine safety through scientific research, public education, and advocacy, and to support the vaccine injured.”
In an email sent earlier Thursday, Kirsch wrote, in part, “The Covid Litigation Conference is the premier legal event where experienced lawyers in the Covid space come together to connect and get educated about this burgeoning legal landscape. There are potentially MILLIONS of Covid litigation cases waiting to be brought forward involving the illegal Covid vaccine mandates and the resulting wrongful terminations across the US in 2021 and 2022.”
“We will be interviewing some of the most recognized and experienced attorneys in the field currently, including Robert Barnes, Warner Mendenhall, Tricia Lindsay and many more,” the newsletter continues. “Wrongful termination lawsuits are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the myriad of COVID related illegal and fraudulent activities we have all been subject to for nearly 4 years. This is surely the beginning of a massive wave of justice that will sweep over the US, ensuring our leaders know to never again attempt this kind of fraud and injustice on the American Public!”
Kirsch is a co-author of a research paper recently retracted by the science journal Cureus over which Kirsch is threatening a $250 million lawsuit on three counts:
- Defamation
- Breach of implied contract
- Fraudulent misrepresentation
Dr. Peter A. McCullough, also a co-author of the paper, wrote about the retraction on February 24, contending that Cureus violated the “Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines” for scholarly journals.
The initial COVID Litigation Conference, held at this time last year, opened the door to the possibility of viable litigation over injuries and deaths believed to have resulted from COVID-19 vaccination, which many employers and the federal government, under Joe Biden, required for continued employment for a time until they were overturned by the federal courts.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 protected vaccine manufacturers from liability for anyone claiming an injury from an approved vaccine except in cases of provable negligence or fraud, creating a government compensation program funded by excise taxes on vaccine products. The bill’s wording in that regard reads:
Provides that no vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death: (1) resulting from unavoidable side effects; or (2) solely due to the manufacturer’s failure to provide direct warnings. Provides that a manufacturer may be held liable where: (1) such manufacturer engaged in the fraudulent or intentional withholding of information; or (2) such manufacturer failed to exercise due care. Permits punitive damages in such civil actions under certain circumstances.
The law also requires the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) “to conduct studies on pertussis, rubella, and radiculoneuritis vaccines and publish the results of such studies,” among other responsibilities related to vaccine development and testing.
At the end of 2005, Congress passed the PREP Act, which “authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to limit legal liability for losses relating to the administration of medical countermeasures such as diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines,” which was invoked after COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency.
In the event of such an emergency, rather than suing vaccine manufacturers, individuals believed to have been injured by any “countermeasures” were compelled to seek compensation through the government’s Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) administered by the Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA), a division of DHHS.
Vaccines, and especially those administered to children in keeping with the CDC’s childhood “immunization schedule” and required by school systems across the nation, have long been suspected of causing injury and death. On May 23, 2019, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) wrote:
When it comes to telling the story of vaccine injuries and how frighteningly commonplace they have become, denial, censorship and lies seem to be ruling the day—for now. However, future public health historians will surely acknowledge that the unprecedented health crisis beleaguering American children began around the same time—1986—that Congress let the genie out of the bottle by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA).
While the Act marked a depressing turning point for American children and their families, it was a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry. The industry protections offered by the Act—which essentially awarded vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability for injuries resulting from childhood vaccines, “no matter how toxic the ingredients, how negligent the manufacturer or how grievous the harm”—sparked a gold rush of vaccine development.
Given the two laws and the fast-tracked development of COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed, it was generally believed those injured or the survivors of those who passed away after receiving one of the COVID-19 products approved under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) issued by the FDA could not collect damages directly from manufacturers.
That perception appears to be changing. In a November 3, 2023 article, Bloomberg News reported:
A lawsuit by Covid-19 vaccine recipients claiming they were injured by their shots may usher in long-awaited changes to how the federal government handles immunization injuries.
Individuals frustrated by the HHS program designed to compensate them for their injuries are taking their grievances to court. In a lawsuit lodged with the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, they say the program is unconstitutional, depriving them of their rights to due process and a jury trial.
Lawyers say the move could spur Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services to reform how they handle vaccine injuries, as well as push more of the individuals alleging injuries to not just sue the government, but the drugmakers that the program is meant to shield from litigation.
On Tuesday, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX21) introduced a bill seeking to change the 1986 provision to permit Americans to sue vaccine manufacturers for injuries and deaths believed to have emanated from their products.