Healthcare Reform: Revoking Immunity

How can we prevent corruption of this scale happening ever again?

There are a great many reforms to the healthcare system that absolutely must be adopted, however it is largely driven by how proactive the public want to be in seeing these reforms occur.

Tolerance and apathy will simply be met with more abuse, and this goes beyond simply appealing to your nearest representative in politics, to strike at the very heart of corruption itself.

Revoke Immunity to Liabilities, and Prohibit Governments from Agreeing Contracts with Similar Exemptions in Future

For American counterparts, this fight to repeal has a path, but to understand that path you need to know how the ‘immunity to liabilities’ system works.

Currently, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 requires litigants to undergo lawsuits, normally aimed against pharmaceutical companies over vaccines, instead through the US Special Masters Court, where they must litigate under a bias “no-fault” system against the… US government itself.

The petition must also be served upon the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who replaces the vaccine manufacturer or vaccine administrator to defend the claim

This is not your typical court. It is rigged against the victims from the very beginning.

Firstly, it demands a higher burden of proof than a civil court, rather than the typical “preponderance of the evidence” seen in normal civil courts, where normally the goal is to convince “the fact finder that there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true”.

It instead demands the Special Masters court, overseen by a non-judge, requires “actual proof of causation” if it is outside of a limited list of options the US government is willing to consider. Get injured by a poorly researched outcome? Tough luck, the US government demands actual causation.

the petitioner may still pursue a claim but must establish actual causation

Given the general public are not medical professionals, and governments often bully and fires those who dare to question the vaccines, with medical agencies, groups and hospitals following suit, very rarely do doctors want to go on record to provide proof of causation, if indeed explicit causation is actually even found.

These cases, being “no-fault” do not create a precedent. So even if a family were to establish actual causation, another family would have to jump through the hoops to prove it all over again.

There is no jury in this system, either, only a ‘Special Master’, which is a ‘subordinate appointed by a judge’. They’re not even a fully fledged judge!

With the inconsistencies painfully evident, on what grounds can the American public litigate to see this horrible anomaly removed?

The Seventh Amendment

Unsurprisingly, the American Founders foresaw a time when abuse of power within courts and court systems was a thing that was likely to occur. So they laid down some ground rules.

Most people are familiar with the commonly cited Amendments, such as the First and Second, but in this case, the Seventh is the powerhouse that can bring this rigged “court” system crashing to the ground.

The Seventh Amendment states:

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

It clearly says the “right of trial by jury shall be preserved” for any civil court cases over $20. The litigants in this case are bringing suits worth way more - even factoring in inflation - and are being unfairly and systematically denied their right to trial by jury in their civil cases.

In-fact, the Magna Carta, of which the Seventh Amendment is based upon, even says:

"No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or diseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land"

The Fifth Amendment - primarily aimed at criminal cases - echoes similarly:

[…] nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law […]

It is striking, then, that the Special Masters “court” does not follow any of the “due process of law” at the time the Constitution was written.

It did not say the public forego their rights to court hearings by juries, nor does it say they forego their rights to a fair trial under preponderance of the evidence, nor does it say they can be deprived of their life, liberty or property without due process of law (consider what the vaccine injured have lost with no fair trial; is it right their culprit, their abuser, gets away with this?).

Indeed, the unusual demands of “actual causation” could arguably constitute cruel and unusual punishment, in that the victim is being denied additional rights to renumeration and justice by fallaciously deployed, questionable standards of which the public did not consent to.

Wouldn’t This Destroy Vaccines?

For those of you still oddly believing in the ‘kind heart and soul’ of the pharmaceutical companies that created this unjust abuse of power; no it wouldn’t.

At least not defective vaccines.

What’s worth noticing is drugs, medical surgical procedures and more, do not get this unduly favourable treatment. If you get injured by drugs, you’d go through a conventional civil court. If you got injured by drugs that had been injected into you, likewise you’d go through a conventional civil court…

…But if you got injected with drugs that were magically declared ‘vaccines’, regardless of whether or not they worked, behaved that way, or what approaches they actually used, then suddenly you go to the Special Masters court. This is an arbitrary “standard” where the goalposts can move at whim.

If drugs can survive going through normal court procedures, vaccines can too. There is zero justification for the double-standard applied.

So How Can The Immunity to Liability Be Revoked?

This is the hard and expensive part: It would require a person who has suffered a vaccine injury to litigate all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to get the ‘Immunity to Liability’ bills overturned on the grounds they violate the Seventh and Fifth Amendments of their rights so they can directly sue the people actually responsible.

Financing could come in the form of crowdfunding, or maybe there’s a particularly rich litigant with deep pockets willing to take this case all the way to SCOTUS to achieve the victory needed.

Either way, it’d destroy the shield that pharmaceutical companies have been abusing to get away with their evil practices of outright fraud, and bring the biggest turnabout in over 3 decades.

If you like my work, be sure to support it by sharing the article link with other people, subscribing or even becoming a supporter. Thank you!