A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Vermont reflects the ongoing erosion of parental rights at the hands of the judiciary and school officials.
On July 26, 2024, in Politella v. Windham Southeast School District, the court unanimously affirmed that even though a clinic worker mistakenly vaccinated a six-year-old first-grader over both his verbal objection and his parent’s explicit refusal to consent to have him inoculated with the experimental Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, officials were immune from liability. The court agreed that the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act grants officials immunity during public health emergencies.
This column begins by reviewing the court’s facts and judicial rationale and then reflects on how it impacts parental rights.
Politella v. Windham Southeast School District
Days before a vaccination clinic was scheduled at L.P. Politella’s school, on dropping his son off for class, his father spoke with the assistant principal, reiterating that he and his wife did not consent to his being vaccinated. Even though the assistant principal said he understood and L.P. would not be vaccinated without parental consent, controversy soon erupted. In November 2021, an unnamed clinic worker mistakenly inoculated the child even though he “verbally protested,” saying, “Dad said no.”
A day later the principal sent the parents a letter explaining that “in the course of vaccinating students at this clinic, a mistake was made…. We are deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures.”
In response to L.P. having been erroneously vaccinated, despite not having claimed he suffered harm, the parents removed him from the school. The parents then filed suit under state law, charging that school officials and others violated Vermont’s constitution and healthcare bill of rights along with committing negligence and battery. A trial court granted the defendant’s motion for a judgment on the pleadings, holding that because they were preempted by the federal PREP Act, it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.
Because the case hinged on the immunity provisions of the far-reaching PREP Act, which became law in December 2005, they are worth highlighting briefly.
The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to grant immunity to entities and individuals, except for acts of willful misconduct, for claims arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administering countermeasures during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
On appeal, the Supreme Court of Vermont, in a brief twelve-page order, affirmed in favor of the defendants, finding that the PREP Act preempted the parents’ state claims because federal law controlled. The panel rejected the parental claim that their suit should have been allowed to proceed because the Act only covers willful misconduct, observing in a footnote that they had not raised such an allegation.
The court next rejected the charge that the experimental nature of the vaccine was sufficient to revoke the defendants’ immunity. The court further determined that because the parental claims were related to the administration of a covered countermeasure under the Act, their suit could not proceed, concluding they “failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because their lawsuit cannot proceed as a matter of law.”
Important questions about the limits of governmental authority
In fairness, the Supreme Court of Vermont arguably, albeit narrowly, correctly interpreted the overly expansive parameters of the PREP Act’s immunity provisions as applied to those administering countermeasures to prevent the spread of diseases, such as COVID-19, during public health emergencies.
At the same time, though, Politella raises two serious, overlapping issues over the Act’s overreaching grant of authority that allowed the HSS Secretary to confer sweeping immunity on persons and entities during public health emergencies. If the parents appeal, the Supreme Court would have the opportunity to clarify the limits of state authority about parental rights.
Regardless of whether the parents appeal, Politella raises important questions about limits on the authority of governmental officials as they increasingly impinge on the long-enshrined rights enunciated in Pierce v. Society of Sisters. In Pierce the Court famously wrote “[t]he child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.” In light of Pierce, the Supreme Court, hopefully in conjunction with the Federal and state governments, will limit the authority of unelected public officials over well-cared-for children, let alone society writ large, public health emergencies notwithstanding.
The first issue considers the extent to which public officials can, or should be allowed to, avoid liability, regardless of intent, when failing to comply with express parental wishes for the well-being of their children as here, to prevent their son from being exposed to risk by being inoculated with an experimental vaccine. The PREP Act’s overreaching in allowing the HSS Secretary to grant sweeping immunity without adequate safeguards, especially if officials ignore (mistakenly or intentionally) parental wishes, is troubling. Even if one accepts school officials’ claim that L.P. was vaccinated by accident, why is no one liable insofar as he verbally protested to the clinic worker that he was not to have been inoculated—combined his father’s having clearly reiterated to the assistant principal that he was not to be vaccinated? Why did the clinic worker not double-check before acting?
So, there is the school officials’ failure to supervise, the negligence of the clinic worker (who remains cloaked by the shield of anonymity) in not conferring with school officials, as well as battery by touching and inoculating L.P. against his will. It is inconceivable to think the Act intended to grant immunity under these circumstances. Moreover, by vaccinating L.P. against the express wishes of his parents, questions arise about the status of informed consent because they clearly objected to their son’s being subjected to an experimental treatment.
The second issue concerns whether legislatively and/or judicially, limits must be placed on the extent to which emergency protocols can trump parental wishes. This matter is especially important in light of a statement by Dr. Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Advisor to the President during the COVID-19 pandemic, that the vaccines did not work “overly well.” Fauci also admitted “there was “no science behind” other COVID restrictions, such as his six-foot social-distancing rules and masking protocols, which he conceded were made up and “sort of just appeared.”
Yet, these arbitrary rules caused millions to suffer needlessly while overriding parental authority over the lives of their children, resulting in significant learning and social losses for countless youngsters, many of whom may never recover.
Given the rights of self-determination and freedom rooted in the Constitution and natural law, this tension between public health policy and parental rights must be resolved in favor of the latter by placing clear limits on the power of unelected bureaucrats who remain unanswerable to voters in our democratic republic. Change must occur to prevent the further erosion of parental rights to direct the upbringing of their children, including caring for their health, as they see fit while exercising their own best judgments.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
The government of Vermont is guilty of child abuse and ought to be sued all the way to the Supreme Court.
Parents: Keep your children far, far away from any agency operated by a government.
I would be interested to know the definition of 1)the adverb ‘mistakenly’ and 2)The phrase ‘parental rights’ in Vermont.
In addition – the statement “deeply sorry that this happened” – how many actually believe this?
the one problem is it’s generally been called a vaccine from the start and it’s actually mRNA
I won’t say this specifically is a reason more adults are refusing to have children–I don’t think anyone would think this kind of thing would happen–but it shows a pattern of behavior/cultural assumptions that people are not thinking about consciously that would prompt people, especially women, to not want children.
Modern society has pretty much reduced the “job” of “parenting/mothering” to being an unpaid taxi-driver/laundry maid. Schools feed, socialize, babysit, educate, and now give medical care to the children. In some cases schools might actually clothe them as well. What is left for the mother to do?
With respect sir, from a lowly MT(ASCP) who worked in the Microbiology Department in a large inner-city hospital for over 30 years before retiring (after my husband died of COVID-19 in 2020), vaccines are God’s gift to mankind and have prevented dreadful diseases and saved many lives over the decades.
I still remember when I was very young and standing in line with my parents to receive the polio vaccine–all the parents were chatting and saying, “Thank God we don’t have to worry about our child(ren) getting polio.” Some parents were crying, they were so happy to be able to protect their children from the dreaded polio virus. Almost everyone back then knew someone who had been healthy and then contracted polio resulting in total paralysis and life in an iron lung.
Why would anyone refuse a gift from God? It is God, not Satan, Who gives men and women the knowledge to figure out the mysteries of infectious disease and how to combat them.
If the COVID vaccine is not as efficacious as many believe it is, so what? That doesn’t indicate a “conspiracy” or “God’s intent for us to avoid the vaccines of man.” Most of our vaccines took years to perfect, and viruses continue to mutate from year to year, which means regularly re-working the vaccines to cover these mutated viruses.
When the first COVID vaccines became available, the hospital that I worked in scheduled sessions for all employees, and I stood in a very long line alongside of doctors, hospital administration, nurses, various techs (lab, XRAY, etc.), housekeeping, dietary, engineering, etc. to get my vaccine. One of the doctors in the line near me was crying, he was so happy to have a hope of protection against the virus, which had killed several of his patients. Many people were thanking God for His mercy in helping scientists to develop the vaccine.
Why would anyone refuse a such a good life-preserving gift from God? Believe me, losing someone to COVID is awful, not only for the loved one who is suffering from the effects of the disease, but for those of us left on this earth. A few days aga on Labor Day, my oldest daughter sent me a long email telling me that she had been crying all day because of the memory of having her dad drive to her city to spend the Labor Day weekend with her during the beginning of the COVD pandemic (I was working that weekend), and they had such a wonderful time together even though many of the restaurants and tourist sites were closed down. And now he’s gone (to heaven, hopefully) and she misses him. We all do, and his amazing little grandson, now 3, will never meet his granddad on this earth.
I do not understand Christians (Catholics) who refuse God’s gift of vaccines. To me, it’s teasing suicide.
What an emotionally manipulative post. I do not understand ignorant lemmings who allow people to inject them with untested vaccines under the assumption that they will provide miracle cures. As it turns out, people’s legitimate questions and concerns about the covid vaccines have been confirmed. Not only did they not prevent covid, they only appear to have been effective for short periods. And then there are those cases where the shots actually harmed people.
Athaanasius: Thank you. Yours is a voice of sane thinking. We’ve had enough of government -induced crises and hysterical reactions.
No offense, but vaccines and mRNA are modern man made inventions. I don’t believe they were mentioned in the Gospels.
mRNA is derived from cells grown from aborted fetuses from the 1970s and 1980s
You can read about it further of course: What Clarence Thomas said about fetal cell lines and COVID-19 vaccines off PolitiFact. Also, the following came from Nebraska Medicine: Now, let’s break down the science
Fetal cell lines are cells that grow in a laboratory. They descend from cells taken from abortions in the 1970s and 1980s.
Those individual cells from the 1970s and 1980s have since multiplied into many new cells over the past four or five decades, creating the fetal cell lines I mentioned above. Current fetal cell lines are thousands of generations removed from the original fetal tissue. They do not contain any tissue from a fetus.
Vaccine makers may use these fetal cell lines during the following two phases:
Research and development
Production and manufacturing
When it comes to the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, fetal cell line HEK 293 was used during the research and development phase. All HEK 293 cells are descended from tissue taken from a 1973 abortion that took place in the Netherlands. Using fetal cell lines to test the effectiveness and safety of medications is common practice, because they provide a consistent and well-documented standard.
For the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, fetal cell lines were used in the production and manufacturing stage. To make the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, scientists infect PER.C6 fetal cell lines to grow the adenovirus vector. (Learn more about how viral vector vaccines work.) All PER.C6 cells used to manufacture the Johnson & Johnson vaccine are descended from tissue taken from a 1985 abortion that took place in the Netherlands. This cell line is used because it is a well-studied industry standard for safe and reliable production of viral vector vaccines.
God is Truth. Why were experimental “vaccines” administered in a way that blocked legal remedies for damages and then being called “safe and effective” in public statements? Ethical administration of an experimental “vaccine” should have required opt-in. During the pandemic people became totally unhinged and were at each other’s throats. No dissent was allowed. Civil rights were freely disregarded. Level-headed thinking appeared to be unacceptable. I have two risk factors for COVID-19 and I thought that there had be better ways than lockdowns that destroyed small businesses and the livelihoods that they had provided.
*
The ruling classes were often found violating their own rules that they imposed on others. Things like not wearing masks, and engaging in activities that they scolded others about. Do as I say, not as I do. A serious lack of solidarity between the ruling classes and the common person on the street. That is why so much of the claimed science was shown to be political science. The pandemic stress test of our ruling classes and society in general showed a lot of rot and decay. A lot of ungodly behavior.
Excellent points; remember the independent barber in Owosso, MI that refused to quit working? Our guv kept saying “follow the science” which has never been disclosed, as far as I know, and even Dr. Fauci said the 6 feet and all that really had no basis.
I don’t agree, Mrs Whitlock. I am sorry for your loss in 2020. We all lost something or someone in that hellish year.
I know of several people who have had extremely bad reactions after taking the experimental vaccine, aka “God’s Gift” Covid is an enhanced version of the flu. It’s usually not life-threatening, except to those who are afflicted with other underlying health issues, such as COPD, cancer, pneumonia and diabetes. Unless this 6 year old kid had a serious health issue that would have put him at risk of dying from covid, there is absolutely no reason the kid should have been administered the vaccine by a Nazi healthcare employee, much less being forced too, which is against his personal human individual freedom and against the wishes of his biological parents, both of which are a true Gift from God.
I had pnem from it and it’s a bugger – it won’t let go as easily as bronchitis will with “normal” drug intervention. One reason it hit the US so hard was we’re largely out of shape and overweight in too much of the population. Of course, now we know the ventilator was not the right choice for many – I just recalled how they were trying to get those manufactured back in 2020.
To simplify, the reported act was apparently not willful, therefore the offending person was not culpable seems to hold. Does not appear that in this case a violation of parental rights was involved. Let’s not be paranoid. Mistakes are made. We are all human. Let’s concentrate on those cases where there is clear evidence of discrimination or violation of our civil rights. This seems to be a case of the “chip on the shoulder “ syndrome.
You have no right to assume it was an innocent mistake. What was the school administration doing allowing the shots on campus in the first place?
Thanks for the comments.
Hard to know how these people escaped liability, cannot make this stuff up.
Many things today are done “out of an abundance of caution” then why wouldn’t they have waited after the warning from the youngster??
Kids should not be getting the mRNA.
I cannot fathom WHY the parents were not notified when an internal procedure, injuection was authored. Is Vermont unique? What about parent involvement with their child’s wellbeing by attending PTA meetings.
If the vaccine is authorized by the FDA, then the federal government must be in control, not the Supreme Court of Vermont!
Fauci?????
Agreed fully.
This is why I have been highlighting the need to safeguard parental rights.
RFK Jr and the other anti vaxxers triumphant. We now worship ignorance.
You’re a ways behind the curve. In fact, we worship unproven and untested “expertise.”
Oh, I forgot. You endorsed Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin with the quacks. Double blind clinical studies showed patients getting a placebo doing better than the Hydroxychloroquine group. People in red states which Pooh poohed the vaccine died at a higher rate,because clowns like Kristi Noem discouraged the vaccine and promoted quackery. She was trying to earn brownie points with Trump, but “Psycho Barbie” offended too many people shooting puppies.
Your mag needs some diversity of opinion, but it is merely a right wing echo chamber spewing conspiracy schlock. Goodbye.
“Your mag needs some diversity of opinion, but it is merely a right wing echo chamber spewing conspiracy schlock.”
Really? Where did we say any of those things at CWR? Where?
Pathetic. Nothing but slander and ranting from you. See ya.
Trump was pushing the vaccine in order to get reelected; which was quite obvious.
Just so CWR readers know, here are the three CWR pieces that mention ivermectin; here are the five that mention hydroxychloroquine. And here is my outrageous (sarcasm) editorial from Dec. 2021 explaining why there was/is, in fact, no moral imperative to take the COVID shots. This is “conspiracy schlock”? Sigh.
tell that to someone who now has myocarditis
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9935942/
https://research.unc.edu/human-research-ethics/resources/ccm3_019064/
“Preparedness Act (PREP Act) 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“
“Immunity from tort liability means there is no legal tort claim that can be pursued in state or federal courts. Tort claims include all claims (except for willful misconduct), under federal or state law for any type of loss including death; physical, mental, or emotional injury; fear of such injury; or property damage or loss, including business interruption loss, with any causal relationship to any stage of development, distribution, administration, dispensing, or sue of the covered countermeasure recommended in the PREP Act declaration.”
Many treatments that could have lessened the symptoms based on diagnostics of the disease were forbidden to be used and only the vaccine , which did not stop the spread or provide immunity, was mandated.
By July 2024, these facts about Covid 19 were known:
https://www.google.com/search?q=iron+deregulation+and+Covid+19&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
ferroptosis and covid 19 – Google Search
https://www.google.com/search?q=hyperferritinemia+and+covid+19&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
And yet no one in HHS has been able to demonstrate how the Covid 19 vaccine restores the proper balance of FURiN, HEPCIDIN and thus IRON, to correct the iron deregulation that can occur from Covid 19 in those susceptible to disease.
How, in July of 2024, could this fact not be due to “willful misconduct “.
Sharon, I am sorry for the loss of your beloved husband. May he rest in the Peace of Christ🙏💕
Simple question, since it is true Covid 19 causes iron deregulation, how exactly does the vaccines correct this iron deregulation and restore the proper balance of Furin, HEPCIDin, and thus Iron?
https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+19+and+iron+deregulation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
I forgot to mention this study:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9797506/
I have repeatedly urged the USCCB and state Catholic conferences, in the wake of the COVID debacle, to make changes in state and federal “emergency” legislation to restrict the state from closing churches or coercing people into experimental vaccines. But the bishops, who refuse to undertake a post-mortem assessment of their COVID response, have done nothing. Ephatha –Open YOUR mouths!
Oh, I forgot. You endorsed Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin with the quacks. Double blind clinical studies showed patients getting a placebo doing better than the Hydroxychloroquine group. People in red states which Pooh poohed the vaccine died at a higher rate,because clowns like Kristi Noem discouraged the vaccine and promoted quackery. She was trying to earn brownie points with Trump, but “Psycho Barbie” offended too many people shooting puppies.
Your mag needs some diversity of opinion, but it is merely a right wing echo chamber spewing conspiracy schlock. Goodbye.
Isn’t Hydrox is related to Sulfa – my folks used that during the depression before Penn
Since it is true that Covid 19 causes iron deregulation,(search COVID 19 and iron deregulation)
, and it is true that Covid 19 in certain susceptible persons can , cause FERROPtosis -(search
COVID 19 and FERROPtosis ) , how does the COVID vaccine correct the iron imbalance in order to be effective?
Thank you for doing this, John!
“Preparedness Act (PREP Act) 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“
Immunity from tort liability means there is no legal tort claim that can be pursued in state or federal courts. Tort claims include all claims (except for willful misconduct), under federal or state law for any type of loss including death; physical, mental, or emotional injury; fear of such injury; or property damage or loss, including business interruption loss, with any causal relationship to any stage of development, distribution, administration, dispensing, or sue of the covered countermeasure recommended in the PREP Act declaration.”Many treatments that could have lessened the symptoms based on diagnostics of the disease were forbidden to be used and only the vaccine , which did not stop the spread or provide immunity, was mandated.
By July 2024, these facts about Covid 19 were known:
https://www.google.com/search?q=iron+deregulation+and+Covid+19&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
ferroptosis and covid 19 – Google Search
https://www.google.com/search?q=hyperferritinemia+and+covid+19&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
And yet no one in HHS has been able to demonstrate how the Covid 19 vaccine restores the proper balance of FURiN, HEPCIDIN and thus IRON, to correct the iron deregulation that can occur from Covid 19 in those susceptible to disease.
How, in July of 2024, could this fact not be due to “willful misconduct “.
That should read:
Simple question, since it is true Covid 19 causes iron deregulation, how exactly do any of the vaccines correct this iron deregulation and restore the proper balance of Furin, HEPCIDin, and thus Iron?
https://www.google.com/search?q=covid+19+and+iron+deregulation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
My second simple question would be:
Since it is not necessary or proper to destroy innocent human life in order to save innocent human life,
How can the Covid “vaccine” mandate possibly pass the Law Of General Applicability Test because FURIN levels and thus HEPCIDin levels, and thus Iron levels, can differ among human persons, and thus mandating this treatment, which is not, in essence, a vaccine that provides immunity from disease, not only violates our Religious Liberty, due to the use of cells from an aborted beloved baby daughter, who obviously could not have consented, but also violates The Free Exercise And Equal Protection Clauses.
Maybe appeal this decision. Since the child objected verbally and communicated to the provider that there was pardental objection, this misconduct was, in fact, willful.
“Anti Vaxxers”= the Enlightened Ones
I’m more a “cautious around mRNA” person.
My CPA swore that invermectin worked for her employee and she as well. I had Remdesivir and that was a bit tough but it worked on the omicron strain
Great discussion, all.
Thanks,
Charlie