Tag: lawsuits

Lawsuit claims Covid vaccine injury compensation program violates Constitution

Two women, with support from Children’s Health Defense (CHD), are suing the government agency that oversees the compensation program for Covid vaccine injuries.

Angela K. McInish and Christina Gay Fible say they developed debilitating injuries after receiving Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines. They allege the program violated their constitutional rights by setting eligibility criteria so restrictive that neither woman qualifies for compensation.

The lawsuit, filed against the Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA), challenges the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), alleging it violates constitutional due process and equal protection guarantees by leaving injured individuals with no legal remedy.

CICP was established under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act and processes claims for injuries related to medical countermeasures, including Covid vaccines, administered during a public health emergency.

The PREP Act shields Covid vaccine manufacturers, healthcare workers, and others who administer the shots from liability for most injuries. As a result, people injured by Covid vaccines cannot sue in regular court and must file a claim with CICP within 12 months of injury.

CICP says it “provides compensation for covered serious injuries or deaths.” However, the plaintiffs’ attorney, Ray Flores, said the program’s definition of “serious physical injury” is arbitrary.

Keep reading

Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Ordered to Testify in Dutch COVID Vaccine Injury Lawsuit

Bill Gates and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla will have to appear in person in the Netherlands to testify at a hearing in a COVID-19 vaccine injury lawsuit, a Dutch court ruled late last month.

The court order relates to a lawsuit filed in 2023 by seven people injured by COVID-19 vaccines. One of the victims has since died.

The lawsuit centers around the question “of whether the COVID-19 injections are a bioweapon,” Dutch newspaper De Andere Krant reported. In addition to Gates and Bourla, the suit names 15 other defendants, including former Dutch prime minister and current NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Dutch state, and several Dutch public health officials and journalists.

De Andere Krant said last month’s ruling “is a significant setback for the defendants, who are accused of misleading victims about the ‘safety and effectiveness’ of the vaccines.” However, it “remains to be seen” whether the defendants will comply with the court’s order and appear at next year’s hearing.

The defendants may face additional legal challenges in Dutch courts in the new year. A second lawsuit, filed in March by three COVID-19 vaccine injury victims in the Netherlands, presents a similar set of allegations and names the same defendants.

At a press conference last week, Dutch attorney Peter Stassen, who represents the vaccine-injured plaintiffs in both cases, earlier this month petitioned the courts in both cases to hear in-person testimony by five expert witnesses regarding the safety and efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

According to Stassen, oral hearings will be held in both cases next year, but hearing dates have not yet been scheduled. Stassen seeks to consolidate the cases.

Keep reading

19 Blue States Sue Trump Admin to Preserve Right to Perform Child Sex Changes

A total of nineteen blue states are suing the Trump administration in a bid to protect the right to perform child sex changes.

Last week, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he would cut off Medicare and Medicaid funding to any provider that offers so-called gender-affirming treatment to minors.

“Under my leadership, and answering President Trump’s call to action, the federal government will do everything in its power to stop unsafe, irreversible practices that put our children at risk,” Kennedy said at the time.

The Oregon-led lawsuit claims that the decision “exceeds the Secretary’s authority and violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the Medicare and Medicaid statutes.”

Oregon Attorney General Dayfield argued that child sex changes are an essential form of healthcare.

His office said in a press release:

Attorney General Dan Rayfield today led a coalition of 18 other states and the District of Columbia in suing to ensure the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) cannot threaten providers with a so-called declaration that baselessly and unlawfully attempts to limit a family’s ability to work with their providers to make the healthcare decisions without interference from the federal government.

The declaration falsely claims that certain forms of gender-affirming care are “unsafe and ineffective” and threatens to punish any doctors, hospitals, and clinics that continue to provide it with exclusion from the federal Medicare and Medicaid programs.

“By targeting Oregon providers, HHS is putting care at risk and forcing families to choose between their personal health care choices and their doctor’s ability to practice,” said Attorney General Rayfield.

“Healthcare decisions belong with families and their healthcare providers, not the government.”

Among the states signed up to the lawsuit are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, Washington, and D.C.

Keep reading

Trump’s DOJ Sues Washington, D.C. Police Department Over Unconstitutional Ban on Semi-Automatic Firearms

The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the District of Columbia’s Metropolitan Police Department for enforcing a ban on semi-automatic firearms in violation of the Second Amendment.

The lawsuit alleges that D.C.’s gun laws require registration of all firearms with the MPD; however, the D.C. Code imposes a sweeping ban on numerous protected weapons, making it legally impossible for residents to own them for self-defense or other lawful purposes.

The DOJ said in a press release announcing the lawsuit:

“MPD’s current pattern and practice of refusing to register protected firearms is forcing residents to sue to protect their rights and to risk facing wrongful arrest for lawfully possessing protected firearms.”

“Today’s action from the Department of Justice’s new Second Amendment Section underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi.

Bondi continued, “Washington, DC’s ban on some of America’s most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation’s capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

Echoing this sentiment, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division added, “This Civil Rights Division will defend American citizens from unconstitutional restrictions of commonly used firearms, in violation of their Second Amendment rights. The newly established Second Amendment Section filed this lawsuit to ensure that the very rights D.C. resident Mr. Heller secured 17 years ago are enforced today — and that all law-abiding citizens seeking to own protected firearms for lawful purposes may do so.”

The case draws directly from the landmark 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, where the Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to own semi-automatic weapons in their homes for self-defense.

Back in 2003, D.C. special policeman Richard Heller challenged the District’s handgun ban, leading to this pivotal ruling. Yet, nearly two decades later, D.C. continues to enforce similar unconstitutional restrictions, resulting in wrongful arrests and denials of basic rights.

Keep reading

Kansas Attorney General And Law Enforcement Sued Over Raids On Hemp Businesses

A McPherson County lawsuit filed by a Kansas business owner challenges “unconstitutionally vague” enforcement operations leading to seizure of cash and hemp-derived products at direction of the state’s attorney general and director of the Kansas Bureau of Investigation.

KBI director Tony Mattivi and Attorney General Kris Kobach said in October law enforcement officers raided CBD and vape shops to serve more than a dozen search warrants on businesses suspected of not complying with state drug law.

In a statement, Mattivi said targeted stores were “nothing but weed dealers” and the state must “enforce our controlled-substance laws when we have these substances causing bad effects on Kansas kids.”

Barry Grissom and Jake Miller, of a law firm based in Kansas City, Missouri, responded Monday by seeking on behalf of Mike Ballinger, owner of the McPherson CBD store Hanging Leaf, a court injunction to stop comparable raids and to compel return of seized property.

“The pleadings speak for themselves,” said Grissom, a former U.S. attorney for the District of Kansas and advocate for legalizing marijuana sales and consumption in Kansas.

Both Mattivi and Kobach, in their official capacity, were named in the filing requesting injunctive relief from “recent enforcement actions involving hemp products legally permitted under Kansas law.”

On October 1, Mattivi and Kobach disclosed their statewide “marijuana enforcement operation” focused on vape shops and CBD dispensaries. This law enforcement effort resulted in execution of at least 15 search warrants across Kansas.

The lawsuit said authorities seized $7,000 in inventory as well as cash from Hanging Leaf. A portion of cash taken into custody at Hanging Leaf was property of an unrelated business operated by the plaintiff, the suit said.

Attorneys for the plaintiff said Kansas law permitted hemp products with no more than 0.3 percent Delta-9 THC or tetrahydrocannabinol. The plaintiff alleged KBI testing with gas chromatography was capable of detecting “only the presence of THC and cannot determine the origin” of the substance. The suit says the KBI testing regimen improperly resulted in seizure of compliant goods.

In addition, the plaintiff asserted unconstitutional vagueness of Kansas law fostered “arbitrary enforcement that chills protected business activities.” The filing requested raids to be forbidden until the state adopted legal protection for products under 0.3 percent hemp derived from Delta-9 THC.

Keep reading

Justice Department Sues Four States Including Georgia After Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger Sides With Democrats in Failure to Produce Voter Rolls

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has launched federal lawsuits against four states, Georgia, Illinois, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, for refusing to turn over full, unredacted voter registration lists upon request, according to official DOJ filings and press statements.

This latest filing brings the total number of federal lawsuits against states over voter data to 22 nationwide.

The centerpiece of the legal offensive is Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R), who has inexplicably aligned with Democratic state officials and election bureaucrats in resisting federal efforts to access complete voter rolls ahead of the 2026 midterms.

DOJ attorneys filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia after the materials provided by Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office were incomplete and failed to include key data fields requested by federal officials, such as voters’ full names, dates of birth, residential addresses, state driver’s license numbers, or the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.

Raffensperger, however, said his office provided the Justice Department with documentation outlining the state’s voter roll maintenance practices along with the publicly available voter registration data.

“Georgia has the cleanest voter rolls in the country because we verify citizenship through the federal SAVE database, use SSA (Social Security Administration) data to remove dead voters, and share data with other states to identify and remove voters who have moved,” Secretary Raffensperger said in a statement.

Keep reading

CDC Sued for Pushing Illegal 72-Dose Childhood Vaccine Schedule

First reported by The Defender, a new federal lawsuit is challenging the CDC’s entire childhood vaccine program.

Filed by Dr. Paul Thomas, Dr. Kenneth P. Stoller, and Stand for Health Freedom, the lawsuit accuses the CDC of recommending 72+ vaccine doses for American children without ever testing the cumulative schedule for safety.

Both doctors previously paid a heavy price for questioning the hyper-vaccination program:

  • Dr. Thomas had his license suspended five days after publishing a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study.
  • Dr. Stoller lost his license for granting exemptions based on genetic vulnerabilities.

What the Lawsuit Alleges

  • No safety testing: Neither the CDC nor FDA has ever studied the long-term, combined effects of the full childhood schedule — despite two decades of warnings from the Institute of Medicine (2002, 2013).
  • 27 years of silence: By law, HHS must file biennial reports to Congress on vaccine safety efforts. Not a single report has been issued since 1998.
  • Constitutional violations: The suit charges the CDC with violating the First Amendment (silencing dissenting doctors), the Fifth Amendment (due process & bodily integrity), and the Administrative Procedure Act (arbitrary and capricious rulemaking).

What Plaintiffs Seek

  • Reclassify all childhood vaccines to Category B — shifting to shared decision-making, which would make medical exemptions far easier to obtain.
  • Require rigorous safety studies comparing fully vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children before any return to a mandated schedule.
  • End retaliation against doctors — protecting physicians who issue exemptions based on individualized medical judgment.

If successful, this lawsuit wouldn’t just expose the unlawful CDC hyper-vaccination program — it would mark a major victory for families seeking vaccine exemptions and for physicians fighting to practice real individualized medicine.

Keep reading

Nevada is the latest of 18 states sued by US government for voter data

The lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division adds Nevada to a growing list of 18 states facing litigation over sensitive state voter data.

The suit comes after months of DOJ demands for complete state voting registration lists, which Nevada and other states have repeatedly denied and called intimidation in an effort to influence elections. President Donald Trump lost all 18 states in the 2020 election, with Nevada one of three states with Republican governors.

The Trump administration said in the filings that it would like to use the voting registrations to verify the states are following federal election law in an effort to strengthen voting security.

Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution says states administer elections and determine their “Times, Places and Manner.”

Nevada, along with most other states, had already denied a request to provide the sensitive voter data. The initial request by the DOJ Civil Rights Division in August called for complete voter registration lists – including Social Security numbers and information about driver’s licenses. Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar said at the time that the state needed more time to look over the “unprecedented” request.

“Despite our simple requests for information on how they’re going to keep this data secure, they’ve given us no clear answers,” Aguilar wrote in response to the suit filing announced Friday. “It’s my duty to follow Nevada law and protect the best interests of Nevadans, which includes protecting their sensitive information and access to the ballot.”

The DOJ Civil Rights Division announced similar suits in Colorado, Hawaii and Massachusetts on Friday. They also sued for 2020 voting records from Fulton County, Georgia after an ongoing election interference case against Trump and allies in the state was dismissed last month.

“At this Department of Justice, we will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal elections laws,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who oversees the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. “If states will not fulfill their duty to protect the integrity of the ballot, we will.”

Wyoming and Indiana provided complete voting registration lists with driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers. Ten other states responded to the DOJ Civil Rights Division with publicly available versions of the voter registration lists, with the sensitive information redacted.

Keep reading

This Tennessee Man Spent 37 Days in Jail for Sharing an Anti-Trump Meme. He Says the Cops Should Pay for That.

In the aftermath of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s murder on September 10, his admirers were offended by online messages that denigrated him, condemned his views, and in some cases even celebrated his death. The people outraged by that commentary evidently included Nick Weems, sheriff of Perry County, Tennessee, who used the powers of his office to strike back at Kirk’s detractors.

As Reason‘s Joe Lancaster reported in October, Weems arranged the arrest of a Kirk critic, Henderson County resident Larry Bushart, on a flagrantly frivolous criminal charge. Because Bushart was unable to cover the staggering $2 million bond demanded for his release (which would have required him to “pay a bondsman at least $210,000,” Lancaster noted), he spent 37 days in jail before the district attorney for Perry County dropped the charge against him after the case drew widespread criticism.

Bushart’s arrest for constitutionally protected speech violated the First Amendment, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) argues in a federal lawsuit against Perry County, Weems, and Jason Morrow, an investigator in the sheriff’s office. The complaint, which was filed on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, says the defendants also violated the Fourth Amendment by arresting Bushart without probable cause. And because they pursued a malicious prosecution, FIRE argues, they should be liable for punitive as well as compensatory damages.

“I spent over three decades in law enforcement, and have the utmost respect for the law,” says Bushart, whose career included 19 years at the Jackson Police Department, five years at the Haywood County Sheriff’s Office, and nine years at the Tennessee Department of Correction. “But I also know my rights, and I was arrested for nothing more than refusing to be bullied into censorship.”

Weems was irked by Bushart’s response to a candlelight vigil for Kirk that was scheduled for the evening of September 20 on the lawn of the Perry County Courthouse—an event that the sheriff himself had promoted on Facebook. That day, Bushart saw a post about the vigil on the “What’s Happening, Perry County?” Facebook page. Commenting on that message, Bushart shared eight anti-Kirk memes, including one highlighting a comment that Donald Trump, then a presidential candidate, made the day after the January 2024 mass shooting at Perry High School in Iowa.

Keep reading

Lawsuit: Female Inmates Forced to Live with Trans-Identifying Males at Texas Special Needs Women’s Prison After Initial Court Win

Two female inmates at a federal prison for women with special needs in Fort Worth, Texas, saw a landmark early court win in November when a judge ordered transgender-identifying male inmates to be housed away from them following claims of sexual abuse.

But rather than keep the biological males completely separate from the female prison population at Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Carswell, Texas, Warden Tyal Rule has chosen to move the males to different housing units to live among other female inmates during litigation, a court filing first obtained by Breitbart News alleges.

In the November temporary restraining order, a judge in one of the nation’s most conservative district courts gave Rule the option to house trans-identifying male inmates in their own area or in another female housing unit away from the two plaintiffs, inmates Rhonda Fleming and Miriam Herrera. Rule chose the latter, allowing biological males, most of whom have not undergone surgical modifications, to live among other female inmates, the filing alleges. Several female inmates in the housing units where the trans-identifying males have been moved are now asking to join the lawsuit in the hopes of also securing protection for themselves.

Attorneys Brian Field and John Greil with D.C. law firm Schaerr|Jaffe LLP are representing four women who are asking the court to include them in the lawsuit, called a “motion to intervene” in legalese. Attorneys first asked for inmates Elizabeth Hardin and Brenda Kirk to be added to the lawsuit on Nov. 10, and on Wednesday they are asking the court to add inmates Jasmine Meabon and Keisha Williams, who are now living with transgender-identifying males who were moved into their housing unit following the court’s order. 

“Having been ordered to protect Plaintiffs Fleming and Herrera from biological males, the Warden simply took a male inmate and moved him into a different women’s unit in the same prison,” the attorneys wrote in the proposed complaint. “Instead of solving the problem, he chose to injure different women.”

The Department of Justice (DOJ), which oversees the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), appears to be against more female inmates seeking redress in this case, asking the court on Dec. 1 not to allow more plaintiffs to be added to the case on procedural grounds. The DOJ’s position seems surprising, given President Donald Trump’s executive order mandating the removal of biological men from women’s prisons. The executive order has been on pause during other litigation brought by transgender-identifying inmates in a D.C. case, but that litigation would not bar the segregation of trans-identifying males inside women’s prisons for safety purposes. 

The DOJ did not respond to request for comment by time of publication, and the BOP told Breitbart News via email that it “does not comment on pending litigation or matters that are the subject of legal proceedings.”

When asked about apparent DOJ opposition in the case, Field and Greil said: “That’s the million-dollar question.” 

“It’s clear that Warden Tyal Rule is fighting the president’s policy, and he’s likely hoping that the White House doesn’t notice,” they told Breitbart News. “In fact, even when he faced a court order, Warden Rule did the absolute minimum to comply. It’s possible that this matter has flown under the radar at Main Justice and the White House, but DOJ needs to put eyes on it, hold folks accountable, and make sure that the President’s policies become reality.”

Keep reading