{"id":78547,"date":"2021-08-11T07:43:12","date_gmt":"2021-08-11T11:43:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=78547"},"modified":"2021-08-11T07:43:24","modified_gmt":"2021-08-11T11:43:24","slug":"ican-responds-to-the-dojs-incorrect-conclusion-that-an-emergency-use-vaccine-can-be-mandated","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=78547","title":{"rendered":"ICAN RESPONDS TO THE DOJ\u2019S INCORRECT CONCLUSION THAT AN EMERGENCY USE VACCINE CAN BE MANDATED"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>From: &#8220;ICAN Legal Update&#8221;<\/p>\n<div>Since the three COVID-19 vaccines were granted emergency use authorization (<strong>EUA<\/strong>) in the U.S., the question of whether employers, schools, and others can mandate the vaccines has been heavily debated.\u00a0At the crux of the debate is Section 564 of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (<strong>FDCA<\/strong>), codified at <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568714:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568714:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEfaqdiuMjp66KeH_il6tNA3iPuIg\">21 U.S.C. \u00a7 360bbb-3<\/a> (<strong>Section 564<\/strong>), which provides \u201crequired conditions\u201d for EUA products including that:<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>the Secretary \u2026 shall \u2026 establish \u2026 [a]ppropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed \u2026 of <strong>the option to accept or refuse administration of the product<\/strong>, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>On July 26, 2021, an <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568715:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568715:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHtIurPo8ZrcKECe71Ta00LlMYCFA\">opinion<\/a> written by the Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (\u201c<strong>DOJ<\/strong>\u201d) was released to the public.\u00a0The opinion was addressed to the Deputy Counsel to the President, part of an administration whose <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568716:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568716:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFXNe2o7N1Eyl0jNd2tNnIxKUkHqQ\">stated<\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568717:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568717:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFwl_ZJlsY_KptKSjt0yIyJr_5M-A\"> goal<\/a> is to vaccinate as many Americans as possible, and concludes \u201cthat section 564 of the FDCA does not prohibit public or private entities from imposing vaccination requirements, even when the only vaccines available are those authorized under EUAs.\u201d<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>ICAN promptly and thoroughly responded in <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568718:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568718:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEjN8iPnl901t7X7bQjYGD6rg-rvQ\">a letter<\/a> to the DOJ. ICAN\u2019s attorneys explain in careful detail how this conclusion runs contrary to the text of Section 564, its statutory framework, the history surrounding its passage, and its consistent interpretation by the FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (<strong>CDC<\/strong>), the Department of Defense (<strong>DOD<\/strong>), and other federal agencies.\u00a0ICAN\u2019s response highlights the experimental nature of EUA products and the long settled legal precedent which establishes that it is not legal to coerce an individual to accept an experimental product.<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>It further provides the historical background and evidence that Congress\u2019 intent in enacting Section 564 was to provide only one limited exception to the option to accept or refuse EUA products \u2013 that exception applies only to military personnel and only when national security is at risk.\u00a0Federal agencies have also historically interpreted Section 564 as a prohibition on mandates of EUA products, and ICAN\u2019s letter highlights these interpretations from the CDC, FDA, DOD, and the U.S. General Services Administration.<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>ICAN also pointed out it would be illogical that Congress would require that individuals be informed of a freedom of choice if that choice is illusory at the whim of any public or private entity, and concluded its letter by urging the DOJ to revise its Slip Opinion and enforce Section 564 by making clear that it <strong>prohibits<\/strong> entities from requiring the use of an EUA product.<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>\n<p>Read the full letter <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568718:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568718:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEjN8iPnl901t7X7bQjYGD6rg-rvQ\">here<\/a> and share it far and wide so that the correct interpretation of Section 564 and the fundamental right to be free from coercion with respect to unlicensed medical products ultimately prevails.<\/p>\n<p>To share this legal update, please use this link: <a href=\"http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568719:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" data-saferedirecturl=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?q=http:\/\/paracom.paramountcommunication.com\/ct\/58568719:WMRqw9dNl:m:1:2386566805:54664AA37B4ED5BDBB3A46D96B7B8A3E:r&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1628768155223000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEhL6Nve0NQPosrfbnuY1nB6Z8DMw\">https:\/\/www.icandecide.org\/<wbr \/>ican_press\/ican-responds-to-<wbr \/>the-dojs-incorrect-conclusion-<wbr \/>that-an-emergency-use-vaccine-<wbr \/>can-be-mandated\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>\n<p>*\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 *\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 *<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div><strong>Openings for Legal Positions:\u00a0 If you are an attorney with civil litigation or class action experience (located any place in the United States) or paralegal (located in the Pacific time-zone), a law firm that regularly represents ICAN may have an opening for these positions.\u00a0If interested, please send resume and short cover letter to <\/strong><a href=\"mailto:jenna@icandecide.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>jenna@icandecide.org<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>From: &#8220;ICAN Legal Update&#8221; Since the three COVID-19 vaccines were granted emergency use authorization (EUA) in the U.S., the question of whether employers, schools, and others can mandate the vaccines has been heavily debated.\u00a0At the crux of the debate is &hellip; <a href=\"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=78547\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=78547"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78547\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=78547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=78547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=78547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}