Telegram is where we really talk. Don't miss out!
A school district cannot be sued for administering a COVID-19 vaccine to a young child despite the parents’ explicit instructions against it. The Vermont Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Windham Southeast School District and the Vermont Department of Health on Friday, stating that the organizations are not legitimate targets of the family’s lawsuit, bringing an apparent end to a legal saga that has been ongoing since 2021.
The issue began in November 2021, when a 6-year-old, named L.P. in court records, was given one dose of a Pfizer vaccine at a clinic hosted by the district and health department. According to WPMI-TV, prior to the clinic, the 6-year-old’s parents informed the school that their child was not to be vaccinated.
An official at the school allegedly understood and acknowledged the parents’ orders. Despite this, L.P. was given a nametag with another student’s name on it. The student whose name was on the tag had already received a dose earlier in the day. L.P. protested and told the adults in charge that “Dad said no.” Despite this, clinic workers administered the dose.
Soon realizing the gravity of this error, the district contacted the parents and apologized to no avail — L.P. was pulled from the school. “We are deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures,” WSSD Superintendent Mark Speno said in a public apology shortly after the incident, the Bennington Banner reported. “Thankfully, we are not aware of any harm to the student because of this mistake,” he continued. “We take our responsibilities to students and families very seriously, and we respect parents’ rights to make health care decisions for their children.”
The parents of L.P. were not convinced by this apology and filed suit in September 2022. On Friday, the state’s highest court cited a federal law in its dismissal of the family’s lawsuit. “Plaintiffs sued various named and unnamed state and school defendants,” the court’s ruling reads. “We conclude that defendants are immune from suit under the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act).”
Justices decided that all defendants in this case are protected from litigation under this law. “We conclude that the PREP Act immunizes every defendant in this case and this fact alone is enough to dismiss the case,” the court’s ruling continues. “Plaintiffs’ arguments about preemption are misplaced, and therefore we need not decide today the extent of the PREP Act’s preemptive effect. We conclude that when the federal PREP Act immunizes a defendant, the PREP Act bars all state-law claims against that defendant as a matter of law.”
The parents’ case, the court finally affirmed, cannot proceed as a matter of law.
