North Carolina justices decide family can sue over unwanted COVID-19 shot
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina mother and son can sue a public school system and a doctors' group on allegations they gave the boy a COVID-19 vaccine without consent, the state Supreme Court ruled on Friday, reversing a lower-court decision that declared a federal health emergency law blocked the litigation.
A trial judge and later the state Court of Appeals had ruled against Emily Happel and her son Tanner Smith, who at age 14 received the vaccination in August 2021 despite his protests at a testing and vaccination clinic at a Guilford County high school, according to the family's lawsuit.
Smith went to the clinic to be tested for COVID-19 after a cluster of cases occurred among his school's football team. He did not expect the clinic would be providing vaccines as well, according to the litigation. Smith told workers he didn't want a vaccination, and he lacked a signed parental consent form to get one. When the clinic was unable to reach his mother, a worker instructed another to 'give it to him anyway,' Happel and Smith allege in legal briefs.
Happel and Smith sued the Guilford County Board of Education and an organization of physicians who helped operate the school clinic, alleging claims of battery and that their constitutional rights were violated.
A panel of the intermediate-level appeals court last year ruled unanimously that the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act shielded the school district and the Old North State Medical Society from liability. The law places broad protections and immunity on an array of individuals and organizations who perform 'countermeasures' during a public health emergency. A COVID-19 emergency declaration in March 2020 activated the law's immunity provisions, Friday's decision said.
Chief Justice Paul Newby, writing Friday's prevailing opinion, said that the federal law did not prevent the mother and son from suing on allegations that their rights in the state constitution had been violated. In particular, he wrote, there is the right for a parent to control their child's upbringing and the 'right of a competent person to refuse forced, nonmandatory medical treatment.'
The federal law's plain text led a majority of justices to conclude that its immunity only covers tort injuries, Newby wrote, which is when someone seeks damages for injuries caused by negligent or wrongful actions. 'Because tort injuries are not constitutional violations, the PREP Act does not bar plaintiffs' constitutional claims,' he added while sending the case back presumably for a trial on the allegations.
The court's five Republican justices backed Newby's opinion, including two who wrote a short separate opinion suggesting the immunity found in the federal law should be narrowed further.
Associate Justice Allison Riggs, writing a dissenting opinion backed by the other Democratic justice on the court, said that state constitutional claims should be preempted from the federal law. Riggs criticized the majority for 'fundamentally unsound' constitutional analyses.
'Through a series of dizzying inversions, it explicitly rewrites an unambiguous statute to exclude state constitutional claims from the broad and inclusive immunity,' Riggs said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies
U.S. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attend an event in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit - Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images On May 11, 2023, President Joseph Biden ended the COVID-19 public health emergency, calling an finish to the pandemic. By the end of 2023, COVID-19 claimed the lives of over 20 million people around the world. But through international cooperation and evidence-based science, vaccines were developed and the world moved on. Indeed, perhaps the biggest success of the period was the quick production of a COVID-19 vaccine. The research behind the mRNA vaccine had been ongoing since the 1970s, but the emergency of the pandemic and international sharing of knowledge helped bring the vaccine to fruition. Today, the COVID-19 vaccine has been credited with saving 2.4 million lives around the world. But now, the U.S. is choosing competition over cooperation. With President Donald Trump's day one executive order to leave the World Health Organization (WHO)—blaming their COVID-19 response—and the shuttering of USAID, the country is taking steps towards further dividing health efforts across the globe. Here in the U.S., a sudden end to $11.4 billion of covid-related grants is stifling national pandemic preparedness efforts on the local and state levels. And most recently, Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. purged experts from the CDC Advisory Committee, putting lives at risk. Historical lessons demonstrate the need for global health infrastructure that works together, shares knowledge, and remembers that pathogens do not stop at borders. White House's Pandemic Office, Busy With Bird Flu, May Shrink Under Trump One of the greatest global health achievements of all time—smallpox eradication—provides a perfect example of what can be done with independent scientific research and international cooperation. During the Cold War between the U.S. and USSR, decades of tension brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Yet, incredibly, the nations managed to find common ground to support the efforts of smallpox eradication. Indeed, they understood the strategic benefits that came from letting public health practitioners and scientists work outside of political divides. The WHO was founded after World War II in 1948. Its formation marked a move from international health, that focused on nations, to global health, that would serve humanity first. The WHO's first eradication effort was the failed, U.S.-backed, Malaria Eradication Program from 1955 to 1969. The Smallpox Eradication Program, with intensive efforts beginning in 1967, provided a chance for redemption for the U.S. and WHO. For the United States, investing in disease eradication and poverty helped to mitigate growing backlash against the Vietnam War. In June of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, 'I propose to dedicate this year to finding new techniques for making man's knowledge serve man's welfare.' He called for 1965—the same year he ordered ground troops to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism —to be a year of international cooperation that could bypass the politics of the Cold War. Previously, the USSR did not participate in the U.S. and WHO's first, failed global eradication plan for malaria. But upon rejoining the WHO in 1956, it was the Soviets who made the first call and investment into global eradication of smallpox in 1958. The WHO functioning as a mediator was crucial to allowing the USSR and the U.S. to work together. It allowed both nations to avoid giving credit to each other; rather success went to science itself. President Johnson called this 'a turning point' away from 'man against man' towards 'man against nature.' The limited role of politicians in the program proved to be key to its success. Scientists made decisions and worked together—no matter what country they came from—by focusing on disease and vaccination, not international tensions. The Soviet-initiated program was lead by Donald A. Henderson, a U.S. epidemiologist, who worked alongside the Russians until the last case of smallpox occurred in Somalia on October 26, 1977. During the 20th century, smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 to 500 million deaths. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated by the WHO in October 1980, and is today still the only human disease to achieve this distinction. Less than a year after the declaration of smallpox eradication, the emergence of another pandemic, the HIV/AIDS crisis, reinforced the importance of science-first cooperation over politically-driven decision making. In June 1981, the first cases of a new unknown disease were reported in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In short order, gay men were stigmatized and blamed in what would become one of the biggest public health disasters of all time. It took years of grassroots science-based activism to move beyond HIV/AIDS victim-blaming and find medical solutions. The Poster Child for AIDS Obscured as Much About the Crisis as He Revealed Too often, governments across the globe placed blame on the gay community for their 'sins' and did not provide needed support, leaving the sick to suffer and die. The pharmaceutical companies profited from the limited medications they had available and did not pursue sufficient development. The FDA process for new drugs was scheduled to take nine years, at a time when life expectancy after receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis was one year. These issues sparked activism, spawning the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) in 1987. ACT UP organizers took science into their own hands and began educating themselves. Members began reading scientific journals religiously, learning the chemistry and epidemiology of drug manufacturing and clinical trials. Members learned how to translate these dense scientific messages to educate the community members on what was—and what was not—being done to help. Because of this work, the FDA changed policies to allow for new treatments to be tested at accelerated rates in times of emergency. ACT UP was able to shift the cultural blame showing that the issue was a result of politics getting in the way of scientific advancements. By 1990, ACT UP influenced the largest federal HIV program to pass Congress, the Ryan White CARE Act. This program was a vital precursor to the 2003 PEPFAR (The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) global initiative. Both of these histories offer a powerful lesson: global health is national health, and national health is local health. With the recent funding cuts from the U.S. government, the future of global health is going in an unknown direction. And yet, the occurrence of pandemics is expected to increase in frequency due to climate change, mass migration, urbanization, and ecosystem destruction. It has been estimated that there is about a 25% chance we will have another COVID-sized pandemic within the next 10 years. No matter how secure the world makes borders, history shows that it can not protect us from disease if we do not have a strong, interconnected public health infrastructure. Luke Jorgensen is a Master of Public Health student at Purdue University where his epidemiology research examines human migration and infectious disease. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
What to know about the new ‘Nimbus' COVID variant
The World Health Organization is keeping an eye on a new COVID-19 variant called NB.1.8.1, or 'Nimbus,' that has spread across Europe, the Americas and the Western Pacific. Nimbus is a descendant of the Omicron variant of the virus and was first identified in late January. Its spike mutations appear to make it more transmissible than other COVID variants, according to the WHO. Spike mutations refer to changes in spike proteins, which sit on the surface of the virus and help it enter healthy cells. While it is spreading in the U.S. and Canada, along with 20 other countries, it does not appear to be driving an increase in sickness or hospitalization. In April, NB.1.8.1 sequences made up 10.7 percent of all submitted sequences from confirmed COVID infections, up from 2.5 percent a month earlier, according to a risk evaluation released by the WHO. The WHO last month deemed NB.1.8.1 a variant 'under monitoring.' Here's what to know about the variant. Most cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. still stem from the LP.8.1 strain, another Omicron descendant. But it looks like NB.1.8.1 might soon replace it as the more common strain, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC estimates that 37 percent of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. stem from the NB.1.8.1 variant while 38 percent are a result from an infection of the LP.8.1 strain of the disease. At the end of May, the agency estimated that the NB.1.8.1 variant caused about 15 percent of all COVID cases. But the agency notes on its website that due to low numbers of virus sequences being reported, precision in the most recent reporting period is low. The NB.1.8.1 variant has been found in at least 13 states, according to Today, which cited data from the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) database. Those states are: California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Arizona, Illinois, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. The available data on 'Nimbus' suggests that it poses a low global threat and that existing COVID-19 vaccines provide adequate protection against severe illness and hospitalization, according to the WHO. 'Currently approved COVID-19 vaccines are expected to remain effective to this variant against symptomatic and severe disease,' reads the WHO's risk evaluation. 'Despite a concurrent increase in cases and hospitalizations in some countries where NB.1.8.1 is widespread, current data do not indicate that this variant leads to more severe illness than other variants in circulation.' Lionel Gesh, an international consultant at the WHO, told The Hill that many new cases in Canada are likely linked to the NB.1.8.1 variant, but that there has not been any major changes in the country in terms of cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions or deaths linked to COVID-19. Symptoms of NB.1.8.1 seem to be similar to those associated with other Omicron variants, according to Gresh. Some common COVID-19 symptoms include cough, fever, fatigue, muscle aches, congestion, headache, nausea, vomiting, and a new loss of smell or taste, according to the CDC. 'We should be as concerned about [NB.1.8.1] as we are concerned for COVID in general,' Gesh said. 'Not more, not less.' Some recent COVID-19 patients have reported experiencing something called 'razor blade throat,' according to Salon. But it is unclear if that symptom is connected to one of the COVID variants or another respiratory illness circulating, Ryan Gregory, an evolutionary and genome biologist at the University of Guelph in Canada, told the outlet.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Hundreds of laid-off CDC employees are being reinstated
NEW YORK (AP) — More than 460 laid-off employees at the nation's top public health agency received notices Wednesday that they are being reinstated, according to a union representing the workers. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirmed reinstatement notices went out to the former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention employees, but provided few details. About 2,400 CDC employees lost their jobs in a wave of cuts across federal health agencies in early April, according to a tally at the time. Whole CDC programs were essentially shut down, including some focused on smoking, lead poisoning, gun violence, asthma and air quality, and workplace safety and health. The entire office that handles Freedom of Information Act requests was shuttered. Infectious disease programs took a hit, too, including programs that fight outbreaks in other countries, labs focused on HIV and hepatitis in the U.S., and staff trying to eliminate tuberculosis. An estimated 200 of the reinstated workers are based in the CDC's National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and Tuberculosis Prevention, HHS officials confirmed. Staffers at a CDC lab that does testing for sexually transmitted diseases are being brought back, said one CDC employee who wasn't authorized to discuss what happened and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. Also reinstated are an estimated 150 employees at the CDC's National Center for Environmental Health, including people staffing a lab that works on lead poisoning, according to the union and employees. Layoffs at federal agencies were challenged in lawsuits, with judges in some cases ordering federal agencies to halt terminations of employees. Officials at HHS have never detailed how they made the layoff decisions in the first place. And they did not answer questions about why the notices went out, or how decisions were made about who to bring back. HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said the agency was streamlining operations and that 'the nation's critical public health functions remain intact and effective.' "The Trump Administration is committed to protecting essential services — whether it's supporting coal miners and firefighters through NIOSH, safeguarding public health through lead prevention, or researching and tracking the most prevalent communicable diseases,' he said. This is not the first time that employees at the Atlanta-based agency were told they were being terminated only to then be told to come back. After an earlier round of termination notices went out in February, about 180 CDC employees in March were told to come back. __ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
