COVID-19 Vaccine Makers and Providers Granted Immunity Through 2029
A Dec. 11 amendment to the PREP Act has sparked debate over accountability for COVID-19 vaccine-related injuries.

The Biden administration has extended liability protections for COVID-19 vaccine makers, health care providers, and others through 2029. The decision, which has sparked renewed debate over accountability for vaccine-related injuries and the future of public health policy, ensures immunity from most lawsuits for those involved in the development and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines and other medical countermeasures.
The five-year extension, signed by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra on Dec. 11, continues a policy first implemented during the pandemic under then-President Donald Trump. It is one of the longest liability protections in the history of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act. Proponents argue that the protections are essential for fostering innovation and maintaining public health readiness, but critics contend they leave vaccine-injured individuals without recourse and could limit future administrations’ ability to enact significant policy changes.
While the official COVID-19 public health emergency ended on May 11, 2023, the new declaration warns of a “credible risk of a future public health emergency.”

The PREP Act, enacted in 2005, grants liability immunity to encourage the swift development and deployment of medical countermeasures during public health emergencies. Without this protection, manufacturers and providers might hesitate to produce or distribute critical products—like vaccines or treatments—due to fears of lawsuits over unforeseen side effects. The act was first invoked for COVID-19 in March 2020, covering vaccines, antiviral treatments, diagnostic tools, and protective equipment.

As the United States prepares for potential future outbreaks, this latest extension ensures that legal protections for manufacturers and health care providers remain intact. However, the decision has sparked fresh calls for reform—or even repeal—of the PREP Act, with critics pushing for greater accountability and support for individuals harmed by medical countermeasures.

Broadening Scope of the PREP Act
Amendments to the PREP Act during the pandemic expanded its scope to include telehealth providers and pharmacy technicians, thus speeding up the rollout of vaccines in response to urgent health needs. According to the American Pharmacists Association, these changes improved access in underserved communities, where local pharmacies often serve as primary health care providers.
Nearly 90 percent of Americans live within five miles of a pharmacy. Previous amendments also supported health care providers in non-traditional settings, reflecting the shifting demands of public health emergencies.

“Today’s necessary actions by HHS will continue to save lives and lower health care costs, particularly in rural and underserved areas where the local pharmacy may be the only health care provider for miles,” Michael D. Hogue, CEO of the American Pharmacists Association, said in a press release.

“The main idea here is that we may not want to impose liability on products essential for addressing current or future public health emergencies,” he said.

Concerns Over Broad Immunity
Proponents of the PREP Act argue it is essential for fostering innovation and protecting public health. Critics, however, contend that the law’s broad liability protections come at a significant cost—namely, lack of accountability for those harmed by vaccines or other medical countermeasures.

Attorney Aaron Siri, who has represented people injured by vaccines, argues that the PREP Act shifts the balance away from accountability.
“The PREP Act incentivizes development of products without concern on the manufacturers’ part of being held accountable for resulting harms,” he stated in an email to The Epoch Times. “Bringing a product to market that can cause more harm than good, and hence needs immunity to liability, is nonsensical.”

The extension of immunity protections has raised eyebrows, particularly in light of ongoing assurances about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. “Since we have now been told, ad nauseum, for more than four years that COVID vaccines are safe, then why the need for continued immunity?” Siri asked.
Calls for sweeping reforms—or even the repeal—of the PREP Act have grown louder. On March 5, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced the Let Injured Americans Be Legally Empowered (LIABLE) Act, which would remove liability protections for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and allow individuals to sue companies like Pfizer and Moderna for vaccine-related injuries.

“Many have faced injury from the vaccine, but few have been afforded little recourse. To date, a mere 11 injury claims have been paid out despite nearly 700 million doses of the vaccine having been administered,” Roy said in a press release. “The American people deserve justice for the infringement on their personal medical freedom and those medically harmed deserve restitution.”
Siri agrees that the act no longer serves its intended purpose. “The PREP Act should be repealed in its entirety. It provides no value,” he said. He suggests fostering the development of medical products that are both effective and safe, eliminating the need for liability immunity.
Timing of the 12th Amendment Raises Questions
The extension is set to take effect on Jan. 1, 2025. The timing—just weeks before a presidential transition—ensures these protections will span the next administration and beyond, potentially limiting future policymakers’ flexibility.
The timing of the extension aligns with speculation about future leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been nominated as HHS Secretary in the new administration. Kennedy’s long-standing calls for greater scrutiny of vaccine safety and reduced legal immunities for manufacturers could create tension with the protections solidified in the amendment.

By locking in liability protections until 2029, the amendment sets a public health framework that prioritizes stability during a time of political uncertainty while leaving little room for adjustment by future administrations. While any HHS secretary could theoretically modify or rescind these protections through additional amendments or declarations, the timing of the current extension may reduce flexibility for new leadership in the short term.

Systemic Failures in Vaccine Injury Compensation
The extension of liability protections under the PREP Act draws attention to persistent challenges in the U.S. vaccine injury compensation system, especially for people who have experienced adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.

For Brianne Dressen, a Utah preschool teacher and clinical trial participant, the extended liability protections feel like a dismissal of the struggles those seeking justice and compensation face.

Dressen, who suffered severe neurological complications after participating in AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine trial, has become a vocal advocate for vaccine-injured individuals.
“We have been begging HHS for years to help provide relief to those damaged by the COVID vaccines,” she told The Epoch Times in an email.

“The message the current administration has sent is clear: ‘If you are harmed by a vaccine, we will not help you.’”

Becerra points to the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) as the primary pathway for addressing claims related to vaccine injuries. Established under the PREP Act, CICP was designed to address vaccine safety concerns by providing a pathway for people harmed by vaccines and other covered countermeasures.

However, critics claim the program falls short of its intended purpose. “The CICP is a ‘rigged system’ that leaves harmed individuals without adequate compensation,” Siri said.

Critics also point to low payout rates and a cumbersome filing process, making the program inaccessible to many.

As of Aug. 1, the Health Resources and Services Administration reported 10,226 claims pending or under review—a backlog that a recent House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic report estimated could take nearly a decade to clear without major reforms. The report criticized the CICP for failing to handle the scale of the COVID-19 vaccination program.

Dressen’s organization, React19, supports people navigating these systemic challenges. She describes the current government programs as “smoke and mirrors,” adding, “Instead of protecting the consumer, HHS is committed to protecting the drug companies and corporate interests.”

According to React19, of the approximately 14,000 claims filed under the CICP, only 48 have resulted in compensation. The program has awarded less than $1 million in total. React19 asserts it can “support injured individuals far better than the government.”

HHS had not responded to The Epoch Times’ questions by the time of publication.
Balancing Preparedness and Accountability
The debate surrounding the PREP Act’s liability protections underscores the challenge of balancing public health preparedness with individual accountability.

Some lawmakers have proposed transitioning claims from the CICP to the more comprehensive National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Experts argue this shift could provide greater transparency, increased payouts, and a clearer legal framework for claimants. “The CICP has a more limited scope than the VICP and provides compensation only for ‘covered countermeasures,’ including vaccines,” wrote Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio in the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic report.

Additionally, advocacy groups like React19 continue pushing for expanded government support for individuals harmed by COVID-19 vaccines, emphasizing the need for programs prioritizing fairness and accountability.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...eyMeAHspy%2BR6sGI%3D

So Trump’s HHS just writes a new amendment just as Biden’s HHS did.

The declaration gives the HHS secretary the discretion to nix the whole thing in the case of “willful misconduct.”

I can’t think of a clearer case, so we will see if RFK Jr. is who he says he is.

“The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to issue a Declaration to provide liability immunity to certain individuals and entities (Covered Persons) against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures (Covered Countermeasures), except for claims involving “willful misconduct”


The PREP Act’s complete legal immunity for injuries protects the shots, of course, but also hospitals, doctors, pharmacists, researchers, remdesivir, the ventilator, Paxlovid, and just about anything medically related to covid. The PREP Act provides the HHS Secretary with these vast powers. My law firm is presently suing the federal government to find PREP unconstitutional.

Starting earlier this year, the medical establishment began lobbying for another extension of the state of emergency. Of course, they framed it as wanting to provide better healthcare services. So.

The statute requires a state of emergency for the PREP Act’s effectiveness. The dumbest thing about extending liability immunity through 2029 is that Becerra also had to extend the state of emergency through 2029 as well. That’s your government at work.

As news of this radical extension through 2029 emerged over the last couple days, people posted lots of questions. Rather than get into the weeds, the bottom line is that Robert Kennedy, Jr. can end this nonsense in five minutes, with a new declaration, after he is confirmed as the new Secretary of HHS. Mercifully, at the same time Kennedy can also end the endless state of covid emergency.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

Publicaly release the information on the negative impacts of the vaccines and who made them. You may not be able to prosecute, but you can tank their stock prices. Also release their political contributions.

So this is a blatant and willful confession that the 'vaccine' mandates were criminally dangerous and illegal in execution. . .

Issuing a pardon means there is criminal activity that requires the pardon (you don't need a pardon for non-criminal acts).

And, at the same time, they are STILL pushing people to get covid boosters.

I agree, we should release the info (ALL OF IT) and let the court of public opinion have at it.

RFK Jr (and many whom he discusses the topic with) have wanted to get rid of the blanket legal immunity for vaccines on the childhood schedule and the vaccine injury court. So I see this move as a pre-loading of the system against the incoming administration to make it that much more difficult for them by creating an additional layer to undo.

IOW, this is only nominally about the (hugely profitable) C19 injections. It is really about the big picture of liability immunity for all vaccines and gene-therapy immunological products.

It may also be a hedge to protect the people involved who did all of this in the event Biden does not issue blanket pardons. (Fauci, Pfizer, Daszak, Hotez, Walensky, etc). In another 5 years the public will have moved on from this issue and there would likely be no prosecutions.

It probably provides an obstacle to investigation of what has already happened. The only legal chink in the armor is the "Willful Misconduct". Only once that was proven would any issues of injury, death, or damages be open to litigation.

Chevron is dead ergo cabinet secretaries don't have unchecked power in the same way post-SCOTUS ruling.

You could call these Political Indulgences where you don't need to confess your sins.
Just split the loot with the right people.
You also get to keep the check.
What's not to like if you need one?

The whole biden regime should be in prison.