Noone should be exempt from liability, not Big Pharma, not the UN, not the BIS, NOONE! Congress or any other legislative body should be able to pass law providing for exemption for liability as they have done with the Cares Act and Vaccine Liability. Exemption from liability provides cover for those who commit criminal acts.
17 Likes
Thanks for sharing, Skippy. In your view, would resolving this primarily require repealing/amending existing legislation, or passing new legislation, or both?
You mention the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), and vaccine liability (which @Leslie-HFDF discusses in her policy piece), which cover Big Pharma and the healthcare system in general.
I’m curious as to whether there are other similar laws in place that cover international entities like the United Nations and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). Obviously those would be of a different nature and would cover different problematic activities than the pharmaceutical industry, but it would be awesome to start narrowing those down so we can examine them closer and look at solutions.
3 Likes
Liam, I am not that familiar with how we might make these changes around liability, however, I do think it outrageous that political organizations like the UN, WHO, EU, etc. are able to simply declare that they are exempt from liability. It must be nice to have that kind of power. Getting exemption from liability seems to be something that is expanding. More and more companies want liability exemption. We have to put a stop to this before noone is responsible for anything.
I don’t believe that what happened with COVID would have been possible without liability protection. For example, liability protection protected hospitals from even though they knew the covid protocols were killing people; it protected companies that mandated vaccines, it protected the vaccine manufacturers, if protected mask mandates, social distancing, etc.
5 Likes
The only answer vis a vis international NGOs is to remove our nations from them. It is literally written into the UN and WHO charters that they may not be sued and that those who work for them and promulgate policies may not be sued. Why would any nation surrender any aspect of any policy to an NGO of that description? We need to acknowledge that these organizations are devices to subvert and undermine the will of the people and the sovereignty of independent nations and get out. That is the only remedy at this point when it comes to international bodies. At home, we have more ability to create changed because we can work at the local and federal levels.
6 Likes
Very interesting points here. When it comes to international bodies, the biggest hurdle is finding a mutually agreed jurisdiction. In practice, powerful countries determine jurisdiction (e.g. if you have a commercial dispute with China you are more likely to listen to a Chinese court than if you had a commercial dispute with a small developing country). In this sense, the US could use its power and influence to force some of these trans-national bodies to accept the jurisdiction of the federal court system. This assumes we’d have an administration looking to open up such disputes in the defense of liberty.
1 Like
Corporations need to be held liable in a way that matters. Having them count as a person but not have the same liabilities is a fallacy. Today a corporation for all intents and purposes counts as a human being in court. While at the same time, they cannot be put in prison. Either everyone in a corporation is liable or this protection needs to cease. This is the road to a corporatocracy and is terrible for a Republic. It isn’t Constitutional or right.
4 Likes
@Cjlowe78 Hypothetical question. Let’s say a car company is found criminally liable for negligently producing a car whose unsafe attributes have resulted in multiple injuries to drivers. How would sentencing look in such a situation?
2 Likes
I would initially recommend repealing H.R. 5546, the childhood vaccine protection act of 1986. This give liability protection to vaccine manufacturers. Since then they have not had to face any real consequences for lax standards on efficacy or safety. This is coming from someone that was vax injured as a baby, nearly a SIDs baby.
2 Likes
I don’t see how it’s legally possible for the federal government to grant immunity to companies for liability under state tort laws. If the feds indeed have that ability, then they also have the ability to preempt all state tort laws. That is absurd. Tort law is the exclusive jurisdiction of the states.
I definitely agree, the US should get out of organizations like the UN, WHO, etc.
1 Like
There would be an individual(s) that would be responsible for the negligence and they would need to be charged directly. Up or down the corporate structure. Liability would lie with the executives if they did it knowingly. If not, then those directly responsible. If it’s more of a beginning to end… Assets seized and company shut down due to negligent actions and penalties for the executives (with mitigating circumstances of course) to prohibit the behavior in the future. Yes, it creates a cold corporate environment. No, their p positions are not more important due to their ‘contributions’ to the economy.
1 Like
The old Ford Pinto comes to mind for this and the settlement for it was a slap in the face to those who died in one.
1 Like
I could not agree more. When I worked as a Director in London for Alliance Capital Management, I was personally liable for anything the company did. I believe that is no longer the case in the UK and it is certainly not the case in the US. This situation in the US creates the ultimate moral hazard in that CEOs make tens to hundreds of millions as long as their company’s stock go up no matter what damage or devastation their company may have caused to people and the environment. Liability for management teams would change the game.
2 Likes
Yes, that’s my #6.
1 Like