Pfizer's Financing of Free Speech: First Amendment Guaranteed
In a controversial move, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer is insisting on immunity from liability for any perceived misleading of the public regarding its Covid-19 vaccine. The company argues that it is acting under its contract with the United States Government, which it claims gives it the right to take any actions related to Covid-19 without accountability.
Pfizer's affinity for governmental favouritism is not new. Over the decades, the company has invested billions of dollars in lobbying efforts, securing expansive legal protections for Big Pharma. This favouritism has allowed Pfizer to assert a sovereign power unshackled from constitutional law, working in tandem with the state.
Recent allegations by the Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, suggest that Pfizer Board Member Scott Gottlieb, who has served on the board since June 27, 2019, and is also an independent director at Illumina, attempted to suppress prominent critics of Covid-19 vaccines on social media. However, no further details or confirmations of these accusations have been provided in the available sources.
Pfizer has argued that states have no legitimate interest in regulating its commercial speech, claiming that it is spreading truthful, FDA-approved information educating the public regarding the Covid-19 vaccine. The company also claims complete immunity for its Covid products under the PREP Act, invoked by President Trump's Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar.
However, the PREP Act does not nullify state laws concerning fraud. The Texas Attorney General's suit alleges that Pfizer, led by CEO Albert Bourla, intimidated vaccine skeptics to deceive the public. The suit also alleges that Pfizer's information was not truthful, but was instead a lucrative marketing campaign designed to deceive the public.
Pfizer has not responded to Paxton's detailed allegations. The closing of these legal avenues raises questions about where victims can turn for justice and whether we can truly claim to live in a representative democracy.
This legal strategy is an attempt to close one of the few existing legal avenues to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable. Critics argue that it is an abuse of the First Amendment, using it as a means to usurp citizens' freedom of speech but prevent prosecution of the company's lies.
The source of this information is brownstone.org, and the original article can be found at https://www.zerohedge.com/political/first-amendment-brought-you-pfizer. This development underscores the importance of vigilance and the need for continued scrutiny of powerful corporations and their actions.
