Browsed by
Category: Health Policy

Where are the CDC and Medicare Whistleblowers?

Where are the CDC and Medicare Whistleblowers?

Comments 2 comments

Whistleblowers and smoking guns are the holy grails in impact litigation. They rarely surface, but when they do, they can make a case. I am sort of surprised that there haven’t been more of them since the pandemic. I’ve heard about and interacted with or about a couple of them, but I haven’t found the real deal yet, i.e., someone with current, non-stale compelling information. I have some contacts in Congress. Now that the Republicans are back controlling one house,…

Read More Read More

Join Them Now!

Join Them Now!

Comments 1 comment

(Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Esq. for those of you who are reading this from beyond our solar system.) (PIC’s fearless President, Shira Miller MD outside the Courtroon after the AB 2098 hearing. Editor’s note: She seems pleased and confident, and as turns out, for good reason. Thx Shira for backing this.) (The rest of the legal team and Dr. Verma whose 40-page declaration demonstrated that the “contemporary scientific consensus” was meaningless in this pandemic. Sanjay’s declaration was cited 9 times…

Read More Read More

AB 2098 hearing held yesterday, no result yet, but we are very, very hopeful

AB 2098 hearing held yesterday, no result yet, but we are very, very hopeful

Comments 4 comments

(Man with shades outside Sacramento Federal Courthouse after oral argument in the challenges to AB 2098) We had the hearing on our challenge (and the companion challenge filed by a high-profile Washington D.C. public interest group) yesterday afternoon. It was a very lively event. And because it was me, there were many lighter moments and even some robust laughter with some back-and-forth banter between us and the judge. Not so much with the Attorney General and the judge. And that…

Read More Read More

California Physician Alert: Be Very Careful About What you Say About Covid to New/Prospective Patients

California Physician Alert: Be Very Careful About What you Say About Covid to New/Prospective Patients

Comments 3 comments

As you all know, AB 2098 is, for now, the law of the land in California. Hopefully it won’t be after our preliminary injunction hearing on Monday. I think all physicians should assume that the Cali boards (medical and osteopathic) will try to enforce the law. But there is problem: How are they going to find out who is spreading “Covid misinformation” to their patient? My guess or assumption is that current patients aren’t going to be the ones complaining….

Read More Read More

Paperwork All Filed in our Challenge to AB 2098; Next Up, the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on January 23rd

Paperwork All Filed in our Challenge to AB 2098; Next Up, the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on January 23rd

Comments 0 Comment

I just filed our reply on our preliminary injunction motion. Here it is: Hoang Final Repyfilingcopy I think you will like it. Here are the Attorney General’s response papers to our motion for a preliminary injunction. Our reply responds to these papers. response calderondeclaration limdeclaration requestjudicialnotice Since the elephant that will be in the courtroom on the 23rd will be Judge Slaughter’s decision in the McDonald case denying a preliminary injunction enjoining AB 2098 (now Section 2270 of the Business…

Read More Read More

Must See CHD TV on AB 2098

Must See CHD TV on AB 2098

Comments 1 comment

Here is the link to the legal update on CHD’s and PIC’s lawsuit against AB 2098. https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/chd-federal-lawsuit-over-ca-covid-misinformation-bill/ There is an excellent discussion by Dr. Sanjay Verma explaining how often the public health authorities got it wrong during Covid and the lack of science behind the public health decisions we all have been living with for the past three years. And I always have a good time when FG&J get together (Ray Flores, Greg Glaser, and yours truly). (Hopefully, they edited…

Read More Read More

Here is the Defender’s Article about Hoang v. Bonta

Here is the Defender’s Article about Hoang v. Bonta

Comments 1 comment

couldn’t have said it better! https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ray-l-flores-ii-8b302b15_chd-files-motion-to-prevent-california-from-activity-7006860507873755136-ZepV?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop Rick Jaffe, Esq.

Preliminary Injunction Motion filed in our AB 2098 Challenge

Preliminary Injunction Motion filed in our AB 2098 Challenge

Comments 0 Comment

Yesterday afternoon, we filed the initial papers for a preliminary injunction in our lawsuit challenging Cali. AB 2098, the misinformed Covid misinformation bill which is set to take effect on January 1st. The hearing is set for January 17th before District Judge Dale A. Drozd, who currently doing law and motion hearings (like out motion) by Zoom. But the date and judge are a bit up in the air because our case is “related” to the Hoeg v. Newsom case…

Read More Read More

I’ve been pretty quiet for some time. Here is why: Hoang v. Bonta, challenging AB 2098

I’ve been pretty quiet for some time. Here is why: Hoang v. Bonta, challenging AB 2098

Comments 6 comments

Thursday afternoon, December 1st, we filed a lawsuit challenging California AB 2098 on behalf of a California osteopathic physician, LeTrinh Hoang, Physicians for Informed Consent, and Children’s Health Defense (California chapter). Here is the complaint: complaint Bobby K. and Mary Holland are working on the case with me (and my usual compatriots). Mary is working on the preliminary injunction motion as I write this. We expect to be before a federal judge in mid-January. Our case is somewhat different from…

Read More Read More

As expected,

As expected,

Comments 2 comments

Federal District Judge Slaughter denied the Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction stopping AB 2098 from going into effect and dismissed the complaint on standing grounds. However, he did give the Plaintiffs leave to refile to correct the standing defect. Here is the decision. Slaughter’d This was not a close case, and it’s not about the system being against people with a particular belief. The Plaintiffs did not adequately plead that they had the right to challenge the law. I…

Read More Read More