The FDA wants the court to dismiss the suit, which was filed in 2023 by three doctors who outed the FDA for providing illegal warnings against ivermectin, which the FDA itself approved for human use back in 1996.
The reason the motion was sealed, according to a government brief, is because it allegedly contains "confidential information" from a separate legal proceeding. There were supposed to be redacted versions of the motion released for public perusal, but this has not yet occurred.
In response to the FDA's call for the case to be tossed, the three doctors who filed it said on January 12 that the court should reject the FDA's request.
"The FDA exceeded its authority by repeatedly issuing public directives not to use ivermectin for COVID-19, even though the drug remains fully approved for human use," the doctors wrote in their request.
(Related: Did you catch what Dr. Mary Talley Bowden said about how ivermectin is helping her patients overcome damage caused by COVID jabs?)
FDA overstepped its jurisdictional bounds with ivermectin theatrics
You may recall that one of the illegal directives issued by the FDA during the "pandemic" came through a then-Twitter post in which the federal agency mocked people for using FDA-approved ivermectin.
"You are not a horse," the FDA deceptively mocked, implying that ivermectin is strictly for cattle and livestock, which is false. "Stop it with the #Ivermectin. It's not authorized for treating #COVID."
An appeals court already found that the FDA likely overstepped its bounds with this type of ridiculous messaging.
"FDA can inform, but it has identified no authority allowing it to recommend consumers 'stop' taking medicine," wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Don Willett, an appointee of President Donald Trump, in his appeals ruling.
The appeals court then remanded the case back to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, who said in 2022 that the three doctors who filed the suit failed to prove their allegations, in his opinion.
Judge Brown, another appointee of President Trump, is the person whom the FDA is now asking to dismiss the case entirely.
The FDA's argument as to why the case should be dismissed argues that the plaintiffs have not suffered injuries that are traceable to the FDA, and that cannot be remedied by a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.
"The FDA is wrong," the lawyers for the doctors say against the FDA's argument.
"Plaintiffs have suffered interference with their practice of medicine and the doctor-patient relationship, economic harm, reputational harm, and increased exposure to malpractice liability, and have been subject to disciplinary proceedings and forced resignations, all of which clearly trace to the FDA's campaign against ivermectin and would be remedied by equitable relief."
The law as it currently stands under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act only enables the FDA to authorize or approve drugs for a specific use. Doctors are still allowed to freely prescribe FDA-approved drugs for other purposes if they choose under a form of prescribing known as "off-label."
It cannot be stated enough that the law does not grant the FDA the authority to regulate off-label prescriptions as it repeatedly did with regard to ivermectin all throughout the "pandemic."
"The FDA is the common thread through all of [the] plaintiffs' injuries, which began only after the FDA embarked on its campaign to stop the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 and which often involve explicit invocation of the FDA's directives and recommendations," the plaintiffs' lawyers further said.
The latest news about the cancer known as the FDA can be found at FDA.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
