Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA)
🔍 What is an EUA?
An Emergency Use Authorization is a legal mechanism that allows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to authorize unapproved medical products (or unapproved uses of approved products) during a public health emergency.
Legal Basis:
Section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA)
Introduced in 2004, expanded under Project BioShield Act
Conditions for EUA:
FDA must determine:
A declared emergency exists (by HHS, DHS, or DoD)
Product may be effective
Known and potential benefits outweigh risks
No adequate, approved, and available alternatives
🛡️ Scope and Controversy
Used for vaccines, treatments, diagnostic tools (e.g., COVID tests)
Raises issues around:
Informed consent
Liability protections
Constitutional challenges
State vs federal powers
📚 Detailed Case Law Involving EUA
Let’s examine six key cases, focusing on courts’ interpretation of EUA-related issues.
✅ 1. Doe v. Rumsfeld (2005)
Court: U.S. District Court (D.C.)
Facts: Military personnel challenged the mandatory anthrax vaccination program under an EUA.
Issue: Can the military compel service members to take a vaccine not fully approved?
Ruling: The court ruled that individuals must be allowed to refuse EUA products unless the President overrides consent via executive order.
Significance: Cemented that EUA use is voluntary under the FDCA, unless otherwise directed by lawful authority.
✅ 2. Bridges v. Houston Methodist Hospital (2021)
Court: U.S. District Court (Texas)
Facts: Hospital workers sued over being required to take a COVID-19 vaccine (under EUA) or lose their jobs.
Issue: Is it illegal to mandate an EUA product for employment?
Ruling: The court upheld the hospital’s policy, stating that EUA status does not prohibit private mandates.
Significance: Differentiated private employer policy from governmental coercion, suggesting that EUA does not immunize employees from job policies.
✅ 3. Norris v. Stanley (2021)
Court: U.S. District Court (Michigan)
Facts: A university employee refused a COVID-19 vaccine and claimed EUA status meant it couldn’t be required.
Issue: Does the FDA’s EUA framework prevent public universities from mandating vaccines?
Ruling: The court ruled against the plaintiff, stating EUA law does not prohibit state institutions from making policies based on public health needs.
Significance: Reinforced that EUA laws constrain federal agencies, not necessarily state or employer actions.
✅ 4. Navy SEAL 1 v. Biden (2022)
Court: U.S. District Court (Florida)
Facts: Plaintiffs, including Navy SEALs, challenged the military’s COVID-19 vaccine requirement under EUA.
Issue: Could service members be disciplined for refusing an EUA vaccine?
Ruling: The court sided with the plaintiffs temporarily, citing constitutional and statutory rights.
Significance: Highlighted how religious freedom and bodily autonomy intersect with EUA mandates in the military.
✅ 5. In re: COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Products Liability Litigation (Ongoing)
Court: Multiple federal courts
Facts: Various plaintiffs filed suits against vaccine manufacturers and the U.S. government over alleged harms from EUA vaccines.
Issue: Are manufacturers liable for injuries from EUA-authorized products?
Ruling: Most cases have been dismissed under the PREP Act, which gives manufacturers broad immunity.
Significance: Reinforced that EUA products, when used during a declared emergency, come with strong legal liability shields.
✅ 6. Cruz v. Zucker (2021)
Court: New York State Court
Facts: Parents sued the New York Department of Health for authorizing COVID testing for students under an EUA without clear consent.
Issue: Is EUA testing in schools constitutional without explicit opt-in consent?
Ruling: The court emphasized that EUA use must include informed choice, especially with children.
Significance: Echoes Doe v. Rumsfeld in affirming that voluntary consent is central to EUA legality.
📌 Summary: Legal Themes from the Cases
| Key Legal Issue | Case Example | Key Takeaway |
|---|---|---|
| Voluntary use of EUA products | Doe v. Rumsfeld | EUA products cannot be forced without legal basis |
| Employer mandates of EUA products | Bridges, Norris | Private mandates are generally allowed |
| Religious freedom vs. EUA mandates | Navy SEAL 1 v. Biden | Courts scrutinize forced use on religious grounds |
| Manufacturer liability and immunity | In re EUA Litigation | PREP Act shields EUA manufacturers from lawsuits |
| Consent in public health measures | Cruz v. Zucker | EUA actions must allow informed refusal |
RELATED Blog
0 comments