Galveston Island, TX – October 6, 2022
On Thursday, October 6, 2022, our Americas Frontline Doctors’ (AFLDS) legal team was honored to file an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, (Galveston Division), in support of a lawsuit filed by an extraordinarily brave and outspoken group of plaintiffs. These plaintiffs are doctors fighting the FDA’s illegal mandates against ivermectin.
As mentioned in a recent prior AFLDS press release, an amicus curiae brief is filed voluntarily by a non-participating but interested third-party or organization possessing specialized knowledge and expertise to further assist the court in an opinion. Here is a link to the complete AFLDS amicus curiae brief.
Robert L. Apter, et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), et al., No. 3:22-cv-184 (S.D. Tx., June 2, 2022), (the case), was filed by Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC. We have linked a copy of the plaintiffs’ complaint here.
The plaintiffs in the case, Drs. Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden, and Paul E. Marik have publicly denounced the defendants – primarily the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – for the unlawful attempt to prohibit them from prescribing human-grade ivermectin. The plaintiffs have successfully used ivermectin in treating COVID-19 patients.
As stated in the plaintiffs’ complaint, “This case is not about whether ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19. It’s about who determines the appropriate treatment for each unique patient and whether the FDA can interfere with that process [emphasis added].”
The FDA is a federal agency within the HHS that has thus far prevented doctors nationwide from prescribing ivermectin to COVID-19 patients. Ivermectin is one of the safest drugs on the market and has been used hundreds of millions of times. Moreover, there is significant evidence that ivermectin is effective at treating COVID-19. A plethora of evidence directly refutes the illegal propaganda campaign being waged against ivermectin by the FDA.
At AFLDS, we recognize that the Apter case is crucial to the jurisprudence of future medical health and civil rights laws. The FDA cannot legally enforce its unlawful ivermectin mandates. Mandates are not laws. Only Congress cannot enact laws. The FDA cannot make or enforce laws including laws against the use of ivermectin.
Unfortunately, however, a deep-rooted but erroneous perception exists among the mass collective consciousness (including many doctors) that the FDA is completely infallible and omniscient. Thus, most individuals conform to FDA edicts -- regardless of facts or counter-narratives. This blind and unquestionable allegiance to the FDA subsequently places an undue psychological stranglehold on the sacred doctor-patient relationship and adversely affects objective and scientific treatment plans from being accomplished by the plaintiffs, including the potentially life-saving drug ivermectin from being prescribed by them.
Additionally, the FDA’s unlawful and unprecedented anti-ivermectin propaganda campaign illegally infringes on doctors’ free speech rights. It makes it virtually impossible for the plaintiffs (and all other critically thinking doctors) to practice the unfettered art of medicine, which they more than rightly deserve. The plaintiffs collectively possess decades-long academic and professional training, which is further buttressed by innumerable scientific- and peer-reviewed published papers.
As stated by AFLDS Attorney David A. Dalia, “The brave plaintiff physicians are on the right side of history. The FDA should never illegally cross the line and overreach into the practice of medicine again, by waging illegal propaganda campaigns against legal treatments with which it disagrees. This disrupts protected doctor/patient relationships, endangers patients, and causes significant harms to patients as well as to doctors. This courageous lawsuit will hopefully end this illegal FDA practice forever.”
We at AFLDS support all brave and trailblazing doctors who are willing to challenge the status quo and non-justifiable legal and scientific mandates, especially those espoused by non-medically trained bureaucrats like the FDA.
The government’s motion to dismiss the case is scheduled for oral argument on Tuesday, November 1, 2022.
A similarly filed amicus curiae brief has also been filed by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). We have created a link to the AAPS amicus brief, which you can read here.