• • Iowa Republicans propose a bill requiring vaccine manufacturers to waive legal immunity for injury lawsuits to distribute or administer vaccines in the state.

• • The bill aims to hold vaccine makers accountable for injuries, challenging protections under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

• • Supporters argue the current system denies due process, with only 1% of injury claims succeeding through VAERS.

• • The bill reignites debates on informed consent, corporate responsibility, and the balance between public health and individual rights.

Iowa Republicans are advancing a bill that would require vaccine manufacturers to waive their legal immunity against injury lawsuits if they want their products distributed or administered in the state. House File 712, introduced by GOP lawmakers, aims to ensure that vaccine makers are held responsible for any injuries caused by their products, a move supporters say is long overdue.

The bill, which has sparked heated debate in the Iowa legislature, would bar any vaccine from being sold or administered in the state unless the manufacturer agrees to waive “immunity from suit for an injury arising from a design defect of the vaccine, including the immunity granted by the federal National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.” This legislation comes amid growing concerns about the lack of public awareness regarding potential vaccine risks and the inability of individuals to seek justice through the courts.

Sen. Doug Campbell, R-Mason City, who is spearheading the effort, argues that the current system denies Iowans their right to due process. “Basically, there is no due process for somebody’s injury,” Campbell said during a subcommittee hearing. “I mean, 1% of the people who have injuries that go through the VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] process get through with a win. That’s abysmal if you’re going to put a product out there and there’s liability.”

The proposed bill mirrors a broader concern that vaccine manufacturers enjoy unprecedented legal protections, shielding them from lawsuits even when their products may cause harm. Critics of the current system point to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), established in the 1980s, as a bureaucratic maze that often leaves injured individuals without recourse.

Debate over public health vs. corporate responsibility

Opponents of the bill warn that removing legal protections for vaccine manufacturers could have dire consequences. Jack Ohringer, a University of Iowa medical student, testified that the legislation could lead to vaccine shortages or price hikes.

However, supporters argue that accountability is a cornerstone of consumer protection. Courtney Collier, a proponent of the bill, stated, “Every industry and business in Iowa should be liable for the products they produce and sell to Iowan consumers. It should not be legal for a medical professional to offer a product to Iowans that both they and the manufacturer are 100% free from liability for if it harms or kills a patient.”

The Iowa bill comes as the federal government continues to shield COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers from liability under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which was recently extended by the Biden administration. Critics of the PREP Act argue that it prioritizes corporate interests over individual rights, leaving those injured by vaccines with limited options for compensation.

While the Iowa bill is unlikely to pass in its current form, it has reignited a critical conversation about informed consent and corporate accountability. Sen. Dennis Guth, R-Klemme, emphasized the need for transparency, reading an email from an Algona resident who claimed to have suffered a vaccine injury. “The one thing that disappoints me the most today has been the medical field’s denial of the facts that are out there,” Guth said.

The Iowa bill represents a significant step toward ensuring that vaccine manufacturers are held to the same standards as other industries. While the debate over vaccine safety and liability is far from over, the proposed legislation underscores the importance of informed consent and the right to seek justice. As Sen. Campbell and his colleagues continue to push for accountability, their efforts serve as a reminder that no industry should be above the law.