The Judical Bloodletting of a Federal Judge
The following is a story of a federal judge who has issued opinions in favor of a few vaccine injury petitions on appeal
I will let you, the reader, decide for yourself if this is the next round of canceling those who speak up for the vaccine injured.
The judge was not biased towards the vaccine injured, however, she just questioned the mechanisms in law that make it very difficult to challenge the status quo.
Judge Pauline Newman is a distinguished American jurist who served as a United States Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
She was appointed to the Federal Circuit in 1984 by President Ronald Reagan and took senior status in 1997.
Judge Newman might be familiar to the vaccine injured with her dissenting opinions in Oliver v HHS(2017-2540) and Boatmon v HHS(2018-2333). Both cases were decided 2-1 in favor of the government, the defendant.
Yet Judge Newman writes in her dissenting opinions that the petitioners brought forth compelling reasons that need to be litigated in the NVICP.
In Oliver v HHS, parents argued that the DTaP vaccine caused early onset of epilepsy and seizures. Our government using a very low powered study (Berkovic – 14 participants) that the petitioner has a SCN1A gene mutation aka Dravet Syndrome, and epilepsy and seizures was a forgone conclusion.
Yet the study was not conclusive. Judge Newman dissented from the majority and stated that this case is why it needs to be litigated with medical experts in the NVICP instead of automatically being dismissed because of a gene mutation.
In Boatmon v HHS, parents argued that several vaccines given at the same time led to their child’s death or SIDS. Special Master agreed with parents and awarded compensation. Our government appealed the decision, went judge shopping at the Federal Court of Claims level, found a judge to reverse the decision.
Petitioners filed an appeal with the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. It was here that our government argued their position to the 3 judge panel. In summary “if you award compensation to the petitioners, then parents will stop vaccinating their children”.
Judge Newman dissented against the majority opinion to uphold the Federal Claims judge and dismiss the case.
During her tenure on the Federal Circuit, Judge Newman was known for her expertise in patent law, intellectual property, and technology-related cases. She has authored numerous influential opinions in these areas.
Judge Newman has also been involved in various aspects of intellectual property law reform and has contributed significantly to the development of patent law in the United States.
In an interview at the American Bar Association conference October 13, 2023, the embattled Judge Newman has been referred to as the “great dissenter” touched on her role of the dissent as a teaching tool.
“The dissent helps the student understand the balance that the court decided to reach – what philosophy, what logic, what evidence they rejected as being not probative for whatever reason, and what was accepted. Without dissent, you do not have the information because its not presented in a majority opinion”, Newman said in a recorded interview with Steven Caltrider, chair of the ABA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and chief IP counsel for Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
One of the best dissenting opinions offered by a judge or jurist in a higher court such as the US Supreme Court or Federal Appellate courts, was Justice Sotomayor’s dissent in Bruesewitz v Wyeth Labs, et al.
That dissent should be required reading for anyone concerned about or researching the failures of vaccine policy & law in the United States.
Now, Judge Newman has been suspended by the Court because she refuses to cooperate with a mental fitness probe. According to the complaint filed in March 2023, Judge Newman has committed “serious misconduct” by refusing to cooperate.
Judge Pauline Newman is now 96 years of age. Yet those who have heard her discuss recent cases, she is more coherent that many of the 40 to 50 year old attorneys arguing in front of the panel.
However, the complaint cited statements from “many different staff members describing memory loss, confusion, paranoia and angry rants.”
Newman has defended her mental capacity and sued her colleagues in DC Circuit Court to reverse a Circuit judicial decision to stop assigning her new cases. Judge Newman has offered up her own medical records by an independent neurologist to counter claims made against her.
So the question has to asked. Is this a new way to attack and remove those who speak up for and speak out against the Pharmaceutical Industry and our Federal Government’s policy of protecting the vaccine program?
Or is it time for Judge Pauline Newman to step down, reflect upon her 39 years of honorably serving upon the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
Keep Learning, Keep Challenging Yourself and Always, Always Question Authority.
See more here substack.com
Header image: IP Watchdog
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.