Parental Rights Are Not NegotiableWashington, DC&nbsp;- June 27, 2025On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered a 6-3&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf">decision</a> in&nbsp;Mahmoud v. Taylor, 24-297. Justice Samuel Alito delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kagan and Jackson joined.Earlier this year, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-mahmoud-v-taylor">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court in support of the Petitioners. The Petitioners are a coalition of Maryland parents who sued the Montgomery County Board of Education for forcing their young children to read sexually explicit books pushing radical gender ideology without parental notification or the opportunity to opt out. In today’s landmark ruling, the High Court held that “Parents challenging the Board’s introduction of the ‘LGBTQ+-inclusive’ storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, are entitled to a preliminary injunction.”In delivering the opinion of the Court, Justice Alito wrote, “A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill. And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction.”America’s Frontline Doctors salutes SCOTUS for affirming the Petitioners’ parental rights to protect their children from dangerous curricula contrary to their religious beliefs. In doing so, the Court has set a legal precedent for any citizen battling government usurpation across the country. AFLDS proudly stands with the brave parents of Maryland and all parents across the nation - who are boldly defending their parental rights.&nbsp;In a statement following this landmark victory, AFLDS attorney David Dalia stated, “It is very gratifying to see our Supreme Court reaffirm the fundamental rights of parents to guide their children’s educations, to guide their children’s religious upbringings, and to protect their children from influences which they deem harmful. Montgomery County stubbornly refused to allow parents any opportunity to opt out of the promotion of inappropriate and harmful ‘gender ideology’ to minors as young as kindergarten age. School boards throughout the nation recognize the necessity of respecting parental wishes in many other areas of childhood education, including religious education, and especially in sensitive matters of human sexuality, matters traditionally reserved to parents. Montgomery County was an outlier in their failed attempt to usurp the parent-child relationship. This improper attempt at parental usurpation has now been stopped by this excellent decision.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “The Montgomery County Board of Education usurped the parental authority of Maryland parents, causing irreversible psychological and physical harm to their children. The Supreme Court has reversed this dangerous Marxist overreach. Parents have the fundamental right to raise their children free from state-imposed indoctrination. Parental rights are NOT negotiable and cannot be seized by the state. Today’s ruling is an important step in stamping out government usurpation in the United States of America.”Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on our progress and efforts to safeguard the constitutional rights of every citizen.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org &nbsp;Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

SCOTUS Delivers Landmark Ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor

AFLDS Was The Only Physician Organization To Get It RightWashington, DC&nbsp;- June 18, 2025On June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered a 6-3&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-477_2cp3.pdf">decision</a> in&nbsp;United States v. Skrmetti. The High Court held that “Tennessee’s law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies rational basis review.” Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Alito joined in part. Justice Thomas and Justice Barrett each wrote separate opinions agreeing with the majority, and Thomas joined Barrett’s opinion as well. Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Jackson joined in full and Kagan joined in part.Last year, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-united-states-v-skrmetti">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court in support of the Respondents, who were sued by the former administration over Tennessee’s law that prohibits “gender-affirming care” for minors.Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “The Court today reserves ‘to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process’ the power to decide how best to address an area of medical uncertainty and extraordinary importance. That sovereign prerogative does not bow to ‘major medical organizations.’ Experts and elites have been wrong before - and they may prove to be wrong again.”AFLDS applauds SCOTUS for upholding Tennessee’s law which protects the health and safety of children by prohibiting these&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/medical/mutilation">dangerous interventions</a>. In doing so, the Court has set a precedent that will safeguard the lives of countless young Americans. The medical mutilation of children is a crime against humanity. Our lawmakers must be allowed to take critical action by passing legislation that protects our Nation’s children and holds rogue doctors accountable - without Big Government interference.&nbsp;In a statement following this historic victory, AFLDS attorney David Dalia stated, “The Supreme Court got it right. There is an epidemic of reckless ideology masquerading as medicine, and Tennessee had every right to step in and protect its children. These so-called ‘gender-affirming’ treatments are grotesque experiments - lifelong medical sentences disguised as care. As Dr. Eithan Haim rightly said, this is a ‘physiological solution to a psychological problem.’ The truth is chilling: most children grow out of gender confusion but these procedures cause irreversible damage and a lifetime of pain. Tennessee stood up when it mattered, and this decision is a resounding affirmation that the state’s duty to protect children comes before political agendas.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added,&nbsp;“America’s Frontline Doctors was the only physician organization to stand with Tennessee to defend the state’s right to ban these barbaric treatments on minor children. Other major medical groups supported these horrific procedures. ‘Gender-affirming care’ is one of the greatest lies ever sold. Medically mutilating healthy kids in the name of a radical ideology is not medicine. It’s abuse, and it violates the very nature of the Hippocratic Oath. No child should be permanently disfigured in the name of ideology. The Supreme Court's ruling sends a clear message to transpredators everywhere. The medical mutilation of our children will not be tolerated in the United States of America.”Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on our progress and efforts to end the medical mutilation of children.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a>

SCOTUS Delivers Historic Ruling in United States v. Skrmetti

Safeguarding Physician Free SpeechDenver, CO.&nbsp;- June 16, 2025On June 11, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1750108031/AFLDS_Amici_Curiae_stamped_25_8021_Documents_6_11_2025_45b4af9778.pdf">amici curiae brief&nbsp;</a>with the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in support of Dr. Eric Cubin (Plaintiff-Appellant), in&nbsp;Cubin v. Gordon, 25-8021. Dr. Cubin is suing Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon (Defendant-Appellee) for terminating him from the state’s medical board in retaliation for the doctor's support of legislation that would prohibit (and has since passed) certain “gender-affirming” procedures for minors. By submitting an&nbsp;<a href="https://libertyjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Cubin-Appellants-Principal-Brief.pdf?utm_source=2023+Media+List&amp;utm_campaign=45034a9f82-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_03_26_03_21&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=0_-45034a9f82-448659176">appeal</a> to the Tenth Circuit, Dr. Cubin is asking the appellate court to restore him to his position on the Wyoming Board of Medicine by reversing the decision of the district court.&nbsp;Dr. Eric Cubin is a respected and accomplished doctor, appointed by Governor Mark Gordon to the Wyoming Board of Medicine in 2023. As a member of the Board, Dr. Cubin always fulfilled his duties and obligations in a professional, unbiased, and clinical manner based on the merits alone. Additionally, Cubin is a 15-year member of the Wyoming Medical Society (WMS), a voluntary organization of doctors that claims to represent the interests of physicians across the state.In early 2024, the WMS publicly expressed its opposition to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2024/SF0099">Chloe’s Law</a>, a proposed bill that would restrict the ability of Wyoming doctors to provide “gender-affirming care” to minors, such as hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery. Because this public position did not reflect the perspective held by all of its members, Dr. Cubin contacted WMS leadership to express his concerns and request that the organization present the views of physicians on both sides of the issue. After the WMS repeatedly failed to address his concerns, Dr. Cubin emailed the Wyoming House of Representatives to express his personal support for Chloe’s Law and criticism of the WMS’s position against it.&nbsp;Chloe’s Law passed later that year with strong support from state lawmakers and was signed into law by Governor Mark Gordon. However, a month later, the governor removed Dr. Cubin from his position on the Board, explicitly citing his personal email to the House of Representatives as the reason for removal. As a result, Dr. Cubin suffered economic injury and harm to his professional reputation. Dr. Cubin sued Governor Gordon, alleging that his termination from the Board violated his First Amendment rights of free speech and petition - seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and damages. The district court&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/videos/post/daily-dose-ethcial-doctor-punished-with-dr-peterson-pierre">denied</a> Dr. Cubin’s motion for a preliminary injunction and he is now appealing to the Tenth Circuit.America’s Frontline Doctors contends that by terminating Dr. Cubin for speaking accurate medical information in a private capacity, Governor Gordon exhibited unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and violated the doctor’s First Amendment rights. In other words, speech in favor of “gender-affirming care” was favored, while speech against these interventions was punished. This violates the First Amendment, and dangerously threatens physician free speech in the United States of America. Both of these viewpoints are equally entitled to the same First Amendment protections.&nbsp;Further, the medical harms of “gender-affirming care” (aka medical mutilation) are&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/medical/mutilation">well documented</a> and growing. Dr. Cubin must be free to engage in protected speech that is in the best interest of Wyoming’s minor children. He should not be punished or censored for courageously informing the public of medical facts which he knows to be correct.&nbsp;AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “Chloe’s law is excellent and protects Wyoming’s minor children from irreversible surgical mutilations with lifelong consequences. Children are incapable of understanding these consequences, thus nullifying any possibility of informed consent. At least twenty-five other states have also banned these dangerous procedures which are known to drastically interfere with the normal functioning of children’s bodies. This must not be labeled transphobic. These are now well-known medical facts as they relate to minors, which have caused a widespread international retreat. Dr. Cubin’s courage in speaking the truth in support of Chloe’s Law in his private capacity was consistent with the AMA’s highest ethical principles of medicine, which call upon doctors to participate in activities which enhance public health, and to make relevant medical information publicly available. Dr. Cubin’s ethical stance is fully entitled to First Amendment protections.”&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Governor Gordon’s decision to remove Dr. Cubin is emblematic of the ideological capture of state institutions. We need more doctors like Dr. Cubin on state medical boards, which increasingly usurp authority and operate as enforcers of political orthodoxy. Dr. Cubin was punished not for wrongdoing, but for dissent. He opposed a grotesque and radical agenda that sterilizes and harms children for life. The medical mutilation of children is not a political issue. It is a moral one. We need physicians on medical boards who pursue ethical medicine - not ideological enforcement.”This pivotal free speech case has the potential to set a precedent for all doctors being punished for exercising their First Amendment rights. AFLDS proudly stands in solidarity with Dr. Cubin and ethical doctors everywhere. Together, we will continue standing for physician free speech and bring truth back to medicine.&nbsp;Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to protect the free speech rights of all Americans.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Cubin v. Gordon

Gaining Ground Against COVID TyrannyWashington, DC&nbsp;- June 9, 2025On June 4, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an <a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1749502773/Does_v_Hochul_AFLDS_Amici_Brief_31bd803a3b.pdf?updated_at=2025-06-09T20:59:34.242Z" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court of the United States in support of the Petitioners in&nbsp;Does v. Hochul, 24-1015. The Petitioners in this case are former healthcare workers in the state of New York. The Respondents are New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health James McDonald, Trinity Health, New-York Presbyterian Healthcare System, and Westchester Medical Center Advanced Physician Services. By submitting a petition for <a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1749502773/20250320094212122_250316a_Petition_for_efiling_2decd470be.pdf?updated_at=2025-06-09T20:59:33.743Z" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">writ of certiorari</a> to SCOTUS, the Petitioners are asking the High Court to reverse the decision of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals - seeking declaratory relief and damages resulting from the state’s COVID “vaccine” mandate.In 2021, the state of New York issued a mandate requiring healthcare workers to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of continued employment. Though initially offering religious accommodations, the state subsequently revoked them. In short, the state’s mandate disregarded federal law and the Petitioners’ religious convictions. The Petitioners were unceremoniously terminated from their employment and suffered financial, personal, and professional hardship.&nbsp;The Petitioners sued, filing a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction. The district court denied the TRO and granted the Defendants’ (Respondents) motions to dismiss the complaint. The Second Circuit later affirmed the dismissal. The lower courts justified the Respondents’ mandate by taking&nbsp;<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judicial_notice">judicial notice</a> of the “fact” that the COVID shots were “safe and effective” - treating this claim as not subject to reasonable dispute.&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors maintains the position that the COVID shots are not “vaccines” because they do not prevent infection or transmission. This makes them personal medical treatments ONLY.&nbsp; Additionally, vast scientific research has proven these experimental mRNA injections to be neither safe nor effective. The CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has documented a horrific safety profile attributed to these shots with millions of adverse reactions. By “mandating” these dangerous medical treatments, the Respondents engaged in unconstitutional, illegal, and possible criminal activity in violation of numerous well-established laws and regulations. If left unchecked by the courts, these unlawful violations are likely to recur in the future.&nbsp;Further, the lower courts improperly took judicial notice of the false and hotly disputed “fact” that the experimental COVID-19 shots were “safe and effective.” Overwhelming evidence confirms that this “finding” is “subject to reasonable dispute,” which prohibits valid judicial notice. In doing so, the courts embraced the one-sided viewpoint of New York State public health authorities. This improper use of judicial notice threatens the integrity of the entire judicial system. In submitting our&nbsp;amici curiae brief, we are calling on the Supreme Court to correct the dangerous rulings of the lower courts and firmly reject New York’s tyrannical mandate.AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “Judicial notice is prohibited under the Federal Rules of Evidence for any fact that is ‘subject to reasonable dispute.’ So when the New York court takes judicial notice of the discredited and vigorously disputed ‘safe and effective’ narrative, in order to support a compulsory medical ‘mandate’ with nationwide implications, this dangerous ruling abusing judicial notice should be summarily reversed. For years, AFLDS has presented overwhelming evidence that these experimental mRNA injections are neither ‘safe,’ nor ‘effective.’ The body of data is clear. VAERS has recorded a shocking 38,615 American deaths attributed to these experimental mRNA gene therapies through April 25th, 2025 alone. This tells you everything you need to know.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Case by case, America’s Frontline Doctors and I have been fighting back against these totalitarian mandates. These cases are not about rectifying past grievances. They are about restoring the rule of law, reaffirming informed consent, and rejecting the medical tyranny that took root in the name of ‘health.’ We must ensure that all those harmed by these mandates are vindicated. These legal battles are the new frontline in the war for civil liberties. The fight for freedom is far from over, but we are gaining ground. Let history record that the reversal of COVID tyranny was not granted - it was won!”Supporting these vital cases is critical to the mission of America’s Frontline Doctors. Please read our press releases for&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-brock-v-city-of-bellingham">Brock v. City of Bellingham</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-boyd-v-shriners">Boyd v. Shriners</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-sweeney-v-ucha">Sweeney v. UCHA</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-bridges-v-the-methodist-hospital">Bridges v. The Methodist Hospital</a> to learn more!Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our legal efforts to vindicate all those harmed by COVID mandates.# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a>

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Does v. Hochul

A Wake-Up Call for All AmericansNaples, FL.&nbsp;- June 2, 2025Selective Persecution: The Legalization of American Fascism, the new book from Dr. Simone Gold will be released tomorrow! Published by Skyhorse Publishing with a foreword by Dennis Prager, Selective Persecution will be available on Amazon in both Kindle and hardcover versions.&nbsp;In 2020, AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold became “public health enemy number one” after breaking the spell of the COVID-19 pandemic by leading the instantly viral&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitecoatsummit.com/videos/2020">White Coat Summit</a> at the steps of the Supreme Court. It was in this watershed moment that America’s Frontline Doctors was born, the Nation’s medical civil liberties organization. Answering the call to speak the truth in a time of mass deception, Dr. Gold led the charge against the tyranny of the Medical Industrial Complex and all those pushing agendas at the expense of science. She told that story in her first book: I Do Not Consent: My Fight Against Medical Cancel Culture. On January 6, 2021, Dr. Gold was invited to speak on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol. Everything changed on that fateful day. This is where this story begins.&nbsp;In&nbsp;Selective Persecution, Dr. Simone Gold shares her journey as a COVID whistleblower and her experience inside the US Capitol on January 6th. She walks readers through a dizzying array of COVID lies and corruption, the course of J6 itself, and the unfathomable progression of fascist government abuse that followed. Dr. Gold endured a violent FBI raid, extreme malice and misconduct by the Department of Justice, and was sentenced to federal prison amid shocking corruption in the judiciary. She was then further persecuted by the California Medical Board, the New York Bar, congressional committees, the TSA, and was widely defamed by the press - all for the crime of daring to speak the truth!&nbsp;&nbsp;In a statement about her book, Dr. Gold said,&nbsp;"This is a chilling account that details how a weaponized government can be turned against any citizen. I want readers to understand that our Nation has an infrastructure for tyranny. This infrastructure made it possible for our government to target me and put me through hell. My David vs. Goliath story should be alarming to all Americans. Our country is not immune from fascism. It may not look like the fascism in the history books, but make no mistake about it, this is an American flavor of fascism. This book is a wake-up call for We the People. We do not yet live in China, but it is crucial that citizens arm themselves with the information needed to push back against tyranny when they see it starting to take shape. It is my hope that this book encourages readers to always do what is right in their soul and speak truth without fear.”Both the Kindle and hardcover versions of&nbsp;Selective Persecution can be pre-ordered&nbsp;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Selective-Persecution-Legalization-American-Fascism-ebook/dp/B0DTJBN4ZZ/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;sr=8-1">HERE</a>. Please visit her&nbsp;<a href="https://www.drsimonegold.com/">website</a> for future events!# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org &nbsp;Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a>

Dr. Simone Gold’s Selective Persecution Releases Tomorrow!

The Rising Tide of Medical FreedomSan Francisco, CA.&nbsp;- May 12, 2025On May 9, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1747073977/AFLDS_Amici_Curiae_Brief_Brock_v_City_of_Bellingham_rrihyo.pdf">amici curiae brief</a> with the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in support of the Plaintiffs-Appellants (Plaintiffs) in&nbsp;Brock v. City of Bellingham. The Plaintiffs are former city employees that served in critical roles, such as EMTs and police officers. The Defendants-Appellees (Defendants) are the City of Bellingham (Washington State) and its former mayor Seth Fleetwood. The Petitioners are seeking damages resulting from the Defendants’ COVID-19 “vaccine” mandate. By submitting an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1747073210/Doc_10_Appellants_Opening_Brief_Brock_v_City_of_Bellingham_3c3b2c751c.pdf">appeal</a> to the Ninth Circuit, the Plaintiffs are asking the appellate court to reverse the decision of the district court.In September 2021, Mayor Fleetwood issued a mandatory vaccination policy requiring all city employees and on-site indoor contractors to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment. When the Plaintiffs refused to comply, the Defendants subjected them to harassment, segregation, demotion, and termination. The Plaintiffs sued, alleging that the Defendants deprived them of their right to refuse EUA (emergency use authorization) drugs, the right to be treated equally before the law, and the right to privacy. District Court Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein granted the Defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding a “compelling” government interest in justifying the Defendants’ mandate. In other words, the mandate was rationally related to stopping the spread of COVID-19.&nbsp;Since 2020 until today, America’s Frontline Doctors maintains the position that the COVID shots are personal medical treatments ONLY. They are not “vaccines” because they do not prevent infection or transmission. Additionally, vast scientific research and evidence has proven these experimental mRNA injections to be neither safe nor effective.&nbsp;Further, the Defendants engaged in unconstitutional, illegal, and possible criminal activity in violation of numerous well-established laws and regulations by coercively “mandating” these dangerous medical treatments. These egregious and unlawful violations are likely to recur in the future if left unchecked by the courts. By submitting our&nbsp;amici curiae brief to the Ninth Circuit, we are calling on the court to firmly reject the Defendants’ mandate by reversing the decision of the lower court.&nbsp;&nbsp;AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “It’s shocking that some government officials and private employers are still attempting to coerce employees to take unwanted and dangerous COVID-19 mRNA injections by threat of termination. These experimental drugs not only have terrible safety profiles and significant adverse reactions including death, they offer zero protection to others. These mandates are unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, and violate voluntary informed consent and the Nuremberg Code. These mandates are getting struck down now by courts all over the country. Why do some employers keep doing this? Medical freedom is excellent public policy. Coerced experimentation on humans is very bad public policy.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “The ‘vaccine’ mandates that we saw during the pandemic destroyed lives and careers. The courageous Plaintiffs in&nbsp;Brock and countless Americans across the country deserve restorative justice. This case and the mounting cases against these ‘mandates’ are proof that the dam is breaking. The tide of medical freedom is rising and COVID-era tyranny will be held accountable. A new day is coming. We the People will see total victory.”Supporting these historic cases is critical to the mission of America’s Frontline Doctors. Please see our press releases for&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-bridges-v-the-methodist-hospital">Bridges v. The Methodist Hospital</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-sweeney-v-ucha">Sweeney v. UCHA</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-boyd-v-shriners">Boyd v. Shriners</a> to learn more!Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our legal efforts to ensure medical freedom for all Americans.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Brock v. City of Bellingham

Standing Tall for Physician Free SpeechWashington, DC&nbsp;- April 21, 2025On April 16, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1745246854/AFD_Kory_Amici_Brief_4_16_2025_159cbd451b.pdf">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court of the United States, in support of the Petitioners in&nbsp;Kory v. Bonta. The Petitioners in this case are doctors Pierre Kory, Le Trinh Hoang, and Brian Tyson, along with Physicians for Informed Consent and Children’s Health Defense. The Respondents are California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Medical Board of California executive director Reji Varghese, and Osteopathic Medical Board of California executive officer Erika Calderon. The Petitioners are suing the Respondents for targeting physicians for spreading so-called COVID-19 “misinformation” and infringing on the constitutionally&nbsp;protected doctor-patient relationship. By submitting a petition for&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1745246899/20250225143104572_24_Kory_Petition_1200100a39.pdf">writ of certiorari</a> to SCOTUS, the Petitioners are asking the High Court to reverse the decision of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.Since 2022, the medical and osteopathic medical boards of California, with assistance from state lawmakers, have been threatening disciplinary actions against physicians for providing free speech (information and opinions) to patients that depart from the COVID narrative issued by public health authorities. This speech being suppressed by the Respondent California officials includes alternative FDA-approved treatments for the virus, the alleged benefits of public health measures such as masks, and the safety and effectiveness of the experimental mRNA shots. Any doctor that refuses to comply with this “narrative” and deviates from the COVID-19 “standard of care” is subject to investigation, sanction, and even prosecution. The Petitioners sued, asserting that this speech is protected by the First Amendment and that patients have the right to be provided with this information - seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court denied the Petitioners’ motion for a preliminary injunction which was later affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. Additionally, the district court held that the Petitioners did not have standing to bring their case.America’s Frontline Doctors contends that by attempting to prohibit discussions of all viable treatment options available to patients, the Respondents' enforcement policy breaches ethical duties of honesty, transparency, and informed consent owed by physicians to their patients and arguably constitutes professional malpractice. Doctors cannot withhold valuable and life-saving medical information from their patients. The Respondents’ draconian interference with the protected doctor-patient relationship threatens to destroy the Petitioners’ ethical medical practices. Medical censorship can kill, and patient lives are at risk. This gives them firm standing to safeguard their rights and have access to the courts to redress their grievances.Further, the Respondents’ coercive censorship scheme constitutes unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and blatantly violates the First Amendment. By favoring speech that embraces only one viewpoint in this debate over medical treatment, the Respondents are choosing sides. This is particularly dangerous when the viewpoint discrimination adopted has been proven by vast medical research to be incorrect and the censored treatment options have been proven to be safer.Lastly, both of the lower courts held that all physician speech to their patients is not protected by the First Amendment because it is incidental to medical care. In other words, a doctor's appointment transforms protected free speech into speech not protected by the First Amendment. However, merely labeling protected free speech as “incidental to medical care” does not change its character as free speech.AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “How can anyone believe that government censorship of free speech rights of physicians is a good idea? The American Medical Association recognizes that withholding medical information from patients is unethical. So why is California doing this? Why is California promoting, through this coercive disciplinary scheme, experimental COVID-19 mRNA gene therapy injections with terrible safety profiles? They threaten honest doctors who in their best professional judgment discuss simple, safe and effective cures using Nobel Prize-winning drugs such as Ivermectin. This is completely irrational. California is constitutionally prohibited by our great First Amendment from engaging in such egregious ‘viewpoint discrimination.’ We are hopeful that the United States Supreme Court will protect the free speech rights of physicians by granting these excellent doctors’ writ of certiorari in this case.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “The COVID pandemic showed the world that tyranny no longer operates in the dark. Those seeking to usurp power and trample on the rights of the American people are doing so in plain sight. Tyranny is not TAKING hold in California. It has TAKEN hold. And as California goes, so goes the Nation. This lawsuit is not only about the free speech rights of California doctors. It’s about the free speech rights of anyone who holds a state license. Like our Founding Fathers, all citizens have a duty and a moral obligation to take a stand against evil. AFLDS and I will always stand for free speech. This is not the time to sit on the sidelines. Join us in the charge. Censorship, no matter what form it takes - no matter who wields it - must be held accountable by We the People.”This pivotal free speech case has the power to set a precedent for all doctors being targeted by rogue actors and for all patients seeking truth in healthcare. We proudly stand in solidarity with the righteous Petitioners in&nbsp;Kory,&nbsp;and we will continue standing for physician free speech. Together, we are calling on the Supreme Court to grant their petition for certiorari.Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to protect the free speech rights of all Americans.# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a>

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Kory v. Bonta

Breaking Down the Dam of COVID TyrannyPhiladelphia, PA.&nbsp;- April 15, 2025On April 14, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1745614556/AFLDS_Amici_Brief_Addendum_stamped_25_1183_3rd_Cir_4_18_2025_d0a5df68d5.pdf?updated_at=2025-04-25T20:55:56.916Z">amici curiae brief</a> with the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in support of the Plaintiffs-Appellants (Plaintiffs) in&nbsp;Boyd v. Shriners. The Plaintiffs are seeking damages resulting from the&nbsp;Defendants-Appellees’ (Defendants)&nbsp;COVID-19 “vaccine” mandate. By submitting an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1744757424/2025_04_07_Appellants_Brief_1_08_AM_ca162d03ae.pdf">appeal</a> to the Third Circuit, the Plaintiffs are asking the appellate court to reverse the decision of the district court. This case has the potential to break the dam of COVID tyranny and deliver restorative justice for countless Americans harmed by these unlawful mandates.In September 2021, Shriners Hospitals for Children issued a mandate requiring its employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of new or continued employment. The Plaintiffs refused to comply and their jobs were ultimately terminated. The Plaintiffs sued, alleging that the Defendants deprived them of their right to refuse EUA (emergency use authorization) drugs, the right to be treated equally before the law, and the right to privacy. District Court Judge Cathy Bissoon granted the Defendants’ motion to dismiss, relying on previous precedent for cases that are still on appeal and have not yet received final judgment. Those decisions relied on the narrative that the COVID “vaccines” are “safe and effective.”&nbsp;AFLDS is supporting and standing with the courageous Plaintiffs in two of these cases. Please see our press releases for&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-bridges-v-the-methodist-hospital">Bridges v. The Methodist Hospital</a> and&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-sweeney-v-ucha">Sweeney v. UCHA</a> to learn more.&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors maintains the position that the COVID shots are not “vaccines” because they do not prevent infection or transmission. This makes them personal medical treatments ONLY. Additionally, vast scientific research and evidence has proven these experimental mRNA gene therapy injections to be neither safe nor effective. The CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has documented a horrific safety profile attributed to these shots with millions of adverse reactions and hospitalizations. By coercively “mandating” these dangerous medical treatments, the Defendants engaged in unconstitutional, illegal, and possible criminal activity in violation of numerous well-established laws and regulations. If left unchecked by the courts, these egregious and unlawful violations are likely to recur in the future. The Third Circuit must reject the Defendants’ mandate by reversing the lower court’s dismissal.AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “It should be obvious to everyone by now that these experimental COVID gene therapy injections are neither ‘safe’ nor ‘effective.’ The evidence makes that quite clear and many states are now calling for them to be banned entirely. So why are hospitals still ‘mandating’ them? Absolutely no one should be coerced into taking these dangerous injections under the threat of job termination. We are hopeful that the Third Circuit will correct the deeply flawed decision of the district court.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “As the cases against these ‘vaccine’ mandates continue to mount, the dam of COVID tyranny will continue to break. Justice will be served. It is only a matter of time. We proudly stand in unity with the brave Plaintiffs in&nbsp;Boyd&nbsp;and are hopeful that the Third Circuit will reverse the lower court’s dismissal and hear their case. Supporting these cases is critical to AFLDS’ mission and we will always be at the forefront of the medical freedom fight. Total victory is on the horizon. We will see a new day in the United States of America.”Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to deliver restorative justice for all Americans victimized by COVID mandates.# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Boyd v. Shriners

Turning the Tide Against COVID TyrannyDenver, CO.&nbsp;- March 27, 2025On March 19, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1743093814/Sweeney_v_UCHA_AFLDS_Amici_Curiae_Brief_Doc23_stamped_3_19_2024_06ca07fb4d.pdf">amici curiae brief</a> with the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in support of the Plaintiffs-Appellants (Plaintiffs) in&nbsp;Sweeney v. UCHA. By submitting an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1743093814/Doc_15_Appellant_s_Opening_Brief_Sweeney_v_UCHA_1_1_44c6d455f5.pdf">appeal</a> to the Tenth Circuit, the Plaintiffs are asking the appellate court to reverse the decision of the district court and are seeking damages resulting from the Defendants-Appellees’ (Defendants) COVID-19 “vaccine” mandate. This case is positioned to turn the tide in the medical freedom fight by correcting the injustices inflicted on countless Americans who were wrongly coerced, threatened, and damaged by tyrannical COVID mandates.In July 2021, the University of Colorado Health Authority issued a mandate requiring its employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or have a valid exemption. Any employee that refused to comply faced disciplinary action up to and including termination. The Plaintiffs sued, alleging that the Defendants deprived them of their right to refuse EUA (emergency use authorization) drugs, the right to be treated equally before the law, and the right to procedural due process. District Court Judge Nina Y. Wang granted the Defendants’ motions to dismiss, finding a “compelling” government interest in justifying the Defendants’ mandate. In other words ruling the mandate was rationally related to stopping the spread of the virus.America’s Frontline Doctors maintains the position that these experimental mRNA injections are not vaccines because they do not prevent infection or transmission. This makes the COVID shots personal medical treatments ONLY. Additionally, vast scientific research has proven these “vaccines” to be neither safe nor effective.Further, the Defendants engaged in unconstitutional, illegal, and possible criminal activity by “mandating” these dangerous medical treatments in violation of numerous well-established laws and regulations. These unlawful violations are likely to recur in the future if left unchecked by the courts. Coercively mandating the COVID shots is unacceptable in the United States of America. The Tenth Circuit must firmly reject the Defendants’ mandate by reversing the district court’s erroneous dismissal.&nbsp;AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “How can anyone mandate anything that might kill you? This is about saving lives. It should be obvious to everyone by now that the COVID shots are not ‘safe and effective.’ The evidence makes that quite clear. Absolutely no one should be coerced into taking these dangerous injections under the threat of job termination. COVID-era tyranny and its mandates can no longer be condoned. Dangerous precedents cannot be set. We are hopeful that the Tenth Circuit will correct the deeply flawed decision of the district court.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Since our inception, America’s Frontline Doctors has been at the forefront of the medical freedom fight. We recognized from the beginning that vaccine mandates and passports must not become the law of the land. If tyranny is given an inch, it most certainly will take a mile. We saw this during COVID. However, We the People have the power to take our country back. It’s up to us. We proudly stand in solidarity with the courageous Plaintiffs in this historic case and pray that the Tenth Circuit will reverse the district court’s dismissal. AFLDS and I will continue to support these cases. The dam of COVID tyranny is breaking and it's only a matter of time before the American people achieve total victory.”Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our legal efforts to ensure medical freedom for all Americans.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Sweeney v. UCHA

A Pivotal Case Advances to the High CourtWashington, DC&nbsp;- March 12, 2025On March 10, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States&nbsp;<a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/supreme-court-to-decide-can-colorado-silence-counselors-who-dont-push-gender-ideology/">agreed</a> to hear&nbsp;Chiles v. Salazar, granting the Petitioner’s writ of certiorari. This pivotal case has the potential to set a precedent for countless healthcare professionals across the country that are being forced to comply with a radical gender ideology to the detriment of their patients.Last December, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1734471609/Chilesv_Salazar_AFLDS_Amici_Brief_d79921f9b2.pdf">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court in support of the Petitioner (Kaley Chiles), calling on the High Court to hear her case. The Petitioner is suing the Respondents over Colorado’s “Counseling Censorship Law” which violates her free speech rights by prohibiting licensed counselors from engaging in any conversation with minor patients that does not steer them in the direction of “gender-affirming care.” Please read our previous&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-chiles-v-salazar">press release</a> to learn more.&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors is pleased that the Supreme Court will hear&nbsp;Chiles v. Salazar. We are hopeful that SCOTUS will strike down Colorado’s unconstitutional restriction on free speech. Children all across our Nation must be protected from the dangers of “gender-affirming care.”&nbsp;AFLDS attorney David Dalia states,&nbsp;“The granting of&nbsp;certiorari by SCOTUS in the&nbsp;Chiles case is a great victory for fundamental parental rights in this country. SCOTUS grants certiorari and agrees to hear only 1% -2% of all cases, but reverses the lower court in about 80% of those cases granted. I’m optimistic that the Supreme Court will declare this terrible Colorado statute to be unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds, an obvious ruling which the lower courts failed to do.”&nbsp;AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Colorado’s law is a blatant violation of the First Amendment that severely compromises the patient-counselor relationship. By forcing counselors to comply with a radical gender ideology, vulnerable minor patients are directed down the tragically predictable path of medical mutilation. The medical harms of this path are well documented and growing. In&nbsp;Chiles, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to affirm our constitutionally protected right to free speech. In doing so, the children of Colorado will be better protected against the agenda of the medical mutilation industry. I am hopeful that the High Court will strike down Colorado’s assault on our God-given liberties.”&nbsp;Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to end the medical mutilation of children.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

SCOTUS Grants Writ Petition in Chiles v. Salazar

Taking a Stand for Parental RightsWashington, DC&nbsp;- March 12, 2025On March 10, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1741820388/AFD_Mahmoud_Amici_Brief_9a5c385f2e.pdf">amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court of the United States, in support of the Petitioners in&nbsp;Mahmoud v. Taylor. A coalition of Maryland parents (Petitioners) are&nbsp;<a href="https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20250304162418/Mahmoud-v-Taylor-Merits-Opening-Brief.pdf">suing</a> the Montgomery County Board of Education (Defendant) for forcing their young children to read controversial books pushing radical gender ideology without parental notification or the opportunity to opt out. By submitting our&nbsp;amici curiae brief, AFLDS joins the Petitioners in calling for SCOTUS to reverse the decision of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In short, we are asking the High Court to affirm the Petitioners' parental rights to protect their children from dangerous curriculum contrary to their religious beliefs.&nbsp;In November 2022, the Board of Education introduced “LGBTQ-inclusive” storybooks for instructing elementary school students. These books champion pride parades, gender transitioning, and pronoun preferences for children. Despite initially assuring hundreds of concerned parents that they would be notified when the books would be read and could opt their children out, the Board reversed course in March 2023. Stripped of their parental rights, the Petitioners sued for damages and injunctive relief to prohibit the Board from continuing its no-notice and no-opt-out policy. The Petitioners argued that the Board’s policy violated the Free Exercise Clause by overriding their freedom to direct the religious upbringing of their children and by burdening their religious exercise.&nbsp;The district court&nbsp;<a href="https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20230824190313/2023-08-24-59-Opinion-and-Order.pdf">denied</a> the Petitioners’ motion for a preliminary injunction, holding that they could not show “that the no-opt-out policy burdens their religious exercise.” The Fourth Circuit later&nbsp;<a href="https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20240515133057/Mahmoud-opinion.pdf">affirmed</a> the lower court’s ruling so the Petitioners appealed to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS granted the Petitioners’&nbsp;<a href="https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20240912180459/Mahmoud-v.-Taylor-Cert-Petition.pdf">writ of certiorari</a> and is set to hear their case in April of this year.&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors holds the position that the Petitioners are engaged in the lawful exercise of their constitutionally protected parental rights to shield and protect their minor children from being exposed to radical gender ideology. These fundamental rights include the religious upbringing of their children and protecting them from real or potential harms. The psychological and physical harms of prematurely exposing minor children to sexualized materials, such as those pushed by the Board’s curriculum, are&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/medical/mutilation">well documented</a>. Further, the reading of such materials to children can arguably be characterized as criminal child abuse.&nbsp;Additionally, parental rights cannot be co-opted by government actors such as the Montgomery County Board of Education. By denying the Petitioners’ motion for an injunction, the Fourth Circuit allowed the Board’s egregious violations of the Petitioners’ parental rights to continue. This is directly contrary to numerous well-settled court precedents and centuries of tradition.AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “When I tell people that the parents LOST in both courts in their attempt to shield their kindergarten-aged children from exposure to inappropriate, harmful and highly sexualized materials, they are incredulous. Parents have the fundamental right to protect their children from any and all harmful influences, as affirmed by numerous precedents from the United States Supreme Court. Our amici curiae brief is packed with relevant and accurate medical research on these subjects. The same day we filed our brief in&nbsp;Mahmoud, SCOTUS granted certiorari in the related case of&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/aflds-files-amici-curiae-brief-in-chiles-v-salazar">Chiles v. Salazar</a>, involving Colorado’s Counseling Censorship Law. The Court is clearly interested in these parental rights issues, which I expect they will reaffirm. I urge everyone to watch&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/videos/post/the-gold-report-ep-32-gender-ideology-is-a-cult-with-erin-lee">Dr. Gold’s interview</a> with a courageous Colorado mother who rescued her daughter from being transitioned by her school without her parent’s knowledge. This interview succinctly and compassionately covers all of these issues.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Usurpation, no matter who wields it, has no place in the United States of America. Allowing the Montgomery County Board of Education to usurp the parental authority of Maryland parents threatens not only our constitutionally protected rights, but the lives of children across the country. The Board’s reckless policies are causing irreversible psychological and physical harm to Maryland children as we speak. We cannot allow a precedent to be set in which parental rights are seized by the State. This will come to a state near you if not stopped. This must end now.”This pivotal case for parental rights is poised to set a legal precedent for any citizen battling government usurpation across the country. America’s Frontline Doctors proudly stand in solidarity with the courageous parents of Maryland and all parents taking a stand for parental rights.&nbsp;Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to safeguard the constitutional rights of every citizen.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Mahmoud v. Taylor

Holding Rogue Medical Boards AccountableWashington, DC&nbsp;- February 18, 2025On February 14, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1739894002/AFLDS_Amici_Brief_for_Thomas_5454d125cf.pdf">&nbsp;amici curiae brief</a> with the Supreme Court of the United States, in support of the Petitioner in&nbsp;Thomas v. Harder. Dr. Paul Thomas (Petitioner) is suing the members and staff of the Oregon Medical Board (Respondents) for intentionally persecuting him for his research and views on childhood vaccines, forcing him out of his medical practice in three states. By submitting a petition for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-752/336474/20250102234102163_Thomas%20Petition.pdf">writ of certiorari</a> to SCOTUS, the Petitioner is asking the High Court to vindicate his right to sue the Oregon Medical Board for damages by reversing the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-752/336474/20250102234132799_Thomas%20Appendix.pdf">judgment</a> of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This critical case has the potential to set legal precedent for all doctors seeking justice from the tyranny of rogue medical boards.&nbsp;In December 2020, the Oregon Medical Board suspended Dr. Thomas’ license on an emergency basis stating he was a “danger to the public.” The Board’s rationale for this action was that the doctor was failing to protect the health and safety of his patients by not meeting the standard of care relating to vaccinations. To target Thomas, the Respondents concocted an unwritten rule that pediatricians had the duty to vaccinate their patients. Both the district court and the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Respondents were entitled to absolute immunity from the damages their actions caused.&nbsp;Dr. Paul Thomas practiced medicine in Oregon for over 30 years, serving thousands of patients with zero complaints. He was also licensed to practice medicine in both Washington State and Hawaii. Dr. Thomas saw tremendous success in the treatment of his patients, truthfully informing them of all relevant and available medical information. Despite being an honest doctor upholding his oath, the Oregon Medical Board targeted him. They fabricated a rule, investigated him for 2 years, and wrote up phony charges. The good doctor’s life was devastated - he lost his license in all three states, his medical practice, and his marriage.&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors contends that the Respondents should not be allowed to escape accountability for their alleged intentional and malicious behavior behind a shield of unwarranted “absolute immunity.” Even judges are denied absolute judicial immunity in cases where they are alleged to have engaged in such acts. Further, the Oregon Medical Board’s enforcement of its unwritten vaccine ideology upon independent doctors is contrary to well-established Oregon state law and the constitutional right to refuse medical treatment. These violations disqualify the Respondents from automatic blanket immunity.&nbsp;Doctors have a professional obligation to fully inform their patients of the possible benefits and adverse consequences of all medical treatments. Dr. Thomas has been consistent with his duty of providing his patients informed consent and adhering to the Hippocratic Oath. We are hopeful that SCOTUS will correct the erroneous judgement of the lower courts which deprived Dr. Thomas access to pursue justice. Certiorari should be granted in order to justly reinstate Dr. Thomas and to curb any future abuses by medical boards nationwide.&nbsp;AFLDS attorney David Dalia states, “Medical boards must not be allowed to revoke a good doctor’s hard earned medical license for conducting accurate medical research and data with which they simply disagree. The medical board inflicted their extreme vaccine ideology upon Dr. Thomas, and coercively demanded that he recommend experimental drugs to children against his best professional judgment; drugs which have resulted in over 38,000 deaths in America alone. The medical board turned a blind eye to the pertinent adverse reaction statistics, and to the dozens of studies which confirmed Dr. Thomas’ data. The Board’s persecution campaign against Dr. Thomas was so malicious that a book was written about it. The medical board also ignored the many states and other countries which are now moving to ban these dangerous mRNA drugs completely. Dr. Thomas should be reinstated immediately.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Like Dr. Thomas, I experienced firsthand the usurpation of a weaponized medical board. This is the usurpation that George Washington warned us about. The tyranny inflicted upon Dr. Thomas has no place in our country. Allowing the Oregon Medical Board to escape accountability for their crimes against Dr. Thomas would set a dangerous precedent. If not stopped, future violations are likely to recur. The courts must hold these bad actors accountable.”America’s Frontline Doctors will continue our fight to hold medical boards accountable for their actions. We proudly stand in solidarity with Dr. Thomas and ethical doctors everywhere who put their patients before profit.&nbsp;Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on the status of this case and our efforts to bring truth back to medicine.&nbsp;# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org &nbsp;Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

AFLDS Files Amici Curiae Brief in Thomas v. Harder

Standing Tall Against Tyranny and Usurpation&nbsp;San Diego, CA.&nbsp;- February 4, 2025On Tuesday, December 10, 2024, a Superior Court judge delivered a precedent-setting&nbsp;<a href="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1738703344/jan_15_decision_gold_359b4115b5.pdf">decision</a> in Dr. Simone Gold’s landmark free speech case against the California Medical Board (CMB). As we previously&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/issue-briefs/dr-gold-emerges-victorious-in-landmark-free-speech-case">reported</a>, Dr. Gold emerged victorious over the CMB last year, overcoming their fraudulent witch hunt and flagrant abuse of power.In 2023, Dr. Gold&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/press-releases/simone-gold-m-d-v-medical-board-of-california-et-al-dr-simone-gold-sues-the-california-medical-board-and-its-president-kristina-lawson">sued</a> the CMB in federal court in response to their illegal and unrelenting efforts to silence her and revoke her physician license. During a 3-day medical licensing&nbsp;<a href="https://aflds.org/about-us/issue-briefs/dr-gold-remained-poised-and-dignified-during-an-intense-3-day-hearing-with-the-california-medical-board">hearing</a>, the CMB alleged that Dr. Gold was devoid of professional ethics and judgement due to her misdemeanor presence at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. The CMB charged that Dr. Gold's actions that day were “substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician.” This was a shocking pivot from their original accusation of spreading COVID-19 “misinformation.”&nbsp;After the conclusion of the hearing, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) vindicated Dr. Gold by ruling that the CMB cannot revoke her physician license. However, the judge concurred with the CMB’s J6 claims, ordering that she be publicly reprimanded by the medical board and required to take a medical ethics course. Despite the legal victory in retaining her license, Dr. Gold recognized that an outstanding physician with a flawless track record should not be subjected to an absurd reprimand or ethics course. Further, allowing the CMB to continue its unchecked abuse of power sets a dangerous precedent. Dr. Gold and her legal team immediately submitted a writ of mandate (appeal) to the Superior Court of California.&nbsp;San Diego Superior Court Judge Michael T. Smyth found that the CMB had failed to show with clear and convincing evidence that Dr. Gold’s conduct on J6 was “substantially related” to her role as a physician - vacating the California Medical Board’s public reprimand and Dr. Gold’s requirement to take a medical ethics course. In addition, the judge awarded Dr. Gold financial relief for litigation costs which the CMB will now have to pay her for.&nbsp;In a statement following this remarkable ruling, Dr. Gold said, “The initial trial verdict was a victory by any definition. I appealed because what the government did was wrong. The California Medical Board has absolutely no authority to sanction doctors for nonmedical misdemeanors. George Washington warned us about usurpation and the courts must hold these executive agencies accountable. I am thankful for my excellent attorneys who believed in my vision for victory. I have been vindicated and together we have set a historic precedent for any licensed professional battling usurpation in the future.”&nbsp;Lead Attorney Heather Gibson added, “It’s a sad day in America when the awesome and virtually unlimited power of the agencies of government is wrongfully brought to bear on productive patriots. Fortunately, there are still a few individuals in the system who can intervene under the right circumstances on behalf of individuals like Dr. Gold, who refuse to surrender. I am so proud to have acted on her behalf.”If the California Medical Board cannot successfully appeal the Superior Court’s decision, the federal stay will be lifted and Dr. Gold’s federal case will proceed. Stay tuned for updates on Dr. Gold’s unwavering fight to safeguard&nbsp;our freedoms!# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

Dr. Gold Scores Another Legal Victory Over CMB

The First Step Toward Restorative JusticeWashington, DC&nbsp;- January 28, 2025Ending one of the darkest moments in our Nation’s history, on Monday January 20,&nbsp; President Donald J. Trump pardoned over 99% of the J6 hostages and commuted the sentences for the remaining fourteen, still under review for pardons. The president’s actions will have a profound impact on the rule of law and free speech in the United States of America. AFLDS is tremendously thankful to the president for standing with the J6 hostages and keeping his promise to pardon them.&nbsp;The President of the United States&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/granting-pardons-and-commutation-of-sentences-for-certain-offenses-relating-to-the-events-at-or-near-the-united-states-capitol-on-january-6-2021/">said</a>, “This proclamation ends a grave national injustice that has been perpetrated upon the American people over the last four years and begins a process of national reconciliation.”&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors holds the position that the systemic rot that led to this injustice must be undone. The judges who imposed excessive sentences, the prosecutors who pushed baseless charges and the federal agents who raided the homes of peaceful taxpayers must all be held accountable. These pardons represent a long-overdue acknowledgement of this injustice, but they do not erase the suffering endured by so many. All those who suffered political persecution at the hands of the weaponized Biden DOJ must be made whole. This is why we are urging President Trump to help bring restorative justice to the thousands of Americans whose lives were destroyed by a totalitarian regime.In a statement following the president’s proclamation, AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold stated, “On behalf of all the J6 hostages, including myself, I would like to thank President Trump for taking this major step toward restorative justice. The patriots that were held hostage by the Biden regime are the 21st century version of Japanese-Americans who were held in internment camps. I urge President Trump and his Cabinet to engage with us to ensure restorative justice for Americans that were viciously persecuted by their own government. This pardon is only the first step. It’s time that we finally see justice.”AFLDS Creative Director John Strand added, “The sweeping pardon of the fraudulent and malicious J6 prosecutorial witch hunt is both a complete exoneration of J6 protesters, who were entrapped and betrayed by their own government, and a powerful repudiation of the Biden regime’s brazen trampling of the Constitution in the course of weaponizing the DOJ against citizen dissidents. President Trump demonstrated both moral courage and constitutional clarity in resisting shameful pressure from many republicans to further perpetuate the democrat/media lies about January 6. The corruption and cowardice of those republicans must not be forgotten, nor forgiven, and President Trump’s outstanding courage and integrity should likewise be remembered forever.”The pardoning of the J6 hostages was not just a victory for them. It was a victory for all Americans. President Trump’s pardons are only the beginning of our renewed fight for justice, freedom and the restoration of a country that has veered dangerously off course. We have the opportunity to usher in a renaissance where Americans stand together for our rights and the principles upon which this country was founded. Together, with courage and unity, we will ensure that the miscarriage of justice perpetrated over the last four years is never repeated.&nbsp;Stay tuned - We keep you updated on our efforts to engage with the Trump administration and ensure all J6 hostages receive restorative justice.# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.orgMedia Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

President Donald J. Trump Pardons the J6 Hostages

A Monumental Victory Over Weaponized GovernmentHouston, TX. – January 27, 2025On January 24, 2025, US District Judge David Hittner&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/EithanHaim/status/1882895715820863510">dismissed</a> the US government’s lawsuit against courageous whistleblower, Dr. Eithan Haim. Haim, 34, was put in the crosshairs of a weaponized DOJ after he&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/whistleblower-doctor-targeted-by-doj-after-exposing-texas-children-s-hospital-s-secret-transgender-surgery-program?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email">exposed</a> the secret transgender program at Texas Children’s Hospital (TCH).Upon discovering that TCH was lying to the public about the existence of its gender clinic and that the medical mutilation of children was a top priority, Dr. Haim recognized that he had a moral obligation to expose the hospital’s deception. Haim partnered with journalist Christopher Rufo, who then published a bombshell&nbsp;<a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/sex-change-procedures-at-texas-childrens-hospital">exposé</a> in May 2023 that immediately sent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/a-doctor-blew-the-whistle-on-his-hospitals-transgender-clinic-now-the-feds-are-trying-to-ruin-his-life">shockwaves</a> across the country.&nbsp;Despite redacting patient names and believing his own actions to be legal, the once anonymous whistleblower became a target of the US government. On June 4, 2024, three armed US Marshals delivered a court summons and four-count&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68860918/1/united-states-v-haim/">indictment</a> charging Dr. Haim with violating the patient-privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The prosecutors allege that the doctor knowingly obtained sensitive patient records under false pretenses with the intent to cause malicious harm to TCH’s physicians and patients. If convicted, Haim would have faced up to ten years in prison and&nbsp; $250,000 in fines. Last week’s ruling ended the government’s persecution of the brave doctor.&nbsp;In a statement following this monumental victory, Dr. Haim stated, “We took on the most powerful federal leviathan in human history and we won! It demonstrates the strength and power of truth when it stands up to corruption.”AFLDS Founder and President Dr. Simone Gold added, “Dr. Haim exposed the tremendous harm being done to vulnerable children while thousands of others stayed silent. His courage saved lives and sparked legislative action in Texas. Dr. Haim upheld his oath to ‘do no harm’ even under the threat of weaponized government abuse. This is both a victory for a valiant man and a win for American justice.”&nbsp;America’s Frontline Doctors salute Dr. Haim for his continued bravery in the face of evil. The DOJ’s persecution of Dr. Eithan Haim was about more than just silencing the voice of one doctor. It was about silencing ALL doctors and truth-tellers who speak out against government tyranny.&nbsp;Stay tuned - We will keep you updated on Dr. Haim and our efforts to bring courage and honor back to medicine!# # #About AFLDSWe are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future.&nbsp;Visit AFLDS.org &nbsp;Media Contact&nbsp;Lisa Alexander, Communications Director |&nbsp;<a href="mailto:Media@AFLDS.org">Media@AFLDS.org</a> &nbsp;

Protecting your Medical
Freedom and Civil Liberties

Press Releases