Oral Surgeon Continues Battling Gov’t over Opposing Vax Mandate; Humphrey’s Executor in FTC v. PPO

Rhode Island Oral Surgeon Continues Battling Gov’t Retaliation over Opposing Vaccine Mandate

The State of Rhode Island unlawfully prevented Dr. Stephen Skoly from practicing critically needed dental care in retaliation for his public opposition to the temporary emergency regulation mandating that “all health care workers and health care providers be vaccinated against COVID- 19.” Statements by and behavior of state officials make clear that administrative actions against Dr. Skoly were taken precisely because he publicly voiced his opposition and would not have been taken but for Dr. Skoly’s speech. NCLA has filed a response to the government’s Motion to Dismiss Skoly v. McKee, et al., in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island.

Mark talks through Dr. Skoly’s opposition to summary judgment in Skoly v. Mckee. 

Humphrey’s Executor in FTC v. PPO

NCLA has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) lawsuit against Precision Patient Outcomes, Inc. (PPO), a California-based company which develops precision medical solutions for burn and wound care, scar management, and skin-renewing technologies, and its CEO, Margrett Lewis. Among other things, NCLA argues the Supreme Court’s blessing the FTC of yesteryear in Humphrey’s Executor does not imply that the Commission newly vested with truly executive powers would be similarly endorsed. When Humphrey’s Executor was decided, the FTC did not possess the power to initiate suits or to seek any penalties. This core executive power was only added to the FTC’s authority in the 1970s. The Supreme Court itself has recognized that its 1935 “conclusion that the FTC did not exercise executive power has not withstood the test of time."

Vec discusses Humphrey’s Executor in FTC v. PPO.