The PREP ACT Is Clearly Unconstitutional

In the War of 1812, when the British burned down the White House and First Lady Dolly Madison astutely recued the portrait of George Washington from being burned, President James Madison did not invoke the Emergency Powers Clause of the United States Constitution. This is because the United States Constitution has no Emergency Power Clause. The closest thing to such a clause would be the ability to quell an insurrection. And no, taking selfies at the White House protesting a fake election, doesn’t qualify. James Madison did not violate habeas corpus or trample on any of the Bill of Rights. Madison had faith in the document that he wrote. He also understood that the Constitution would be worthless if any branch of government could simply override the contract on a whim, or even when the survival of the nation was at stake.

This is why amending the Constitution (contract) is difficult.

Note: General Andrew Jackson’s enacting martial law in battle of New Orleans was not authorized by President Madison nor did he know about it till later.

Anyway, this is exactly what the illegal legislation called the PREP Act does. The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), was enacted on December 30, 2005. It is a U.S. federal law ostensibly designed to facilitate the rapid deployment of medical countermeasures during public health emergencies. Codified under 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d and § 247d-6e, it provides legal protections, primarily immunity from liability, to certain individuals and entities, such as manufacturers, distributors, healthcare providers, and government officials that are involved in the development, distribution, or administration of countermeasures like vaccines, drugs, or medical devices. This immunity applies to claims of loss caused by these countermeasures, except in cases of "willful misconduct" that results in death or serious physical injury, which has a high legal threshold to prove.

The PREP Act is activated when the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issues a declaration identifying a public health emergency, such as a pandemic, bioterrorism event, or other crisis, and specifies the countermeasures covered. Once activated, the law ‘claims’ to preempt state laws that might conflict with its provisions. For example, during the COVID-19 plandemic, the HHS Secretary issued a PREP Act declaration on March 17, 2020, covering countermeasures like vaccines and treatments, which has been amended multiple times since to adjust its scope and duration.

As of today, March 10, 2025, the COVID-19 PREP Act declaration is still in effect. The most recent extension came via the 12th Amendment, published on December 10, 2024, in the Federal Register, which extended the liability protections for COVID-19 countermeasures through December 31, 2029, effective from January 1, 2025. This means the emergency powers granted under the PREP Act, specifically, immunity from liability for claims related to the use of covered countermeasures like vaccines and treatments, except for willful misconduct, remain active.

Basically, this law claims that everybody following orders is immune.

The PREP Act is a statute that runs contrary to the U.S. Constitution and has yet to have come before the U.S. Supreme Court for review. As James Roguski also points out, many aspects of this so called law are illegal, and in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Still, even if we table the fact that this law is not lawful under the U.S. Constitution, it is necessary to point out that distributing mRNA biological and technological weapons of mass destruction would qualify as willful misconduct under this law.

C (1)(a) (i) intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose;‘(ii) knowingly without legal or factual justification; and ‘‘(iii) in disregard of a known or obvious risk that is so great as to make it highly probable that the harm will outweigh the benefit.

The late Dr. Francis Boyle, the law professor that wrote the 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act, provided an affidavit in my case stating that the mRNA nanoparticle injections were biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction according to 18 USC 175 CH 10 BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS. Other experts also provided affidavits echoing this sentiment.

So even the dystopian PREP Act falls apart once we establish the fact the mRNA injections are biological and technological weapons of mass destruction. These injections cause harm, including multiple diseases and disorders, and death. These injections also have a negative effectiveness, meaning you are more likely to get COVID. These injections harm directly through injection and indirectly through shedding. The shots also contain nanotechnology.

Even if you were gullible to think that this is not a preplanned global attack on the human population, then the fact that the government knew the negative effects of the injections as early as December of 2020, while simultaneously claiming the injections were safe and effective, clearly shows criminal intent, or dare I say, ‘willful misconduct’.

Targeting a population with a biological agent, chemical agent, or device, would quality as a biological weapon. If the counter measure is a biological weapon liability protection evaporates. The PREP Act is merely another cover for a criminal conspiracy to target Americans with biological and technological weapons of mass destruction. There is no liability protection for committing a crime. Establishing a crime and criminal intent appears to erode any claim to civil liability protection.

Moving beyond the obvious willful misconduct, does the legislature have the right to dispose of Judicial Review? Looking at this statue it actually claims to remove judicial review:

B (7) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—No court of the United States, or of any State, shall have subject matter jurisdiction to review, whether by mandamus or otherwise, any action by the Secretary under this subsection.

Let’s zero in on this folly. Marbury v. Madison (1803), Supreme Court Justice John Marshall established the principle of Judicial Review, and created the legal precedent that the Supreme Court could determine whether laws enacted by Congress were Constitutional or not. As Marshall wrote, “A law repugnant to the Constitution is void”.

This means that at a minimum this aspect of the PREP Act is clearly unconstitutional. This is not even debatable. This is case law that has been reaffirmed for nearly 222 years. Understand that James Madison, the author of the U.S. Constitution was President at the time, and he would have pushed back against the Judicial Branch if the claim was not legitimate.

The legislature simply does not have the authority to limit Judicial Power. It violates the basic principle of Separation of Powers and the framework of the U.S. Constitutional government as having three coequal branches of government. This horizontal distribution of power is to prevent a tyranny to form theoretically if one branch of government usurps power the other branches will collectively push back.

Needless to say, Congress does not have the power to cede dictatorial powers to the Executive Branch of Government through the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

In addition, the Congress does not have the power to eliminate an individual’s right to due process and a jury trial. This Fifth and 7th Amendment Rights are outside the bounds of Congressional authority.

B (8) PREEMPTION OF STATE LAW.— During the effective period of a declaration under subsection (b), or at any time with respect to conduct undertaken in accordance with such declaration, no State or political subdivision of a State may establish, enforce, or continue in effect with respect to a covered countermeasure any provision of law or legal requirement

Again, Congress does not have the authority to interfere with the structural framework of the U.S. government under the Constitution. In this case it is interfering with the vertical balance of power that exists between the Federal and State government as protected under the Tenth Amendment.

This law needs to get in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and ruled unconstitutional, as it clearly is. And if the U.S. Supreme Court does not uphold the Constitution, states need simply nullifying the PREP ACT by whatever method they deem necessary.

Congress could repeal the law, although that implies that the law had some legitimacy, which it doesn’t. The Supreme Court doing its job is preferable. In short, there needs to be constant legal challenges until the Court does the obvious.

Of course, under the PREP Act the HHS Secretary can pull the mRNA injections and end the COVID emergency.

Regardless, the PREP Act is total dystopian BS.

Dr. Joseph Sansone is a psychotherapist opposed to psychopathic authoritarianism.

Mind Matters and Everything Else is 100% independent. If you appreciate my writing and advocacy and would like to support it, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription or making a donation of any amount. Donations may be sent c/o Joseph Sansone, 27499 Riverview Center Boulevard, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, United States, or make an online donation on Ko-Fi.