IV. CONCLUSION

“[I]t is always in the public interest to prevent the violation of a party’s constitutional

rights.” G & V Lounge, Inc. v. Mich. Liquor Control Comm’n, 23 F.3d 1071, 1079 (6th Cir.

1994). “The vindication of constitutional rights and the enforcement of a federal statute serve

the public interest almost by definition.” League of Women Voters of Fla. v. Browning, 863 F.

Supp. 2d 1155, 1167 (N.D. Fla. 2012). On the other hand, “[t]here is generally no public interest

in the perpetuation of unlawful agency action.” League of Women Voters v. Newby, 838 F.3d 1,

12 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

Defendants themselves suffer no conceivable harm from the grant of the requested

injunctions. A disease that has an overall survivability rate exceeding 99% — comparable to the

seasonal flu and countless other ailments — does not create a public health emergency within the

meaning of § 360bbb–3. SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 do not give rise to any countervailing

public interest that justifies overriding the constitutionally protected right to personal autonomy

and bodily integrity. This is so with respect to the entire American public, but even more acutely

with respect to the under-18 age category and those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

IV. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, and for all of the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs move under Rule 65,

Fed.R.Civ.P., for a preliminary injunction against Defendants enjoining them from continuing to

authorize the emergency use of the so-called “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine,” “Moderna

COVID-19 Vaccine” and the “Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) COVID-19 Vaccine” pursuant to

their respective EUAs, and from granting full FDA approval of the Vaccines:

(i) for the under-18 age category; (ii) for those, regardless of age, who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 prior to vaccination; and (iii) until such time as the Defendants have complied with their obligation to create and maintain the requisite “conditions of authorization” under Section 546 of the Food, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb–

3(e), thereby enabling Vaccine candidates to give truly voluntary, informed consent.

Dated: July 19, 2021.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS:

/s/ Lowell H. Becraft, Jr.

LOWELL H. BECRAFT, JR.

Attorney for Plaintiffs ASB 5005-F66L 403C Andrew Jackson Way Huntsville, AL 35801 (256) 533-2535 becraft@hiwaay.net Attorneys for Plaintiffs /s/ Thomas Renz

THOMAS RENZ

(Ohio Bar ID: 98645) 1907 W. State St. #162 Fremont, OH 43420 (419) 351-4248 renzlawllc@gmail.com (Pro Hac Vice)

/s/ Michael A. Hamilton

MICHAEL A. HAMILTON

(KY Bar No. 89471)

CORNERSTONE ATTORNEY 1067 N. Main St, PMB 224 Nicholasville, KY 40356 (859) 655-5455 michael@cornerstoneattorney.com (Pro Hac Vice)

/s/ Jonathan Diener

JONATHAN DIENER

P.O. Box 27 Mule Creek, NM 88051 (575) 388-1754 jonmdiener@gmail.com (Admission Pending Pro Hac Vice) /s/ Robert J. Gargasz

ROBERT J. GARGASZ

(Ohio Bar ID: 0007136) 1670 Cooper Foster Park Rd. Lorain, Ohio 44053 (440) 960-1670 rjgargasz@gmail.com (Pro Hac Vice)

/s/ Joseph S. Gilbert

JOSEPH S. GILBERT

(Nevada Bar No. 9033) Joey Gilbert & Associates D/B/A Joey Gilbert Law 405 Marsh Avenue Reno, Nevada 89509 (775) 284-7700 joey@joeygilbertlaw.com (Pro Hac Vice) /s/ F.R. Jenkins

F. R. JENKINS

(Maine Bar No. 004667) Meridian 361 International Law Group, PLLC 97A Exchange Street, Ste 202 Portland, ME 04101 (866) 338-7087 jenkins@meridian361.com Attorney for Plaintiffs (Pro Hac Vice)

/s/ N. Ana Garner

N. ANA GARNER

Garner Law Firm 1000 Cordova Place #644 Santa Fe, NM 87505 (505) 930-5170 garnerlaw@yahoo.com (Pro Hac Vice)