Press Releases


AFLDS Will Continue to Fight Against University-mandated Covid Vaccinations

Los Angeles, CA – Following a federal judge’s refusal to put Indiana University’s COVID vaccination mandate on hold until litigation is complete, America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) issued the following statements: James Bopp, Jr., Director of Litigation for America’s Frontline Doctors commented: “Today’s ruling does not end the students’ fight. We plan to immediately appeal the Judge’s decision. In addition, we plan on asking the Judge to put a hold on IU’s Mandate pending that appeal. We are confident that the court of appeals will grant our request.” Simone Gold, MD, JD, and founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, said: “It’s troubling to see the Court show any hesitation in their resolve to recognize and protect each person’s sovereignty over their own body. Voluntary consent to receive medications is black letter law (since Nuremburg), and it must not be discarded in favor of scarlet letters of segregation. America’s Frontline Doctors will relentlessly pursue equal justice for all students and all people according to facts and science, not politics.” Dr. Gold continued, “It is critical that those in positions of authority are making decisions and implementing public policy based on thorough consideration of the relevant medical data. Indiana University’s policy fails to recognize the widely available medical studies demonstrating that there is zero statistical risk to the students themselves. Any mandate, or merely even implied pressure, to take a new drug that lacks long-term health and safety data is categorically reckless and unethical.” The lawsuit, Ryan Klaassen et al., v. The Trustees of Indiana University, was filled in June on behalf of eight Indiana University students who are challenging the school’s COVID vaccination mandates. The Students involved are seeking to relief from the school’s mandate, citing their rights to bodily autonomy, due process, and education free from unnecessary restrictions, and the right to consent to medical treatment. Today’s ruling does not impact the case’s ability to proceed, nor is it a ruling against the case being brought by the students.