Regarding the "sophistication litmus test", I would like to add one more point about its insidiousness. In basic form, it allows outsourcing to ostensibly "private" agencies to launder the rights violations the authorities intend to impose. But in the case of the mass violations of informed consent that the world has recently witnessed, …
Regarding the "sophistication litmus test", I would like to add one more point about its insidiousness. In basic form, it allows outsourcing to ostensibly "private" agencies to launder the rights violations the authorities intend to impose. But in the case of the mass violations of informed consent that the world has recently witnessed, another aspect was outsourcing to _other government agencies_ which could, in perverse legal reasoning, be said to be "innocent of responsibility". Legally, "approved" equals "licensed" equals "permissible to use the magic words 'safe and effective'". The FDA is the agency with jurisdiction over all these magic words. (To be sure, the words are not to be conflated with actually _being_ safe and effective, but I'm just focusing here on the legal gymnastics). In this case, the option of outsourcing use of these magic words directly to the private entities - i.e. the pharma companies, would have blatantly violated the law. So they had the CDC and Veterans Affairs conspicuously claim that the legally experimental genetic vaccines were "safe and effective", presumably on the unstated legal argument that the prohibition on the use of these words only applied to marketing by private companies. Then private employers (such as my own, in June 2021) could write up vaccine-mandate policies which asserted that _the CDC says_ that the vaccines are "safe and effective". To ensure lawyers writing these policies that they're clients would be in no legal jeopardy as a consequence, the EEOC wrote up guidelines for such policies, in a footnote explicitly saying that the "FDA approach" (i.e. the prohibition on using the magic words with respect to unapproved products) was not within their jurisdiction or competence. Of course, the FDA didn't just tolerate these shenanigans. It obviously was a party to this division of labor for purposes of rights-extinguishing.
I love it. 'the option of outsourcing magic words directly to private entities in order to tender them immunity in the deployment of tyranny' - Tyranny by Proxy. Brilliant.
Regarding the "sophistication litmus test", I would like to add one more point about its insidiousness. In basic form, it allows outsourcing to ostensibly "private" agencies to launder the rights violations the authorities intend to impose. But in the case of the mass violations of informed consent that the world has recently witnessed, another aspect was outsourcing to _other government agencies_ which could, in perverse legal reasoning, be said to be "innocent of responsibility". Legally, "approved" equals "licensed" equals "permissible to use the magic words 'safe and effective'". The FDA is the agency with jurisdiction over all these magic words. (To be sure, the words are not to be conflated with actually _being_ safe and effective, but I'm just focusing here on the legal gymnastics). In this case, the option of outsourcing use of these magic words directly to the private entities - i.e. the pharma companies, would have blatantly violated the law. So they had the CDC and Veterans Affairs conspicuously claim that the legally experimental genetic vaccines were "safe and effective", presumably on the unstated legal argument that the prohibition on the use of these words only applied to marketing by private companies. Then private employers (such as my own, in June 2021) could write up vaccine-mandate policies which asserted that _the CDC says_ that the vaccines are "safe and effective". To ensure lawyers writing these policies that they're clients would be in no legal jeopardy as a consequence, the EEOC wrote up guidelines for such policies, in a footnote explicitly saying that the "FDA approach" (i.e. the prohibition on using the magic words with respect to unapproved products) was not within their jurisdiction or competence. Of course, the FDA didn't just tolerate these shenanigans. It obviously was a party to this division of labor for purposes of rights-extinguishing.
I love it. 'the option of outsourcing magic words directly to private entities in order to tender them immunity in the deployment of tyranny' - Tyranny by Proxy. Brilliant.