Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
In the midst of the scrutiny about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s promise to transfer his financial interest in vaccin demands to his family, legal experts have criticized the measure, but keep in mind that Kennedy’s approach is not significantly different from the actions taken by other public officials in the past.
During Kennedy’s confirmation audiences last week, The possible next Secretary of Health and Human Services was investigated on their financial participation in the demands for personal injuries linked to vaccines, particularly their ties with a lawsuit against the Merck pharmaceutical company and its Gardasil’s cervical cancer vaccine. Although Kennedy did not initially commit to set aside his participation against Merck, he reversed the course in a written answer to the legislators’ questions after an audience, noting that he would amend his promise and “strip my interest in said litigation through A task to a task to my non -dependent adult son. “
While some legal experts They have argued that the measure is not far enough to cancel the possible conflicts for Kennedy, others say that this approach is similar to that taken by several other public officials who have found themselves in a similar situation. Meanwhile, a legal expert suggested Fox News Digital for Kennedy’s pass to his son “is more than enough to satisfy any ethical concern.”
An image of the HHS RFK Jr. Secretary Nominate Jr. juxtapuso next to a bottle of pills made by drug manufacturers. (Istock/Getty)
“That can meet the problems of conflict of ordinary interests,” said Jim Copland, director of Legal Policy of the Manhattan Institute. “I just don’t think the head of the Department of Health and Human Services It has some business involved in some way with litigation against Merck. ”
The companion legal expert of the Manhattan Institute, Ilya Shapiro, said she is not sure if Kennedy’s measure will be enough to avoid any real conflict, but added that she acknowledged “it is not unusual in the light of the past examples.”
Both Democrats and Republicans have used the family to protect themselves from ethics complaints related to their personal businesses, with the former President Joe Biden Being a recent and remarkable example after a several year investigation into the businesses of his family business that found that both his son and his brother were involved in risky commercial relations with foreign entities, such as China. Biden has repeatedly denied his participation in those businesses.
The questions still revolve around former President Joe Biden and if his office was used to financially benefit his son Hunter and brothers James and Frank. (Getty images)
Former President of Casa Nancy Pelosi Similarly, she sought to defend her family’s businesses after it was revealed that her husband was earning money by investing in companies that had business in front of his wife. In response to the questions of the journalists about whether she agreed with the efforts to prohibit the spouses of federal legislators from trade in actions, Pelosi replied that “they should be able to participate in that.”
Other notable figures that have used their families to protect their personal businesses include president Donald Trump, Who delivered the control of his Trump Business Organization Empire to his children, and the late Senator Dianne Feinstein, whose investor husband, Richard Blum, administered investments through his firm Blum Capital Partners that often crossed with the work of his wife while I was in Congress.
Then, Speaker from the Nancy Pelosi house and her husband, Paul Pelosi. (Photo AP/Kevin Wolf)
Group aligned with Trump pressed the Republican senators in impulse to confirm RFK JR.
“It is my opinion that the RFK plan, Jr. Vaccine injuries For your child it is more than enough to satisfy any ethical concern, “said Hans von Spakovsky, a high -level legal member of the Heritage Foundation,” this is particularly true due to the limitations imposed by the federal law on any claim made against manufacturers of vaccines that severely limit the possible compensation for anyone who claimed a vaccine was somehow defective. “
Spakovsky postulated that the National Program for Compensation of Vaccines of the Federal Government, which prohibits civil litigation against drug manufacturers and, instead, directs the federal government to administer any payment of vaccine injuries, serves to cushion the impact that Kennedy could have vaccine related injuries.
“RFK would not have authority at all (about this program),” he said. “The point is that all this is so disconnected from the potential position of the RFK cabinet, Jr., if confirmed, that anyone who says this is a” serious “ethics problem is wrong.”
The activists attend a press conference on the Ethics Reform of the Supreme Court outside the Capitol on May 2, 2023.
Copand, who agreed with Spakovsky in which the vaccine compensation program decreases much of Kennedy’s advantage, said RFK Jr. could still benefit indirectly.
“I think it is a more worrying conflict of interest than just saying: ‘Oh, it has a lot of capital participation in some company that, by the way, can benefit from you, you know,” Copland said. “I mean, if you had a Secretary of the Department of Defense Who was CEO of an important military contractor, and then transmits it to his son, I think you would still have a concern about it due to the obvious conflict of interest there, which is different from a kind of ordinary ‘,’ Oh, I own a company and, by the way, will benefit from the government. “
RFK JR spent the weekend talking to the key senator who could do or break his confirmation
Fox News Legal Analyst, Andy McCarthy, was more critical of Kennedy’s decision to pass his financial interests to his son, pointing out that the fact that he is “struggling to find a scheme to retain his participation, instead of doing what Obviously correct abandoning up to that this is a true conflict of interest. “
“The comparison with family asset transfers in other contexts is inappropriate and, in any case, loses the point,” McCarthy said. “Whatever one thinks about President Trump’s arrangements regarding his family business, voters knew about that business and chose him anyway, and the president is not in a position to challenge himself from making executive decision making based in conflicts of interest.
Click here to get the Fox News application
McCarthy added that after years “complaining justifiably that President Biden was corruptly enriched by payments … made to his son and brother,” it is difficult for him “that” that “that” that “that” that “that” Republicans You can turn a blind eye to a financial participation, which would create a significant conflict of interest for RFK Jr. as secretary of the HHS, under the pretext that you plan to transfer the stake to your child. “
