1. “Where the special master of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) (hereafter noted as ‘the Program’) violates the 2017 Secretary of Health and Human Services’ (hereafter referred to as ‘the Secretary’ or ‘respondent’) posted Rule that revised the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA) (hereafter noted as ‘the Act’), under what circumstance can the special master arbitrarily overlook the Secretary’s policy changes to shape a capricious decision?”
2. “Where the name implies a childhood law, does the Act fairly represent the rights of children in a ‘person’ law and the constitutional right to a fair jury trial?”
3. “Where the Constitution mandates justice for all, does the Program adequately offer resources and legal representation to petitioners with disabilities?”
4. “Where the Act was written to protect commercial interests for public health concerns, where is a line drawn to protect an individual’s constitutional rights to make informed decisions, to discuss ideas and science, and to freely make choices regarding drug and safety issues?”
5. “Where the Secretary manages multiple healthcare regulatory agencies, under what circumstances can the Program offer nonconforming science and facts which violate administrative and regulatory rules if held independently as facts?”
6. “Where the Secretary promises citizens to operate with utmost care and efficiency, under what discretion may the Secretary or any agent violate this promise by adding regulation and rules with no certified cost savings and dire added risks?”
