A Michigan judge will soon decide if 73-year-old Ross Barranco can be denied a donated kidney because he won’t take the COVID-19 vaccine.
“I just don’t see the logic of it,“ Barranco said in an interview with The Epoch Times. ”Everybody knows an organ transplant procedure requires the nearly complete suppression of a recipient’s immune system so the body won’t reject it.
“Then why do I need to be immunized against COVID before the operation?”
When asked if he thought the vaccine would make any difference in his prognosis, he replied: “Yeah, the vax can kill me.
“To qualify for a transplant, both of my kidneys have to be functioning at 20 percent or less. What if the vax destroys the remaining function before the operation? If it does, I’m done.
“The jab does absolutely nothing beneficial for a transplant patient.”
Given the current COVID-19 testing capability, it remains unclear why transplant patients can’t be tested for COVID-19 before the operation. A negative result could then green-light the procedure.
It’s also unclear why the vaccine is still being regarded by some hospitals as an immunization when data shows that numerous fully vaccinated people have contracted the virus multiple times.
Barranco’s legal team made reference to a 2021 survey of 200 transplant centers across the country.
Of the 140 that responded to the survey, only half required transplant candidates to have partaken in a COVID-19 vaccine regimen.
“The vax can hardly be deemed medically necessary if half of the responding transplant centers are not requiring it,” said Deborah Catalano, a lawyer of Liberty Counsel who is tracking hospital transplant policies and is familiar with many similar cases to that of Barranco.
Liberty Counsel is a nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to upholding religious liberty and Christian values.
Medical questions and safety concerns aside, Barranco, a Roman Catholic, refused the vaccine on religious grounds.
Vax Up or Else
On Feb. 1, 2022, Barranco received what he perceived as an “ultimatum” from the University of Michigan Health System in Ann Arbor.“There’s an active list and a holding list for patients awaiting a transplant. At the time, I was on the holding list," Barranco said.
“That’s when the hospital gave me three months to get three COVID shots, or they would throw me off the list entirely.
“I refused, and they threw me off. That’s when I contacted an attorney.”
Mary Clare Fischer, a public relations representative of the University of Michigan Transplant Center, outlined the hospital’s position in an email to The Epoch Times.
“[Our] policy aims to protect transplant recipients from complications of COVID-19 infection, which has had devastating effects in our patient population,” Fischer said.
“Immunocompromised solid organ transplant recipients have among the highest risk of severe illness or death from COVID-19 infection.
“At present, all of the nearly 1,000 adult patients active on our waiting list are vaccinated against COVID-19 infection.
“As is true of all of our Transplant Center policies and processes, this policy is a critical step in partnering with our patients to maximize the safety of our transplant recipients and provide them the best opportunity to regain their health and quality of life through the gift of transplantation.”
Fischer stated that the transplant center is one of a “significant number” of U.S. hospitals that require the COVID-19 vaccination for adult heart, lung, liver, pancreas, and kidney transplant patients on their active lists.
Why Not Shier?
Katie Shier, Barranco’s co-plaintiff in the case, is an unvaccinated 35-year-old mother of five who’s a candidate for a heart transplant.
She’s being kept alive by a ventricular assist device that has caused an infection, according to the plaintiffs’ attorney, David Peters of the Pacific Justice Institute.
The Pacific Justice Institute is a nonprofit legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties.
The Institute is representing Shier and Barannco free of charge.
Shier, also a Roman Catholic, objects to taking the COVID-19 vaccination on religious grounds.
On June 29, 2021, she was granted placement on the University of Michigan hospital’s transplant waiting list.
The hospital’s subsequently adopted mandatory vaccination policy now precludes her from undergoing the heart transplant necessary to save her life.
Peters told The Epoch Times that, due to the low functioning of Shier’s heart, at any time, she could slip into “imminent or immediate danger and be rushed to the hospital” and maybe qualify for a transplant under the hospital’s vaccination exemption for the critically ill.
“Sadly, it looks like that is something the court will have to order. We have emergency motions ready to go,” Peters said.
Shier told The Epoch Times on Jan. 27: “I’ve been so busy, I haven’t had much time to think about my situation.
“It is in God’s hands. All I want to do is do God’s will. After much prayer, the Lord led me not to give in, but to file the lawsuit.
“I’m fighting for three things.
“The doctors said I have an infection that can only be cured by a heart transplant.
“I believe it’s wrong to require someone to take a dangerous vaccine, so I want to see an end to the mandates.
“And, most importantly, I do not want to take any vaccine or medication that has been tainted by abortion.
“Two of the major pharmaceutical companies making the vaccine developed it from the HEK-293 fetal cell line.
“Some vaccines are known to have fetal tissue in them, and some tests are being conducted on still-living fetuses without anesthesia.
“I’m fighting for a person’s right to refuse any vaccine that is associated with abortion.”
Peters told The Epoch Times that some people misconstrue the case as a medical malpractice suit against the University of Michigan hospital.
“It is not about malpractice. It is about due process rights,” he said.
“Both Ross and Katie regard UMH [University of Michigan hospital] as one of the best hospitals in the world.
“For that reason, Katie won’t go elsewhere. She wants her new heart to come from UMH.”
A ‘Roller-Coaster’ Ordeal
Barranco, a petroleum geological engineer for 46 years, has for decades battled high blood pressure and diabetes, which he says caused his kidney dysfunction.In September 2020, he was told to start investigating the various types of dialysis.
“I began talking to [UMH] in 2021,” he said.
“Eventually, they called me in for an in-person exam. They found both of my kidneys were not working right.
“The doctors do not want to remove a partially functioning kidney while it is still contributing, so the plan was to add a third kidney.
“Soon, I was approved to be on their holding list.”
These days, Barranco isn’t easily excited by the ups and downs of his circumstances. In 2016, his hopes for relief plummeted when a blood test revealed he'd contracted an autoimmune disease that attacked his lungs and kidneys. He was placed on chemotherapy, which worked, and he recovered.
“That happened before I could begin dialysis,” he said. “My plan always has been to skip dialysis if I could, because when it fails, as it eventually always does, that’s the end of the line.”
Concern for Others
When his kidneys amazingly began to improve in response to some lifestyle changes, Barranco requested that the hospital drop him back down to the holding list, “so others more in immediate need of a transplant could take my place on the active list,” he said.He also insisted, against the hospital’s recommendation, that he wait for a cadaver donor rather than a living donor.
“I figured a living donor would be reduced to one good kidney. He or she could possibly die on the operating table or die from post-op complications. It is a risky operation,” he said.
“Or, what if later in life the living donor developed high blood pressure or diabetes with only one kidney?
“There I’d be, doing just fine, but the person who helped me would be suffering. What about him or her?”
Political or Medical?
President Joe Biden issued an order through the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) in November 2021 that would eventually result in the denial of organ transplants to unvaccinated patients such as Barranco and Shier.The federal order mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for health care workers and those professionally associated with them was narrowly permitted to stand by the U.S. Supreme Court in late January 2022.
Just prior to that decision, on Jan. 13, 2022, the high court struck down the Biden-ordered OSHA emergency temporary standard mandating that private employers with more than 100 employees require that their workers receive the COVID-19 vaccines.
It was that February that Barranco received notice from UMH that he had three months to get all three doses or be completely disqualified for a kidney transplant.
“We jumped through all their hoops, and the hospital changed the rules in the middle of the game. They threw us off the active list,” Barranco said.
The Lawsuit
In May 2022, attorneys from the Pacific Justice Institute filed suit in the Michigan Court of Claims.
They asked Judge Brock Swartzle to order the University of Michigan Board of Regents and the hospital to restore their clients, Barranco and Shier, to the transplant list, along with “all other people similarly situated.”
The hospital’s denial of medical services to the plaintiffs and its alleged refusal to consider their request for religious exemption are the reasons cited for the declaratory relief.
Barranco and Shier’s attorneys are also seeking monetary and compensatory damages for the “severe mental anguish and emotional distress” their clients suffered in the process.
The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the plaintiffs’ right to refuse medications or treatment, as well as their rights to due process, privacy, bodily integrity and autonomy, and the free exercise of their religious liberty.
The plaintiffs’ case is based on the exercise clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and its application to the states by the 14th Amendment.
Their pleadings also cite the Michigan Constitution, which reads in part, “The civil and political rights, privileges, and capacities of no person shall be diminished or enlarged on account of religious belief.”
Attorneys for the plaintiffs also referred to Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which prohibits the denial of public accommodations on the basis of religion.
The act defines “place of public accommodation” as “a business, or an educational, refreshment, entertainment, recreation, health, or transportation facility, or institution of any kind, whether licensed or not, whose goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations are extended, offered, sold, or otherwise made available to the public.”
The complaint further alleges that the hospital’s implementation of the vaccination mandate policy was done under pressure from the federal government and isn’t based on the medical needs of the plaintiffs.
“The Biden order effectively banned hospitals from exercising their own independent medical judgment in favor of federal agencies,” Peters told The Epoch Times.
The boards of large research hospitals are very aware of where most of their grant money comes from, Peters said.
“State governments have also been pressured into threatening medical professionals with the revocation of their licenses for noncompliance,” he said.
“Hospitals and doctors need to get back to using their own independent medical judgment based on what is best for each individual patient.”
A Life-or-Death Decision
“By removing Plaintiffs from the active Transplant Waiting List the University of Michigan Health System and the Transplant Board made a life-or-death decision without the Plaintiffs’ consent and removed an existing right without any type of due process,” the complaint says.Plaintiffs also contend that there are no demonstrable, peer-reviewed studies or medical justifications for removing them from the transplant waiting list.
“No such research exists showing that vaccinations are necessary or beneficial for transplant patients,” the complaint says.
University Wants Case Dismissed
In a motion for summary disposition, attorneys for the university hospital asked Swartzle to throw out Barranco and Shier’s case.The university is claiming sovereign immunity, federal preemption, and the failure of the plaintiffs to state a claim as the grounds for dismissal of the case.
According to legaldictionary.net, sovereign immunity “refers to a ruling body, such as the U.S. government, being immune from civil lawsuits or criminal prosecution. ... no one can sue the government without having the government’s consent. [It] comes from British common law, which provided the idea that the King is immune from charges of wrongdoing.”
Sovereign immunity is applied only to the federal and state governments with few exceptions.
Federal preemption is the legal doctrine that holds that federal laws are higher than state laws and take precedence over them.
Because the University of Michigan Health System asserts that its transplant program is governed by federal transplant laws, it claims it can’t be sued for alleged violations of the Michigan Constitution or state civil rights statutes and that any legal action would have to be filed in a federal court.
Other Options
“If I was a patient on a list for an organ transplant, I would not want to go through litigation. Stage four patients may not have time to do so,” said Catalano, senior litigation coordinator at Liberty Counsel.“There are alternatives to a lawsuit. There are other places patients can go for a transplant.”
Catalano told The Epoch Times that over the past 14 months, Liberty Counsel has had 73 requests for legal assistance from unvaccinated transplant candidates from around the country who’ve been denied the lifesaving procedure they need.
“In our pre-litigation strategy, we first send to a hospital a demand letter, which is mostly informational. That usually leads to a series of communications in which we educate them about the latest developments in medical science and law regarding transplants and vaccine mandates,” Catalano said.
“The medical community has [for] too long been deferential to CDC protocols. As a result of our educational efforts, we are now seeing deactivated patients reactivated without going through litigation.”
Catalano stated that science is changing rapidly and new, clear data are emerging from reputable studies on things such as COVID-19 tests, antibody testing, and natural immunity.
Hospitals That Accept Religious Exemptions
Tennessee, by state statute, has outlawed discrimination on the basis of vaccination status, and Texas has done so by an executive order from Gov. Greg Abbott.Along with Texas and Tennessee, Florida and Louisiana have emerged as destination points for unvaccinated patients from other states who are seeking organ transplants, according to Catalano.
“About 30 percent of the 73 requesters for legal assistance from Liberty Counsel have never needed a demand letter. Instead, the patients traveled to accepting states to obtain transplants,” Catalano said.
“We are finding that more unvaccinated patients are receiving needed transplants without a lawsuit than with one.
Public Pressure and Prayer Help
Some of the success that legal foundation lawyers are having on behalf of transplant candidates around the country is being credited to an informed and active citizenry.“Courageous religious objectors are responsible for making the vaccination mandates unsuccessful and putting patients back in the driver’s seat,” Catalano said.
Barranco told The Epoch Times he felt his case was helped by the 24 supporters who drove 70 miles to attend his first hearing at a courthouse in Lansing.
A citizens group called Guardians of Freedom Michigan (GOFM) conducted a prayer vigil in the building before the proceedings began.
“You better believe the judge noticed them. He not only acknowledged their presence in the courtroom, but went out of his way to explain things to them,” Barranco said.
The Medical-Industrial Complex
Illona Rugg, a GOFM activist and Barannco supporter whose husband was fired for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine after 23 years of service as an Ann Arbor firefighter, said: “It bothers me to see them chiseling away at our freedom. People need to stand up against tyranny.“Our very lives are being held hostage by the medical-industrial complex.”
Both organizations list pharmaceutical giant Sanofi, which partnered with Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson in producing the COVID-19 vaccine, as one of their corporate sponsors.
CSL Behring, which partnered with AstraZeneca to produce its COVID-19 vaccine, and Novartis, which partnered with Pfizer, are also corporate sponsors of the American Society of Transplantation.
The United Network of Organ Sharing receives 10 percent of its funding from another active promoter of the COVID-19 vaccine—the federal government.
