Editor’s Note — The 2013 Supreme Court case referred to in the claim “is not related to the question of determining who/what is human and what is not,” Ana Santos Rutschman, an expert in vaccine law and assistant professor at St Louis University’s Center for Health Law Studies, told AFP. “There’s no relationship between this case and any claim related to the administration of any type of vaccine, including mRNA vaccines,” nor is there a “case or law saying that after any type of medical intervention (including receiving a vaccine) someone ceases to be considered a human for legal purposes,” Rutschman said. Instead, the Supreme Court found in the case that isolated segments of human DNA could not be patented. The unanimous decision on June 13, 2013 overturned exclusive rights to use genes but allowed companies to patent their developments of synthetic, so-called complementary DNA. A search of the court’s decision found no mention of the words “vaccine” or “vaccines,” and the emergency use authorizations for the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA Covid-19 vaccines came more than seven years after the case was decided.