I agree in general for most vaccines. I did find something interesting below:
That is only a very partial view of the law.
Parents can't sue drug firms when vaccines cause harm, Supreme Court says is the story and it's about the ability of people to sue drug makers.
The story notes that there is a vaccine court which
To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000.
But what the law should be compared to what it is in the EU is an interesting question. I found this which notes that how the EU treats vaccines can (and should) change how vaccines are changed for other nations:
Liability for Vaccine Injury: The United States, the European Union, and the Developing World
And this makes sense to me:
the ECJ held that when there is no clear medical evidence for or against causation, the plaintiff does not automatically lose because she does not have definite scientific evidence.
...
This decision permits lawsuits in Europe for defectively designed vaccines that individuals cannot bring in any court in the United States. There are several vaccines on the global market now, including pentavalent and hexavalent infant vaccines and human papilloma virus vaccines for teenagers, which appear to be associated with significant injuries and deaths, despite the lack of clear scientific consensus of a causal link. 358N.W. v. Sanofi Pasteur MSD SNC may permit more vaccine injury litigation in Europe, which in turn could improve vaccine safety globally. Because many of the vaccines on the market in Europe are identical to those marketed elsewhere and produced by the same handful of manufacturers, 359 if litigation induces manufacturers to change their product designs for the European market, they might implement those changes elsewhere in the world.
