And that folks is called Nullification and more states need to stand up and know the states and people of the states decide what is or is not constitutional.
This was an unconstitutional move by Obama and all the states need to do is to grow a spine and invoke Nullification. It is not rocket science. It takes an understanding of the Constitution not based on case law or precedent but on the original intent. Here is an article I just had publish on one of the lies they use to shut down any push back. But once the truth is seen it cannot be unseen.
Bug your MPs. Andrew Bridgen has over 20 of them agreeing on the issue of excess deaths. They need to be frightened their constituents will vote them out for being globalist stooges. Demand they call for investigations of the WHO etc. See my "What can parliamentarians do about the WHO" piece posted around March 16.
When the federal govt. was assuming authority in 2020, I was clueless about states' rights as defined in the Constitution. And no news article that I read commented on it. Now I am pissed. Those assholes assumed all sort of authority with zero basis. And got away with it. Off with their heads! (just kidding, but rescind their retirement)
"One reason why the Texas federal judge dismissed the petitioner states' case against Xavier Becerra and the Department of Health and Human Services is that the judge didn't think the states presented any evidence of actual harm, concrete injury or threatened imminent injury to the people living in the states.
HHS argued, and the judge agreed, that the harm from the WHO-based definitions of "public health emergency" were speculative, hypothetical, conjectural, and therefore the states lacked standing.
Soon, the next "deadly global pandemic" performance will begin.
If and when state AGs file new cases to protect state residents from “public health emergency”-predicated arrest, detention, torture and murder, it will be very important that they incorporate the information that has so painfully been brought into the light these last few years.
They must lay out the evidence that "deadly global pandemic" stories are fiction.
They must incorporate the facts about the injuries and deaths caused in each state by use of products known as "Covid-19 vaccines" under Emergency Use Authorization status: the actual harms and concrete injuries.
They must lay out how deployment of EUA products, as covert biochemical weapons, is directly connected to HHS declarations that a "public health emergency exists."
And they must lay out how HHS declarations that a "public health emergency exists" are directly connected to all five of the legal definitions inserted into American regulatory law through the January 19, 2017 edition of the Federal Register, and connected to the whole system of treaties and laws built to enable State-sponsored mass murder, which grows more ripe for dismantling with every passing day."
Is this a court filing? If so, what court? It doesn't say.
Remedies, if any, are obtained in courts by a jury.
Was it filed ONLY with the Department of Health and Human Services?
Did the DHHS respond? It doesn't say.
What force and effect of law was this filing obtained, if any?
Additionally, if one is to make arguments about something, then it MUST be "primary" issues and NOT secondary issues, otherwise, one loses more likely.
In the federal constitution, there is NO mentioned of an "emergency" article/clause.
If so, then that would constitute tyranny against the people.
NONE exist.
There is also NO mentioned of anything related to health (diseases) in the said constitution so, therefore, all federal agencies (FDA, DHHS, CDC, etc. )connected to health/diseases are unconstitutional.
Health is the responsibility of the people ONLY - individuals, and it is a personal issue.
WHO, a foreign entity, is also NOT mentioned in the said constitution so, therefore, it does NOT possess any jurisdiction within the United States.
In the federal constitution, there is mentioned the "10 miles square" provision (limitation in the States for certain things ONLY) to "prevent" the federal government from encroaching on the States - see Article 8, Section 1, Clause 17 = the general government MUST purchase the land for certain things where it would have jurisdiction.
This MUST be understood.
Constitutions and more are NOT taught in schools.
The federal constitution applies ONLY to the State officers and the general government.
Read the sections that says "No State shall.............."
It doesn't say NO people shall.
Furthermore, the various States do NOT possess any jurisdiction to have an emergency article/clause mentioned in the State constitutions in a free government - all power is inherent in the people."
"All" means every bit of power belongs to individuals and NOT the "collective" people.
NO one possess the right to "take away" someone else's rights.
I recently requested and received from the Legislative Library in Augusta, Maine the 1841 and 1857 laws pertaining to "infectious" persons (quarantine, a medical term as opposed to lock down, a military/prison term) and how to handle them and protecting the public.
Both show "local" control of the situation = selectmens are empowered to handle the situation and NOT the State coming from Augusta, Maine (centralization).
So this filing by the 17 State AGs is NOT addressing the "real primary" issues as the Department of Health and Human Services is an unconstitutional/unlawful department.
Hope this helps.
Study the federal and your own State constitutions in order to address the proper and rightful arguments to ensure a win.
Could the Democrat regime legally transfer sovereignty to the CCP?
Or the WEF?
Or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?
Can’t imagine they have the power to do that - so why on earth would they be allowed to hand SOVEREIGNTY to Tedros & his partners in crime? It’s ABSURD.
The governments around the world pretending they can do this have gone ROGUE.
Thanks for resurrecting this Meryl! Will include with my letter to Ken Paxton of TX. who signed the original petition.
You may have seen this? https://open.substack.com/pub/petersweden/p/huge-the-wef-agenda-could-be-banned
And that folks is called Nullification and more states need to stand up and know the states and people of the states decide what is or is not constitutional.
https://tennesseeconservativenews.com/the-constitutionally-illiterate-and-the-supremacy-clause-of-the-us-constitution/
Stuck in OZ atm - strange people.
Ask them what they think about the WHO and they might say: well if ya gotta go ya gotta go.
Not the LOO, the WHO!
Or: well if you get it you get it.
Not the FLU, the WHO.
They just do not get it!
The World Health Organisation: oh those XYZs, they can all go to XYZ as far as I am concerned!
Maybe they do get it after all!
They were setting up their scamdemics....
This was an unconstitutional move by Obama and all the states need to do is to grow a spine and invoke Nullification. It is not rocket science. It takes an understanding of the Constitution not based on case law or precedent but on the original intent. Here is an article I just had publish on one of the lies they use to shut down any push back. But once the truth is seen it cannot be unseen.
https://tennesseeconservativenews.com/the-constitutionally-illiterate-and-the-supremacy-clause-of-the-us-constitution/
Can we sign anything if we live in Europe Meryl - we are not US citizens we are from the UK?
Bug your MPs. Andrew Bridgen has over 20 of them agreeing on the issue of excess deaths. They need to be frightened their constituents will vote them out for being globalist stooges. Demand they call for investigations of the WHO etc. See my "What can parliamentarians do about the WHO" piece posted around March 16.
Thanks for this!
It’s all true!
Omg 😳
When the federal govt. was assuming authority in 2020, I was clueless about states' rights as defined in the Constitution. And no news article that I read commented on it. Now I am pissed. Those assholes assumed all sort of authority with zero basis. And got away with it. Off with their heads! (just kidding, but rescind their retirement)
After HHS refused the AG petition in October 2022, Texas and Oklahoma filed a federal case in January 2023.
The federal judge dismissed the case by order dated Aug. 18, 2023.
PDF links to the case documents below.
Bailiwick reporting and analysis:
Oct. 17, 2023 - https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/texas-and-oklahoma-v-us-department
Oct. 18, 2023 - https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/there-is-never-going-to-be-another
"One reason why the Texas federal judge dismissed the petitioner states' case against Xavier Becerra and the Department of Health and Human Services is that the judge didn't think the states presented any evidence of actual harm, concrete injury or threatened imminent injury to the people living in the states.
HHS argued, and the judge agreed, that the harm from the WHO-based definitions of "public health emergency" were speculative, hypothetical, conjectural, and therefore the states lacked standing.
Soon, the next "deadly global pandemic" performance will begin.
If and when state AGs file new cases to protect state residents from “public health emergency”-predicated arrest, detention, torture and murder, it will be very important that they incorporate the information that has so painfully been brought into the light these last few years.
They must lay out the evidence that "deadly global pandemic" stories are fiction.
They must incorporate the facts about the injuries and deaths caused in each state by use of products known as "Covid-19 vaccines" under Emergency Use Authorization status: the actual harms and concrete injuries.
They must lay out how deployment of EUA products, as covert biochemical weapons, is directly connected to HHS declarations that a "public health emergency exists."
And they must lay out how HHS declarations that a "public health emergency exists" are directly connected to all five of the legal definitions inserted into American regulatory law through the January 19, 2017 edition of the Federal Register, and connected to the whole system of treaties and laws built to enable State-sponsored mass murder, which grows more ripe for dismantling with every passing day."
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2022.07.18-petition-for-rulemaking-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2022.10.31-hhs-refuse-oklahoma-petition-for-rulemaking-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2023.01.18-texas-oklahoma-v-hhs-becerra-who-phe.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2023.03.27-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs-defendants-brief-mtd.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2023.05.01-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs-plaintiffs-opposition-to-mtd.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2023.05.15-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs-defendants-reply-in-further-support-mtd.pdf
https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2023/10/2023.08.18-texas-oklahoma-v.-hhs-order-dismissal-lack-of-standing.pdf
Hi!
I just read the 2022 filing of the 17 State AG's.
First of all, where was this filed?
Is this a court filing? If so, what court? It doesn't say.
Remedies, if any, are obtained in courts by a jury.
Was it filed ONLY with the Department of Health and Human Services?
Did the DHHS respond? It doesn't say.
What force and effect of law was this filing obtained, if any?
Additionally, if one is to make arguments about something, then it MUST be "primary" issues and NOT secondary issues, otherwise, one loses more likely.
In the federal constitution, there is NO mentioned of an "emergency" article/clause.
If so, then that would constitute tyranny against the people.
NONE exist.
There is also NO mentioned of anything related to health (diseases) in the said constitution so, therefore, all federal agencies (FDA, DHHS, CDC, etc. )connected to health/diseases are unconstitutional.
Health is the responsibility of the people ONLY - individuals, and it is a personal issue.
WHO, a foreign entity, is also NOT mentioned in the said constitution so, therefore, it does NOT possess any jurisdiction within the United States.
In the federal constitution, there is mentioned the "10 miles square" provision (limitation in the States for certain things ONLY) to "prevent" the federal government from encroaching on the States - see Article 8, Section 1, Clause 17 = the general government MUST purchase the land for certain things where it would have jurisdiction.
This MUST be understood.
Constitutions and more are NOT taught in schools.
The federal constitution applies ONLY to the State officers and the general government.
Read the sections that says "No State shall.............."
It doesn't say NO people shall.
Furthermore, the various States do NOT possess any jurisdiction to have an emergency article/clause mentioned in the State constitutions in a free government - all power is inherent in the people."
"All" means every bit of power belongs to individuals and NOT the "collective" people.
NO one possess the right to "take away" someone else's rights.
I recently requested and received from the Legislative Library in Augusta, Maine the 1841 and 1857 laws pertaining to "infectious" persons (quarantine, a medical term as opposed to lock down, a military/prison term) and how to handle them and protecting the public.
Both show "local" control of the situation = selectmens are empowered to handle the situation and NOT the State coming from Augusta, Maine (centralization).
So this filing by the 17 State AGs is NOT addressing the "real primary" issues as the Department of Health and Human Services is an unconstitutional/unlawful department.
Hope this helps.
Study the federal and your own State constitutions in order to address the proper and rightful arguments to ensure a win.
Thank you!
Lise from Maine (former licensed clinician)
Mistake mentioned - it is Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 - 10 miles square provision.
Sorry for the mistake.
Look up "ONE HEALTH". Several states have already enacted it into law. It gives globalists power over health.
Wonderful information to know that 17 AGs made a move in 2017 to stop the WHO...knowing it was strongly tied to the CCP who rules China.
Wouldn’t this have to go to the SCOTUS?
Could the Democrat regime legally transfer sovereignty to the CCP?
Or the WEF?
Or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?
Can’t imagine they have the power to do that - so why on earth would they be allowed to hand SOVEREIGNTY to Tedros & his partners in crime? It’s ABSURD.
The governments around the world pretending they can do this have gone ROGUE.
They urgently need to be sent packing.
EVIL 🙈🙈 WORLD HELLTH BIG PHARMA DEPT..OF HELLTH ⚡🌄⚖️🌄⚡+