It’s very unfortunate but our current admin and govt agencies do not give a flying fuck about the US Constitution. Very scary that We The People are just sitting back letting them do whatever they want.
This government is a corporation just like Coca Cola. It has its own statutes, etc. We are all participating from birth unfortunately. Not that this cannot be fixed, however.
The legal precedent goes back to 1905 Jacobson v Massachusetts.
What should be challenged, however, is the fruit of the poison tree: these compulsory mandates are based on deception and collusion; they do not meet the public health principle argued in Jacobson.
• the EUA only possible by collusion to suppress alternative therapeutics and prophylactics
• mRNA gene therapy EUA only possible by collusion to regulate as traditional vaccines
• vaccine deceptively claimed effective by restricting the measure of effectiveness to the ‘presence antibodies by certain week post injection’; implying rather than establishing “immunity”
• the definition of “vaccine” was changed arbitrarily to fit mRNA effectiveness, not the other way around
• adverse events are unacceptably high — lack of action to halt distribution shows extreme bias on behalf of manufacturers over credible physician groups calling for pause to reevaluate product safety
• the very nature of Informed Consent is voluntary and requires transparency
• the products are still experimental and participation in medical experiments cannot be under coercion, threats, or intimidation
Actually, if I recall correctly, if I rob you of your Porsche, steal it from you or illegally take it, you will get it back when the court is finished with it as evidence because these are criminal acts. If I defraud you of your Porsche, because this is a civil matter, you must recover it through an action in tort. This is not legal advice, however because motor vehicle law and different jurisdictions.
That falls in line with what I remember; your vehicle was stolen, you weren’t defrauded of it. The court (and the court’s creature, the police) were finished with it as evidence and you got it back. It was a criminal procedure as with a robbery or a taking.
As I noted, motor vehicles (and real estate) are often treated differently from other kinds of property such as, for instance, cash or jewelry.
Good point. But there’s 115 yrs of legal precedent since Jacobson. So what’s the heavier lift right now? getting the SC to overturn the Jacobson ruling? (which half the population probably agree with) Or showing the Emperor has no clothes and bringing down the whole stinking fraud?
It’s there: the “provide for… the general welfare” language of the first sentence of Article I Section 8 is very general and allows Congress to legislate pretty much anything that is not prohibited by other sections of the constitution. And legislation passed by Congress over the years seems to have authorized the executive branch to do stuff like vaccine mandates.
There is a defensible argument that the rather wooly language of the ninth and tenth amendments will stop some elements of the vaccine mandate, at least for employers who do no business across states lines. (If you’re doing business across state lines, clause 3 of section 8 clearly gives the federal government this power).
And of course Congress has the power to stop the whole thing in its tracks, just by passing legislation that removes the authority it granted to the executive branch in this area.
It's in the cowardice and laziness clause. The president has the power do anything the American people are too cowardly and lazy too speak out against and demand he be held accountable for.
You'd be amazed at what isn't in the constitution, like the federal reserve or affirmative action.
It’s very unfortunate but our current admin and govt agencies do not give a flying fuck about the US Constitution. Very scary that We The People are just sitting back letting them do whatever they want.
So why do we have to abide by their idiotic rulings then?
Because they managed to obscure the 10th Amendment years ago and have avoided anyone questioning that... Until this week
This government is a corporation just like Coca Cola. It has its own statutes, etc. We are all participating from birth unfortunately. Not that this cannot be fixed, however.
They will take the "common good" and spread it over everything like butter.
Its all word games.
How do we remove them then (the people and their rulings)?
I'll bet typing "Follow Pelosi's lead" made your heart and brain hurt? Reading it made mine hurt. But you're right Dee, on all of your post.
The legal precedent goes back to 1905 Jacobson v Massachusetts.
What should be challenged, however, is the fruit of the poison tree: these compulsory mandates are based on deception and collusion; they do not meet the public health principle argued in Jacobson.
• the EUA only possible by collusion to suppress alternative therapeutics and prophylactics
• mRNA gene therapy EUA only possible by collusion to regulate as traditional vaccines
• vaccine deceptively claimed effective by restricting the measure of effectiveness to the ‘presence antibodies by certain week post injection’; implying rather than establishing “immunity”
• the definition of “vaccine” was changed arbitrarily to fit mRNA effectiveness, not the other way around
• adverse events are unacceptably high — lack of action to halt distribution shows extreme bias on behalf of manufacturers over credible physician groups calling for pause to reevaluate product safety
• the very nature of Informed Consent is voluntary and requires transparency
• the products are still experimental and participation in medical experiments cannot be under coercion, threats, or intimidation
Facts
Actually, if I recall correctly, if I rob you of your Porsche, steal it from you or illegally take it, you will get it back when the court is finished with it as evidence because these are criminal acts. If I defraud you of your Porsche, because this is a civil matter, you must recover it through an action in tort. This is not legal advice, however because motor vehicle law and different jurisdictions.
That falls in line with what I remember; your vehicle was stolen, you weren’t defrauded of it. The court (and the court’s creature, the police) were finished with it as evidence and you got it back. It was a criminal procedure as with a robbery or a taking. As I noted, motor vehicles (and real estate) are often treated differently from other kinds of property such as, for instance, cash or jewelry.
Good point. But there’s 115 yrs of legal precedent since Jacobson. So what’s the heavier lift right now? getting the SC to overturn the Jacobson ruling? (which half the population probably agree with) Or showing the Emperor has no clothes and bringing down the whole stinking fraud?
https://townhall.com/columnists/jonathanemord/2021/09/10/bidens-vaccine-mandate-will-sink-in-a-legal-quagmire-n2595690
Emord is a lawyer who has successfully sued the FDA. Very good legal insight here.
Your reading is correct Sir.
If you can read and understand the constitution you can't serve on the supreme court.
It’s there: the “provide for… the general welfare” language of the first sentence of Article I Section 8 is very general and allows Congress to legislate pretty much anything that is not prohibited by other sections of the constitution. And legislation passed by Congress over the years seems to have authorized the executive branch to do stuff like vaccine mandates.
There is a defensible argument that the rather wooly language of the ninth and tenth amendments will stop some elements of the vaccine mandate, at least for employers who do no business across states lines. (If you’re doing business across state lines, clause 3 of section 8 clearly gives the federal government this power).
And of course Congress has the power to stop the whole thing in its tracks, just by passing legislation that removes the authority it granted to the executive branch in this area.
It's in the cowardice and laziness clause. The president has the power do anything the American people are too cowardly and lazy too speak out against and demand he be held accountable for.
I don’t !!!