Reporting and analysis to follow. This is an important case, dismissed by US District Judge Terry R. Means of the USDC for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, by order dated Aug. 18, 2023. My understanding is that the plaintiffs (Texas and Oklahoma) had 60 days to file an appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals because the parties include a US Government agency and a US Government official. The 60-day clock expires today, and to my knowledge (through PACER database), neither Texas nor Oklahoma has filed a notice of appeal. The original petition for rulemaking was filed with HHS in July 2022 by the attorneys general of 15 American states: Oklahoma, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah.Only Oklahoma and Texas filed the federal case in US District Court in January 2023. The states petitioned HHS to repeal three subsections of 42 CFR 70.1, through which HHS defined “public health emergency” conditions on US soil as potentially triggered by the actions of World Health Organization member nations (predicate 3) or the actions of the World Health Organization’s Director-General (predicates 4 and 5).
Judge Means dismissed the case without prejudice, meaning state plaintiffs can re-file a new complaint. It would be good if some state AGs filed a new complaint, challenging the first two definitions of a “public health emergency” as promulgated by HHS by regulatory notice on Jan. 19, 2017, in addition to the latter three definitions the states have already challenged during this first litigation. The states should challenge HHS to provide any factual, evidentiary basis for the claim that a “public health emergency” is different from the mere fact that human beings sometimes get sick, sometimes recover (with or without treatment), and eventually, inevitably die. This would help expose other fraud-based elements of the global criminal enterprise, including mass-testing of populations to present pseudo-diagnostic data to the public, fraudulently characterized as evidence that a pandemic is occurring. To pursue this legal strategy, state AGs will need to reject the foundational lie they have swallowed hook, line and sinker to date: that a pandemic happened. They will need to understand the Covid-19 fraud in its entirety — from the centuries of propaganda-based preparation (fear-mongering and pharmaceutical idolatry) that created the conditions for the present-day crimes to occur, right through to the intentional misrepresentation of illegal US DoD biochemical weapons as FDA-regulated “Covid-19 vaccines” and the injury and death toll caused by the intentional military attacks as conducted within each state. They will also need to reckon with the role that their own states’ disease surveillance, detention, quarantine and forced treatment laws¹ play in 1) maintaining many mutually-reinforcing public fictions and 2) rendering their state populations vulnerable to State-sponsored mass theft, mass torture and mass murder conducted under public health law pretexts. To the extent a federal court allowed the case to proceed, HHS would be challenged to prove that a “public health emergency” has ever existed, exists during the so-called Covid-19 outbreak, or ever can exist, as a set of circumstances morally and legally distinct from living creatures’ intrinsic, God-given susceptibility to illness and God-given capacity for endurance of suffering and for recovery of health. The fraud of “public health emergencies” has been used to morally and legally justify exercise of government police powers to control and restrict citizen use and enjoyment of God-given rights to life, liberty and property: to justify State-orchestrated torture, murder and theft. The actual exercise of these expansive government police powers was triggered upon the actual HHS PHE declaration of Jan. 31, 2020 (effective Jan. 27, 2020) in coordination with the actual WHO PHEIC declaration of Jan. 30, 2020. These illegitimate, fraudulent legal predicates have actually been used to injure and deprive citizens of life, liberty and property; and they remain in effect at the present time under a slightly modified form. Through the case whose documents are provided below, HHS officials have clearly stated their plan to continue using false “public health emergencies” and collaboration with the World Health Organization and its legal instruments, to illegitimately concentrate even more power in the future: to torture more people, to kill more people and to rob more people. HHS officials have also clearly indicated (albeit in a footnote) their understanding — along with the judge — that if the three alleged WHO-based predicates to action are vulnerable to challenge by US states (as violations of the states’ quasi-sovereign authority to protect, among other things, “the health and well-being—both physical and economic—of [state] residents in general”) then so are the two predicates allegedly based on US statutory authority. See March 27, 2023 Defendant HHS brief in support of motion to dismiss, FN 3 at p. 6 and Aug. 18, 2023 Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Dismiss at FN 3, p. 11 and FN 4, p. 12. Texas, Oklahoma v. HHS, Becerra
Related Bailiwick reporting and analysis on public health emergencies:
1 Bailiwick reporting and analysis of state and local medical martial law and preemption:
All content is free to all readers. All support — reading, sharing, commenting and financial — is deeply appreciated.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment