International Message for Freedom and Hope by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | YouTube

Today, October 24, 2020, there are many rallies around the world. Activists in these countries are joining in a common voice: Argentina; Bolivia; Peru; Uruguay; Italy; Germany; Poland; Belgium; Netherlands; United Kingdom; Ireland; Sweden; Denmark; France; and Austria. Citizens of all countries are paying an enormous price for the epidemic.

They have not only lost their loved ones, but their freedoms, their livelihood, their joy. Children and youth are suffering due to this crisis too. Without their friends and social activities, mental health problems in our young is at an all-time high. People around the world are demanding to be spared from the devastating consequences of the epidemic.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of Children’s Health Defense, provides an inspirational message for freedom and hope to activists around the world.

Join the movement. ChildrensHealthDefense.org

Source: YouTube

The Simple Case Against the Newsom Autocracy | Kevin Kiley, California State Legislator

Governor Newsom has exceeded his constitutional authority during the lockdowns.

When the Michigan Supreme Court struck down that state’s Emergency Powers of the Governor Act as unconstitutional, it adopted the very arguments we are making in our case against Gov. Newsom.

So we took the opportunity to file this two-page summary of our legal argument with the Court.

In short, Newsom now faces a “heads you win, tails I lose scenario.” If the Court agrees with our statutory arguments, Newsom will be found to have overstepped the Emergency Services Act and violated the Constitution. On the other hand, if the Court buys his statutory arguments, the entire Act must be found unconstitutional.

Reading the Michigan Court’s opinion was a surreal experience since it so closely resembles our own briefing to the California Court. In fact, the Michigan Supreme Court uses the exact quote from the Federalist Papers with which we began our dispositive brief:

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

(Recall that Newsom has actually argued the Emergency Services Act “centralizes” all of the “the State’s powers in the hands of the Governor.”)

The other similarities are striking:

  • Our Brief: no statute can “give the Executive Branch a roving authority to create any and all new laws in any California code.”
  • Michigan Decision: no statute can “confer upon the governor a roving commission to repeal or amend unspecified provisions anywhere in the entire body of state law.”

Another example:

  • Our Brief: “a statute that gives the Governor ‘discretion as to what the law shall be’ amounts to an unlawful delegation.”
  • Michigan Decision: the statute “is an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Constitution.”

Most importantly, the Separation-of-Powers provision of Michigan’s Constitution is almost identical, word for word, to the one in California’s Constitution.

The trial is one week from today.

Source: Kevin Kiley, California State Legislator

Judge Rules Pennsylvania Governor’s Shutdown Orders Unconstitutional | The Epoch Times

A federal judge has struck down Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf’s CCP virus restrictions that required people to stay at home, put limits on gatherings, and ordered “non-life-sustaining” businesses to stay shut down.

U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV on Sept. 14 sided with plaintiffs that included drive-in movie theaters, hair salons, farmers markets, and several GOP officials who sued as individuals. Butler, Greene, Fayette, and Washington counties were also listed as plaintiffs.

Stickman’s judgment stipulates that “the congregate gathering limits imposed by defendants’ mitigation orders violate the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment,” the “stay-at-home and business closure components of defendants’ orders violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” and “the business closure components of Defendants’ orders violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The judge, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, argued that the actions taken by Wolf and Pennsylvania Secretary of Health Rachel Levine, who are both Democrats, “were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency,” but that “even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered.”

“The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms—in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble,” Stickman said. “There is no question that this country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort.”

Stickman added that the solution to the crisis “can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment.”

Furthermore, he said, the Constitution “cannot accept the concept of a ‘new normal’ where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures.”

Wolf has lifted a number of restrictions since the lawsuit was filed several months ago, allowing businesses to open again and canceling the statewide stay-at-home order. Pennsylvania also has a gathering limit of 25 people for events indoors and 250 for events outside.

Pennsylvania has reported that more than 145,000 people have contracted the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus since the beginning of the pandemic, while more than 7,800 have died.

Wolf’s spokesperson told The Associated Press that his office is reviewing the judge’s decision.

“It’s a complete and total victory for the counties, the businesses and the representatives,” said attorney Thomas W. King III, who represented the plaintiffs, as reported by Triblive. “You can’t order the entire population of Pennsylvania to stay at home.”

Source: The Epoch Times

Ohio Stands Up! files lawsuit to remove DeWine’s COVID-19 emergency order | Richland Source

An Ohio citizens group has filed a lawsuit in federal court to remove Gov. Mike DeWine’s emergency health order, which was signed on March 9 and remains in place today.

Ohio Stands Up! describes itself as a grassroots organization composed of Ohio citizens focused on restoring the rights of Ohio’s 11.69 million residents and educating the public about the realities of COVID-19 data. Download PDF

Ohio Stands Up! said it has filed suit in the Northern District of Ohio Federal Court in Toledo to remove DeWine’s emergency order. The group is represented by attorneys Thomas Renz of Fremont and Robert Gargasz of Lorain.

DeWine was asked about the lawsuit during a press conference Tuesday.

“I’ve been sued many times. [The Ohio Department of] Health has been sued many many times. They have been in many different counties,” he said.

“We’re doing what we know will make a difference. We’ve been very thoughtful of what we’ve done,” he said. “None of these decisions are made in a vacuum…I just have to stay focused on what we need to do in Ohio.”

According to the Ohio Department of Health website on Tuesday, there have been 124,610 positive COVID-19 tests since the pandemic began with 4,165 deaths.

Organizers said the lawsuit is solely funded by donations from Ohio citizens. As of Aug. 30, donations reached $34,055. For more information, visit www.ohiostandsup.org.

“We believe that the response to COVID-19 has been the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American public,” Renz said in an email press release.

“The objective of this legal action is to force the state to honor the Constitution and to stop the lies, manipulation and fear-mongering intentionally being promoted by public health officials and elected officials.”

The attorneys said they are determined to “restore the Constitutional rights that have been stripped away by the State of Ohio’s unjustified actions regarding COVID-19.”

Renz and Gargasz said they will release the extensive evidence that chronicles the case to the public to offer transparency and insight.

“The State of Ohio has consistently lied to and manipulated its citizens from the earliest stages of this pandemic,” Gargasz explained. “We insist that this nonsense end, our rights be restored, and that the actual truth be shared.”

Recently, the CDC confirmed that 94 percent of the deaths attributed to the coronavirus were from people who had as many as two to three other serious illnesses. The majority of those deaths are individuals 75 and older. Six percent of the deaths are directly from COVID-19, according to the CDC.

“The entire U.S. economy was shut down based on fraudulent models that predicted 2.2 million American deaths,” Renz said. “The State of Ohio violated the U.S. Constitution with an emergency declaration that ignores the fundamental rights of all Ohioans. As a result, millions of Ohioans are suffering financially, physically, and mentally.”

Renz and Gargasz stated that:

 Hundreds of thousands of businesses are struggling, and many will never re-open.

 Drug overdoses and suicides have increased as have domestic violence and child abuse cases – directly as a result of the unconstitutional emergency order.

 Many Ohioans were unable to get treatment for conditions not related to COVID-19 because hospitals were closed to accommodate the rush of COVID-19 patients who never arrived.

 Children are struggling emotionally as many are forced into the continued isolation of remote learning while two income households must find solutions to manage young children at home.

 Masks are dangerous, prevent proper breathing, and provide no real protection against this virus, according to multiple studies.

 Families have been barred from seeing their loved ones in hospitals and long-term care facilities, and residents in long-term care facilities have suffered because of the lack of inperson communication from their loved one.https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

 People living alone, of all ages, have been forced into solitary confinement and are dying at tremendously increased rates due to loneliness and lack of self-care.

Gargasz said a rapidly growing number of Ohioans recognize this and understand that, if they don’t stand up and speak out, it could be too late because a precedent has been set.

“There is zero basis for a state of emergency,” Renz said. “Based on what we know about the consequences the emergency order has caused to the physical, financial, and mental well-being of Ohioans, and the vitality of Ohio communities, this is truly a crime against humanity, and it must not be allowed to continue.”

Source: Richland Source

The Election Integrity Threat: 96 Million Unverified Mail-In-Ballots | Judicial Watch

judicialwatch_fb_deepdive-electionintegritythreat_1200x627_v1-768x401Editor’s Note: There is a conspiracy to undermine 2020 Presidential election by the Democratic Party and their accomplices in the “deep state”. This demand for mail-in voting systems in every Democratically controlled state is riddled with corruption, mistakes and fraud as illustrated by Judicial Watch. Furthermore, the puppet-masters behind the Democratic Party, Joe Biden and their socialist/communist allies, including Communist China, intend to overthrow the U.S. Constitution by any means necessary to take control and permanently alter our form of government. Do not be fooled by mainstream media headlines all focused on unseating Trump through lies, deception and false accusations. Trump is doing what is necessary to maintain the integrity of our election process and not allow the Democrats to cheat their way into the White House. May this 2020 election be “free and fair” as it has been done for two hundred and thirty-one years.  May the freedom we have enjoyed as Americans not be taken away by foolish voters or by electoral corruption. Long live America!

“It’s going to be a mess,” FItton remarks. As the country approaches election season, officials across the national political landscape are calling for a move towards mail-in-voting systems – a true recipe for disaster in Fitton’s estimation. With an estimated 96 million ballots to be sent through the mail, “the opportunities for fraud are of enormous proportions.” In 2016, approximately 319,000 absentee mail-in ballots were thrown out. “This year we don’t have any guess how many will be thrown out, because there’s no precedent to what’s being planned here, which is to the break the system.”

From ballot harvesters, to voter-intimidation, the threats to “free and fair elections” are virtually impossible to account for in Fitton’s view. Considering that Judicial Watch discovered nearly 2 million extra names on Pennsylvania and North Carolina voter rolls alone, “voting by mail is a bad public policy” to put it charitably. The president’s concerns for election integrity are well placed, but he is “understating the threat to fair and free elections caused by swamping the mail with nearly 100 million ballots,” Fitton concludes.

With top Democratic Party officials, including John Podesta recently suggesting that a Biden loss would descend the nation into a civil war – and the potential “secession of states from the union” – these are clearly “dangerous times.” The Democratic Party’s war game, as Fitton describes “talked about it [the results of the election] being a street fight, and that we can’t rely on the rule of law.” Clearly, the Left is willing to “upend the rule of law if the election result is seemingly what they don’t want.”

In the meantime, Judicial Watch is working around the clock to direct voter-roll cleanups across the United States, “doing the heavy lifting to ensure your votes are counted and that the elections are as clean possible.” If you’re concerned about election integrity, support Judicial Watch today. The stakes for inaction are simply too high to ignore.

Source: Judicial Watch

CHD Holds Press Conference with Legal Team and Plaintiff in Lawsuit Against Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Three of Facebook’s So-Called “Fact-Checkers” | Collective Evolution

external-content.duckduckgoChildren’s Health Defense (CHD) filed a lawsuit on Monday, August 17, 2020 in San Francisco Federal Court charging Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and three fact-checking outfits with censoring truthful public health posts and for fraudulently misrepresenting and defaming CHD. CHD is a non-profit watchdog group that roots out corruption in federal agencies, including Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and exposes wrongdoings in the Pharmaceutical and Telecom industries. CHD has been a frequent critic of WiFi and 5G Network safety and of certain vaccine policies that CHD claims put Big Pharma profits ahead of public health. CHD has fiercely criticized agency corruption at WHO, CDC and FCC.

According to CHD’s Complaint, Facebook has insidious conflicts with the Pharmaceutical industry and its captive health agencies and has economic stakes in telecom and 5G. Facebook currently censors CHD’s page, targeting its purge against factual information about vaccines, 5G and public health agencies.

Facebook acknowledges that it coordinates its censorship campaign with the WHO and the CDC. While earlier court decisions have upheld Facebook’s right to censor its pages, CHD argues that Facebook’s pervasive government collaborations make its censorship of CHD a First Amendment violation. The government’s role in Facebook’s censorship goes deeper than its close coordination with CDC and WHO. The Facebook censorship began at the suggestion of powerful Democratic Congressman and Intelligence Committee Chairman Representative Adam Schiff, who in March 2019 asked Facebook to suppress and purge internet content critical of government vaccine policies. Facebook and Schiff use the term “misinformation” as a euphemism for any statement, whether truthful or not, that contradicts official government pronouncements. The WHO issued a press release commending Facebook for coordinating its ongoing censorship campaign with public health officials. That same day, Facebook published a “warning label” on CHD’s page, which implies that CHD’s content is inaccurate, and directs CHD followers to turn to the CDC for “reliable, up to date information.” This is an important First Amendment case that tests the boundaries of government authority to openly censor unwanted critique of government

Attorneys Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Roger Teich, and Mary Holland represent Children’s Health Defense in the litigation.

The lawsuit also challenges Facebook’s use of so-called “independent fact-checkers” – which, in truth, are neither independent nor fact-based – to create oppositional content on CHD’s page, literally superimposed over CHD’s original content, about open matters of scientific controversy. To further silence CHD’s dissent against important government policies and its critique of Pharmaceutical products, Facebook deactivated CHD’s donate button, and uses a variety of deceptive technology (i.e. shadow banning) to minimize the reach and visibility of CHD’s content.  In short, Facebook and the government colluded to silence CHD and its followers. Such tactics are fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment, which guarantees the American public the benefits to democracy from free flow of information in the marketplace of ideas. It forbids the government from censoring private speech—particularly speech that criticizes government policies or officials. As Justice Holmes famously said, “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” The current COVID pandemic makes the need for open and fierce public debate on health issues more critical than ever.

Mark Zuckerberg publicly claims that social media platforms shouldn’t be “the arbiters of truth.” This case exposes Zuckerberg for working with the government to suppress and purge unwanted critiques of government officials and policies.

The court will decide whether Facebook’s new government-directed business model of false and misleading “warning labels,” deceptive “fact-checks,” and disabling a non-profit’s donate button, passes muster under the First and Fifth Amendments, the Lanham Act, and RICO. Those statutes protect CHD against online wire-fraud, false disparagement, and knowingly false statements.

CHD asks the Court to declare Facebook’s actions unconstitutional and fraudulent, and award injunctive relief and damages.

Source: Collective Evolution & Children’s Health Defense

Dawning of the Corona Age: Navigating the Pandemic by Johnny Freedom | Liberty International


Author’s Note: 
Five months of intensive research, collating 670 research and news sources, are compacted in this succinct, readable and entertaining 167-page compendium about the “pandemic”. It provides a comprehensive overview for those with an open mind, still willing to learn, to expand perspectives far beyond media tidbits. This is the Dawning of the Corona Age. 

May we remove our masks – and blindfolds – to take notice of what is actually rapidly happening around us to navigate how we can still “live free in an unfree world”.

This newly released book is dedicated to You. Thank you for educating yourself, “thinking twice before you think”, calmly sharing your insights, acting wisely and thereby reclaiming authority over your life! Enjoy the first chapter of thirty-two below. 

“A compelling exploration far beyond the immediate impacts of the “pandemic”, Dawning of the Corona Age imagines how our human world may be altered long into an uncertain future. “

$10 PDF ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=H7ZVUNGC58QE2

$25 PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=QCQQL3JUTVURE (includes PDF Version with 670 Live Links)

$25 AMAZON PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FSR3NJG

THE PANDEMIC:
Season 1, Episode 1 

1. Preface & Introduction

Like a television series straight out of science fiction films, such as, V for Vendetta, Pandemic and The Matrix, the mainstream media narrative relentlessly broadcast at “We the People” seemed at first as surreal and as strange as an episode of The Twilight Zone. 

Now, suddenly, and apparently without warning, we are living in a strange hybrid between George Orwell’s novel 1984, Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and The Matrix. Science fiction has now become real.

George Orwell wisely observed that, “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” In 1958, Aldous Huxley warned that, “Pharmacology and propaganda will make the masses love their slavery. As the world is forced into accepting greater and greater levels of government control in all areas of life, remember that nothing in politics happens by chance. There is a science to creating empires.” 

As  the lead character Orpheus revealed in The Matrix film, “The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.”

These perspectives reflect a deeper sense of what may be happening in our world today. For those open-minded enough to consider the truth as more important than convention and its lies, that sobriety is more essential than distorted states of consciousness, that the Earth and all of its natural wonders are more beautiful than any virtual reality, this book may just break open the possibility of a transformation of our understanding of this “pandemic”. 

In truth, this may be the “crowning” of a “new age” of consciousness emerging from the rubble of an old world dying around us. A “Corona” age may very well be on the horizon if we act from a higher understanding of our own existence as true human beings instead of from our limited perspectives of material existence.

For those with the courage to question authority, to question even our present sense of reality, this book is for you.

“Do not believe in what you have heard; do not blindly believe in traditions just because they have been handed down for many generations; do not believe in anything just because it is rumored and spoken by many; do not believe merely because a written statement of some old sage is produced; do not believe in conjectures; do not believe in that as truth to which you have become attached from habit; do not believe merely
the authority of your teachers and elders,
or news sources or books.

Question all authorities and truisms.

Decide for yourself what is the veracity of your perceptions.
Ponder what is not true. Even more so, ponder what is true, deeply and continuously.”
~ Buddha

$10 PDF ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=H7ZVUNGC58QE2

$25 PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=QCQQL3JUTVURE (includes PDF Version with 670 Live Links)

$25 AMAZON PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FSR3NJG

THE PANDEMIC: COVID-19, Season 1, Episode 1

  1. DumbedDownPreface and Introduction (PDF)
  2. Seven Known Strains of Coronavirus (PDF)
  3. COVID-19 Did Not Naturally Occur By Animal to Human Contact
  4. China’s COVID-19 Coverup
  5. Faulty Computer Simulations & Projections
  6. Skepticism of Mainstream Narratives & Projections
  7. Herd/Individual Immunity, Lockdowns & Quarantines
  8. The Immune System is Your Primary Defense
  9. How Contagious is COVID-19?
  10. “Exosomes” as a Natural Release of the Human Body
  11. Masks or No Masks?
  12. Invalid Testing & Inconclusive Diagnosis for COVID-19
  13. Inflated Death Rates & Asymptomatic Cases
  14. Hydroxychloroquine is an Effective Treatment
  15. Emerging & Effective Treatment Protocols
  16. Questioning the Need, Safety & Efficacy of a Vaccine for COVID-19
  17. Dangers of Vaccines Laced with Toxic Materials
  18. Germ Theory is the Wrong Approach, Look to the Biome

THE LOCKDOWN: Season 1, Episode 2

  1. CoronaWorldInternational, National & State Declarations of Emergency
  2. COVID-19 & The 5G Factor
  3. Total Surveillance State & The Right to Privacy
  4. Legal Authorities for U.S. Public Health Officials & State Governors
  5. Stimulus Bills Are Fast Tracks to Socialism & U.S. Bankruptcy
  6. Chinese Coverup & Propaganda
  7. Undeclared War Between China & United States
  8. Global Goals of the Pandemic
  9. The New World Order
  10. Big Pharma Funding Regulatory Agencies Providing Oversight & Developing Public Policy
  11. Internet Censorship & Medical Fascism
  12. The Global Health Protection Racket
  13. The Future Ain’t What it Used to Be

THE CORONA AGE: 2020 & BEYOND, Season 2

  1. BecomeEnlightenedDawning of the Corona Age

APPENDIX

Public Health Legal Authorities to Collect, Use, Share, and Protect Information | ASTHO

FlaginSunlightOverview

Public health agencies need to collect, use, and share information to prevent disease and injury and protect the public against natural, accidental, and intentional health threats. Various federal and state laws may impact public health activities regarding such information.

Public health agencies may collect and maintain information that identifies an individual or is sensitive in nature, such as information about communications systems or detailed emergency response plans. In these situations, freedom of information (FOI) laws establish parameters for information that must be shared, upon request, and that which may be exempted from public disclosure. In applying the laws, public health agencies may need to juggle competing interests and balance individual privacy against the need to protect or inform the public.

Public health agencies face additional challenges when sharing information with law enforcement, especially when conducting a joint investigation where a public health threat may involve criminal activity. (See ASTHO Public Health Collection, Use, Sharing and Protection of Information Issue Brief  and Authorities and Limitations in Sharing Information Between Public Health Agencies and Law Enforcement Issue Brieffor detailed analyses of issues and law.) (Download a printable PDF.)

Constitutional Considerations

Generally, state and local public health agencies have broad and flexible authority to protect the public health. However, the exercise of governmental power has limits. The United States Constitution contains a Bill of Rights1 that sets out individual liberties and protects individuals from the arbitrary use of governmental power. These rights may impact public health collection and sharing of information.

Right to Privacy
The Constitution provides a limited right to privacy, including “informational privacy.”2 State laws that require reporting of or public health agency access to identifiable information are permissible when they are reasonably directed to the preservation of health and properly respect a patient’s confidentiality and privacy.3

Right Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure
With the owner’s permission,4 public health agencies may enter or search the premises of an individual or business, take biological specimens or environmental samples for testing, copy records, and remove evidence that might be relevant to a public health concern. However, absent consent or the applicability of another exception, public health agencies must comply with requirements in the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment requires that a warrant be obtained, based upon probable cause, to search someone’s premises or seize their property. The Fourth Amendment applies to both criminal investigations and health and safety inspections and investigations.5 In addition to consent, other exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirement might apply to public health inspections and investigations, including searches of pervasively regulated businesses,6searches of premises or items open to the public,7 and searches based on exigent circumstances if delay is likely to lead to injury, public harm, or the destruction of evidence.8

Right Against Self-Incrimination
The Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination prevents the government from forcing an individual to be a witness against himself or herself during trial or a custodial interrogation. If an individual is not informed of his or her right against self-incrimination, the individual’s statements and evidence obtained as a result of these statements may be suppressed in criminal proceedings. This right may arise when a public health incident involves criminal activity, especially when law enforcement and public health investigators are conducting joint interviews or public health agencies assist law enforcement to gather evidence.9


Practice Notes

  • Identify information to be obtained or shared.
  • Identify the purpose for which the information is needed.
  • Determine whether this is the minimum necessary for the purpose or whether de-identified information will serve the purpose.
  • Identify sources for the information, such as healthcare providers, schools, other businesses, and individuals.
  • Identify applicable federal or state laws.
  • Determine and meet conditions or requirements for obtaining or sharing information; in some situations, an individual’s consent may avoid legal issues when disclosing private information.
  • If privacy protections prevent disclosures necessary to protect the public, consult with counsel to identify relevant legal responsibilities, evaluate competing moral claims, and document determined course of action.

State Constitutions
State constitutions, along with court decisions that interpret state constitutions, must be reviewed to identify individual rights that exceed the U.S. Constitution. State constitutions may be sources of additional provisions that govern information sharing; for example, some constitutions define individual privacy rights or cover the public’s right to obtain governmental records.

State Statutes

Generally, state law governs state and local public health agencies’ authority and responsibilities regarding collection, use, disclosure, and protection of information. State laws vary in nature and scope. Authority may be based on general statutes, such as public health laws that grant public health agencies communicable disease control authority. Specific laws may also apply.

Case Reporting
These laws mandate that healthcare providers, laboratories, and others report specific communicable diseases and other illness of public health concern. Reporting requirements vary by state, and may also include poisonings, chemical or radiological exposures, suspected acts of terrorism, and other conditions.

Syndromic Surveillance
State laws may require or authorize reporting to electronic syndromic surveillance systems of information that is routinely gathered in emergency rooms or other places that may indicate an emerging disease or other public health threat before confirmed diagnoses are made.

Investigatory Authority
State laws may specifically grant public health agencies authority to conduct investigations and gather evidence, or such authority may arise from general statutory powers. State laws may also establish procedures for obtaining warrants to search the premises of an individual or business and seize evidence related to a public health threat.

Privacy Provisions
Public health or other laws may contain provisions to protect the confidentiality of information that identifies an individual and to limit its disclosure by public health agencies. Exceptions may be provided, for example, for disclosing information to other agencies, law enforcement, or the public when necessary to protect the public’s health.

Freedom of Information
All states have laws that require information held by governmental agencies to be provided upon request. FOI laws promote transparency and accountability of governments, facilitate consumers’ ability to make informed choices, and safeguard citizens against mismanagement and corruption. Public health agencies—like other governmental agencies—need to be sensitive to these important considerations in responding to FOI requests. At the same time, these laws may create challenges for public health agencies with regard to requests for private information about individuals or sensitive information, such as information that is preliminary, incomplete, or might present a national or state security risk. FOI laws include exemptions that may allow public health agencies to withhold private or sensitive information under certain circumstances. These exemptions vary among states in nature, scope, and prerequisites for denying disclosure.

Federal Statutes

Federal laws that impact collection, use, disclosure, and protection of information by public health agencies include, but are not limited to, the following.

HIPAA Privacy Rule
The Privacy Rule10 adopted under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)11 established national privacy protections for individually identifiable health information. The Privacy Rule may apply to healthcare providers or others that provide information to public health agencies. Depending on a public health agency’s organization, the Privacy Rule may apply to a public health agency when it discloses individually identifiable information. The Privacy Rule is not intended to interfere with public health functions and contains provisions that allow public health agencies to collect identifiable health information and disclose it, including to law enforcement, when authorized by law or when necessary to protect the public from an imminent threat.

FERPA
Privacy protections established by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)12 limit information that schools may provide to public health agencies about students. However, exceptions allow schools to provide certain directory information, such as student name and contact information, and necessary information to appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies.13

Surveillance Data Systems
Various federal laws, such as the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness Act of 2002,14 establish surveillance data systems that allow collection of information provided by state and local governmental agencies and integration of federal, state, and local data systems.

Critical Infrastructure
Confidentiality requirements apply to federal disclosure of certain information to state or local governmental agencies related to critical infrastructure and supplies and resources to protect the public’s health. For example, federal law protects the confidentiality of information voluntarily provided by the private sector to the federal government regarding vaccine tracking and distribution15 and information about critical infrastructure.16 Although the federal government may share this information with state and local government and agencies, those agencies must protect its confidentiality.


Practice Resource

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press provides the Open Government Guide at http://www.rcfp.org/open-government-guide, which is a complete compendium of information on every state’s open records and open meetings laws. Each state’s section is arranged according to a standard outline, making it easy to compare laws in various states.


Sources

  1. U.S. Const., Amds 1-10.
  2. Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977).
  3. Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977); Planned Parenthood of Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976).
  4. Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (1991).
  5. Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967) (search of residences); See v. City of Seattle, 387 US 541 (1967) (search of commercial property).
  6. New York v. Burger, 482 US 691 (1987).
  7. Gostin LO. Public Health Law – Power, Duty, Restraint. (2008), p 468, 699-700. See endnotes 57-58.
  8. Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978).
  9. Richards, EP. “Collaboration between Public Health and Law Enforcement: The Constitutional Challenge. Emerging Infectious Diseases.” Available at http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/8/10/02-0465_article.htm. Accessed 11-15-2012. Goodman, R.A., Munson, JW, Dammer, K., Lazzarini, Z., and Barkely JP. “Forensic Epidemiology: Law at the Intersection of Public Health and Criminal Investigations.” Journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14968670. Accessed on 2-7-2013.
  10. 45 C.F.R. Parts 160 and 164.
  11. Pub. L. 104-191, 42 U.S.C. § 300gg et seq.
  12. Pub. L. 93-380, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, implemented by 34 C.F.R. Part 99.
  13. 34 C.F.R. § 99.31.
  14. Pub. L. 107-188, 42 U.S.C. 300hh et seq.
  15. Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. § 247d-1.
  16. Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-296, 6 U.S.C. 131 et seq., which is part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

Note: This document was compiled from April–November 2012 and reflects the laws and programs current then. It reflects only portions of the laws relevant to public health emergencies and is not intended to be exhaustive of all relevant legal authority. This resource is for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for professional legal or other advice. The document was funded by CDC Award No. 1U38HM000454 to the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials; Subcontractor Subcontractor University of Michigan School of Public Health, Network for Public Health Law – Mid-States Region.

Source: ASTHO

Covid-911 – Insurgency | YouTube

Editor’s Note: What’s happening in America today is a clear and present danger to the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America. Wake Up or lose your freedoms forever.

You’re being scammed by enemies of America who occupy powerful positions in government and the media. November 2020 is the way we, the people, can fight back. Know your enemy. Ditch the masks. Rise.

Source: YouTube

Tracing systemic racism | Facebook

Screen Shot 2020-06-11 at 8.21.47 AMBy Xochi Raye Elysian

“We’ve been existing under this facade, this lie that the Democrats have orchestrated because they consider us (black voters) a low information voter market….Blacks are ideological slaves and pawns to the Democratic party….Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democratic platform.” ~ Candace Owens

I have been a registered Democrat since I was 18. Except for 2016, when I voted Green, I have always voted Democrat, and considered myself a liberal.

Turns out, white supremacy and systemic racism literally has its roots, stems, branches and blossoms from and through the Democratic Party. Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party defended slavery, created the “Jim Crow” laws, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, manipulated the 13th amendment, invented the “Black Codes,” founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynchings, fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950s and 1960s, and created crime and immigration legislation that would result in the incarceration of a highly disproportionate population of people of color within a private prison industry. How can a country not be systemically racist when this is literally the fabric of the system?

The slave-operated plantations in the south were owned by Southern Democrats.

The “Jim Crow” laws were created and enacted by Southern white Democratic legislature, and were enforced until 1965.

In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court ruled that slaves weren’t citizens, they’ were property. The seven Democratic justices of the court all voted in favor of slavery. The two Republican justices voted against.

Abraham Lincoln was killed by a Democrat. Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor was a Democrat. Johnson and the Democratic Party were unified in their opposition to the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery; the 14th Amendment, which gave blacks citizenship; and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the vote.

When the 13th amendment was passed, it was opposed at great length by House Democrats, and was not passed until there was a clause attached that made sure blacks could still be used as slaves. “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”

At the same time, white Southern Democrats began creating “Black Codes,” new types of offenses for black people to be arrested for. They then “leased” prisoners to work on their plantations, coal mines and railroad yards as slaves for decades after slavery was abolished.

The Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1865 by a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest. According to historians, “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”

The White Supremacy Campaign, the seed of all white supremacy campaigns, was created by the Democratic party in N. Carolina in 1898 as a political platform.

President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, shared many views with the Klan. He was pro-segregation, re-segregated many federal agencies, and even screened the first movie ever played at the White House, the racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” originally entitled “The Clansman.”

Democrats did not elect a black man to Congress until 1935. 22 black Republicans served in the US Congress by 1900.

Under Franklin Roosevelt, the Public Works Administration’s efforts to build housing for people displaced during the Great Depression focused on homes for white families in white communities. Only a small portion of houses were built for black families, and those were limited to segregated black communities.

The Housing Act of 1949 was proposed by Democrat Harry S. Truman to solve a housing shortage caused by soldiers returned from World War II. The act subsidized housing for whites only, even stipulating that black families could not purchase the houses even on resale. (He also dropped atomic bombs on Japan and initiated the US in the Korean War.)

80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964, compared to 61 percent of Democrats. Democratic senators filibustered the bill for 75 days.

Democrat President Lyndon Johnson opposed the Civil Rights Act, even though he did pass it. He was purported to have said, “I’ll have them n… voting Democrat for two hundred years,” after setting up a welfare program to create dependency by people of color on the system. At the same time, the Democrats started a persistent campaign of lies and innuendo, falsely equating any opposition to their welfare state with racism.

Democrat Robert Byrd was a senator from 1952-2010. He also started a chapter of the KKK in W. Virginia, and led that group as their Exalted Cyclops.

Although he denies it, records show he was involved with or in support of the KKK for several years. He called non-white people “race mongrels,” voted against The Civil Rights Act and voted twice against the Voting Rights Act. Byrd added language to Homeland Security’s spending bill that required the Federal government to “maintain a level of not less than 34,000 detention beds at all times.” Yet Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and Joe Biden all considered this man a dear friend. Hillary even called him her mentor, and a “man of unsurpassing eloquence and beauty.” Bill Clinton went so far as to excuse Byrd’s involvement with the KKK.

The former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke is also a Democrat. He created the National Association of White People, and ran for President as a Democrat in 1988. Democrat Senator Al Gore Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act.

Democrat Senator Sam Ervin was a segregationist who voted against both the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Yet he continues to be hailed as a hero of the liberal Left, mostly for his role in the Watergate hearings.

William Fulbright was another Democrat that filibustered the Civil Rights Act and also signed the Southern Manifesto, which opposed de-segregation and racial integration. He was honored by Bill Clinton in 1995 as someone who “changed our country and the world for the better…and stood against the 20th century’s most destructive forces.”

Bill Clinton and Joe Biden drafted and passed the 1994 Crime Act. The largest crime legislation in history, this bill gave the federal stamp of approval for states to pass even more tough-on-crime laws, and encouraged even more punitive laws and harsher practices on the ground, including by prosecutors and police, to lock up more people and for longer periods of time. It instituted the death penalty for nearly 60 more crimes, and even encouraged the prosecution of young people as adults.

The bill also included $8.7 billion for prison construction for states that enacted “truth-in-sentencing” laws, which required people convicted of violent crimes to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and mandated life sentences for criminals convicted of a felony after two or more prior convictions, including drug crimes. Not surprisingly, between 1992 and 2003, the number of people serving life sentences increased by more than 80 percent. He also signed into law the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which permits law enforcement to arrest and detain non-citizens believed to be in violation of immigration laws. These two acts literally clasped hands with the private prisons industry.

Hillary Clinton received money from the private prison industry. Although she said she was rejecting donations from prison lobbyists, that included only direct donations to Clinton’s campaign, and did not stipulate supportive super PACs or state and federal Democratic committees. Richard Sullivan of Capitol Counsel, a lobbyist for the for-profit prison operator GEO Group, bundled $274,891 in donations for Clinton in 2016.

Hillary Clinton has also made several public racist statements. She said that white people would prefer to vote for her over Obama. She spoke of black young men as “super predators,” insisting that we “need to bring them to heel.” She minimized Dr. Martin Luther Kings Jr.’s work, saying things only changed because Johnson passed the bill, and stating “It took a president to get it done.” She once “joked” in an interview, that “they all look alike,” referring to black men. She also said, “Some groups of people are almost always highly successful given only half of a chance, Jews, Hindus/Sikhs and Chinese people, for example, while others Muslims, blacks and Roma, for instance, fare badly almost irrespective of circumstances.”

As a young senator, Joe Biden was originally for desegregation, but changed his stance in 1972 because of pressure from his white constituents. He helped write the Crime Act of 1994, and still defends it today. When asked in the recent Democratic debates about the legacy of slavery, he went on a rant, insinuating that black people don’t know how to raise their children. He also recently told people of color that if they don’t vote for him, they “ain’t black.”

Although private prisons had been functioning in America since 1844, the official private prison industry was started by Democrat Terrell Don Hutto in 1983, when he founded the Corrections Corporation of America. Before founding the CCA, now known as Core Civic, this man ran a cotton plantation the size of Manhattan, and used unpaid convicts to work his lands. After creating the CCA, he was president-elect of the American Correctional Association.

Two other for-profit systems comprise the rest of the private prison industry…GEO Group and Management Training Corporation. Private prisons, according to a 2016 Department of Justice Study, are consistently more violent that their already-dismal public counterparts. In 2016, about 19 percent of federal prisoners were held in private prisons. In fewer than 20 years, Core Civic (CCA) has seen its revenue increase by more than 500 percent, from roughly $280 million in 2000, to $1.77 billion in 2017.

It seems to me there are three incredibly important, inextricably linked, pieces driving racial inequality in America…the incarceration clause of the 13th Amendment, the Crime Bill of 1994 created by Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, and the for-profit prison industry. These artifacts of history, even woven into our constitution, sustain all mentalities of prejudice and racism, whether blatant or subconscious. It all dominoes from the compromised 13th Amendment. To my view, it doesn’t seem like defunding the police is the answer, but focusing on reforming these aspects, as well as many others in our Department of Justice.

Clearly the corrupt and abusive law enforcement system is also inextricably linked to these pieces, and also requires an absolute reconstruction. Police should be once again called and considered Peace Officers, rather than Correction Officers. They must be carefully screened before being accepted, selected according to stringent mental and emotional standards. They should be trained in non-violent conflict resolution, psychology, anger management, stress management, etc. Any cop not wearing a body cam at the time of any incident should be suspended. Most importantly, there must be swift and strict justice for any cop who abuses any citizen physically or verbally. Quotas must be abolished. Police Departments must work collaboratively and democratically with ALL of the communities they serve, increasing transparency, accountability, fairness, and public safety.

Also, as you know, billionaire establishment Democrats essentially own the media and make sure that the vast majority of what you see, hear, feel and believe comes from them.

So what makes anyone think the Democratic party cares about black or brown lives, other than to gain more votes? What makes anyone think their support for Black Lives Matter is anything more than further manipulation? Malcolm X warned against white liberals. He also warned against the manipulation of the media. This is an election year. Last week was an election week. They want your votes. I encourage us all to vote consciously, considering each individual candidate’s history and position carefully.

By no means should anyone read this and think that I am now all about the Republican Party.

Although the GOP was a strong ally for people of color for many years, created specifically to oppose slavery, as it stands now it has plenty of issues I contend with, including racist people in offices and white supremacists in support of the party. At this point both parties are arms of the same system, and it extends far beyond the US. But in terms of “systemic racism,” and why things are the way they are in this country, the reason why each of us are grappling with these issues of racism, to whatever degree…a world that exists to serve rich white people has always been, and still is, the Democratic agenda, whether that be overt, as it was up until Jimmy Carter, or insidious and manipulative, as it has been since then.

Source: Facebook