This photo provided by the Arizona Governor’s Office shows shipping containers that will be used to fill a 1,000 foot gap in the border wall with Mexico near Yuma, Ariz., on Friday, Aug. 12, 2022. Two will be stacked atop each other and then topped with razor wire to slow migrants from crossing into Arizona. Republican Gov. Doug Ducey acted without federal permission and plans to fill three gaps totaling 3,000 feet in the coming weeks. (Arizona Governor’s Office via AP)
By Katabella Roberts
The Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs has refused to remove over a hundred double-stacked shipping containers it placed in gaps along its southern border with Mexico, despite the federal government alleging that the containers are a “trespass against the United States.”
Around 122 containers were placed along the border in Yuma County in line with Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey’s orders back in August, including 80 wire-reinforced containers that were placed on bureau lands and 42 on Cocopah Indian Tribe lands, according to federal authorities.
In a letter addressed to Arizona Homeland Security Director Tim Roemer and Arizona Division of Emergency Management Director Allen Clark on Oct. 13, the U.S. Department of the Interior claimed that the 122 containers that were sitting within its lands were a violation of U.S. law.
The containers being placed on the gaps in Yuma’s wall are also “harming federal lands,” while “impeding reclamation’s ability to perform its mission,” the letter stated.
In its letter, the federal government also demanded that no new containers be placed; claiming that U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been awarded a contract to close two gaps in the border barrier near the Morelos Dam in the Yuma.
However, in a responding letter on Oct. 18, Arizona Director of Emergency Management Allen Clark pushed back on all the claims made by the Biden administration and refused to remove the containers.
“The myriad of federal agencies that claim jurisdiction on the southern border but do nothing to prevent the public nuisance caused by illegal immigration and criminal activity that exploits the open border is quite frustrating,” Clark wrote in the letter.
“Your letter incorrectly claims Arizona has trespassed against the United States,” it continues. “The State of Arizona is committed to working with all of our federal partners, including the BOR, to ensure the security of our state and protection of public and private lands … However to date, Arizona has not seen any action by the federal government to do so and was therefore required to take its own action.”
Clark added that the containers would remain in place until specific details regarding construction are provided.
Yuma is Arizona’s busiest illegal border crossing area.
The exchange of letters comes as tensions have soared between the Biden administration and Republican-led border states over immigration policies that have seen an influx of illegal immigrants attempting to enter the United States.
Ducey had ordered the containers be put up in August as the state could no longer wait for the Biden administration to build a border wall on the U.S.-Mexico border as it had promised to in an effort to help stem the flow of illegal aliens coming through Yuma.
Apprehensions of illegal aliens have not seen a decline since the shipping containers were placed in the gaps on Yuma’s wall, County Supervisor Jonathan Lines told NBC affiliate KYMA. However, the number of “gotaways” has decreased.
“The number of known gotaways is down. It used to be 3,000 a month, now it’s at 1,000, so that’s a significant reduction,” Lines said.
Sovereign’s Handbook by Johnny Liberty (30th Anniversary Edition) (3-Volume Printed, Bound Book or PDF)
A three-volume, 750+ page tome with an extensive update of the renowned underground classic ~ the Global Sovereign’s Handbook. Still after all these years, this is the most comprehensive book on sovereignty, economics, law, power structures and history ever written. Served as the primary research behind the best-selling Global One Audio Course. Available Now!
Dawning of the Corona Age: Navigating the Pandemic by Johnny Freedom (3rd Edition) (Printed, Bound Book or PDF)
This comprehensive book, goes far beyond the immediate impact of the “pandemic”, but, along with the reader, imagines how our human world may be altered, both positively and negatively, long into an uncertain future. Available Now!
If you have ever heard talk or been to a seminar about “sovereignty”, then very likely those conversations were influenced by the foundational research of the author and educator.
His research and educational journey reaching millions of people worldwide began in 1992 and culminated in 2022 with the 3-Volume book release – his final word on the subject.
At the turn of the millennium his books and audio courses facilitated in part – a sovereignty and tax-honesty movement that involved millions of Americans.
This 3 Volume series comprises the life’s work of Johnny Liberty filled with comprehensive insights into the last few hundred years of history, law, economics, money, citizenship and governance.
These books show how it is supposed to be done in a constitutional Republic.
How did We the People get to where we are today?
What can we do to reclaim our inherent sovereignty and natural rights?
Many of the answers may be found within these revolutionary pages. Available as a paperback, E-Book (PDF) or an Amazon Kindle format. Thank you for supporting the author.
Sincerely,
With Freedom For All, ~ Johnny Liberty
Sovereign’s Handbook by Johnny Liberty (30th Anniversary Edition)
A three-volume, 750 page tome with an extensive update of the renowned underground classic ~ the Global Sovereign’s Handbook.
Still after all these years, it is the most comprehensive book on sovereignty, economics, law, power structures and history ever written.
Served as the primary research behind the best-selling Global One Audio Course.
The 3 Volume Sovereign’s Handbook by Johnny Liberty is textbook material for everyone including educators/teachers, homeschoolers, historians, activists, leaders/politicians, attorneys/judges/law schools, police officers, and state Citizens/Nationals.
Sovereign’s Handbook by Johnny Liberty (30th Anniversary Edition) (3-Volume Printed, Bound Book or PDF)
A three-volume, 750+ page tome with an extensive update of the renowned underground classic ~ the Global Sovereign’s Handbook. Still after all these years, this is the most comprehensive book on sovereignty, economics, law, power structures and history ever written. Served as the primary research behind the best-selling Global One Audio Course. Available Now!
Dawning of the Corona Age: Navigating the Pandemic by Johnny Freedom (3rd Edition) (Printed, Bound Book or PDF)
This comprehensive book, goes far beyond the immediate impact of the “pandemic”, but, along with the reader, imagines how our human world may be altered, both positively and negatively, long into an uncertain future. Available Now!
“That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn’t even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn’t even an enemy you could put your finger on.”—Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale
By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead
The Constitution of the United States represents the classic solution to one of humankind’s greatest political problems: that is, how does a small group of states combine into a strong union without the states losing their individual powers and surrendering their control over local affairs?
The fifty-five delegates who convened in Philadelphia during the sweltering summer of 1787 answered this question with a document that called for a federal plan of government, a system of separation of powers with checks and balances, and a procedure for orderly change to meet the needs and exigencies of future generations.
In an ultimate sense, the Constitution confirmed the proposition that original power resided in the people—not, however, in the people as a whole but in their capacity as people of the several states. To bring forth the requisite union, the people through the states would transfer some of their powers to the new federal government. All powers not reserved by the people in explicit state constitutional limitations remained in the state governments.
Although the Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787, the fear of the new federal government was so strong that a “bill of rights” was demanded and became an eventuality.
Intended to protect the citizenry’s fundamental rights or “first liberties” against usurpation by the newly created federal government, the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments of the Constitution—is essentially a list of immunities from interference by the federal government.
Unfortunately, although the Bill of Rights was adopted as a means of protecting the people against government tyranny, in America today, the government does whatever it wants, freedom be damned.
“We the people” have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares nothing for our lives or our liberties.
The bogeyman’s names and faces have changed over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, a viral pandemic, and more to come), but the end result remains the same: in the so-called name of national security, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.
A recitation of the Bill of Rights—set against a backdrop of government surveillance, militarized police, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, eminent domain, overcriminalization, armed surveillance drones, whole body scanners, stop and frisk searches, vaccine mandates, travel lockdowns, and the like (all sanctioned by Congress, the White House, and the courts)—would understandably sound more like a eulogy to freedoms lost than an affirmation of rights we truly possess.
What we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. Sadly, most of the damage has been inflicted upon the Bill of Rights.
Here is what it means to live under the Constitution, post-9/11 and in the midst of a COVID-19 pandemic.
The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind, assemble and protest nonviolently without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans should not be silenced by the government. To the founders, all of America was a free speech zone.
Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being arrested and charged with bogus “contempt of cop” charges such as “disrupting the peace” or “resisting arrest” for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a so-called government forum.
The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Essentially, this amendment was intended to give the citizenry the means to resist tyrannical government. Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against SWAT team raids and government agents armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited to the battlefield. As such, this amendment has been rendered nearly null and void.
The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with heavily armed SWAT teams, military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil.
The Fourth Amendment prohibits government agents from conducting surveillance on you or touching you or invading you, unless they have some evidence that you’re up to something criminal. In other words, the Fourth Amendment ensures privacy and bodily integrity. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and has been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance (corporate and otherwise) and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors.
The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights.
The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. Yet when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that “we the people” retain the power to ultimately determine what laws are just.
The Eighth Amendment is similar to the Sixth in that it is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Supreme Court’s determination that what constitutes “cruel and unusual” should be dependent on the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” leaves us with little protection in the face of a society lacking in morals altogether.
The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.
As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC, power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.
If there is any sense to be made from this recitation of freedoms lost, it is simply this: our individual freedoms have been eviscerated so that the government’s powers could be expanded.
Yet those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. It is there to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them.
It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.” As the Preamble proclaims:
We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.
In other words, we have the power to make and break the government. We are the masters and they are the servants. We the American people—the citizenry—are the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.
Most citizens have little, if any, knowledge about their basic rights. And our educational system does a poor job of teaching the basic freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For instance, a survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that a little more than one-third of respondents (36 percent) could name all three branches of the U.S. government, while another one-third (35 percent) could not name a single one.
Many who responded to the survey had a strange conception of what was in the First Amendment. For example, 21% said the “right to own a pet” was listed someplace between “Congress shall make no law” and “redress of grievances.” Some 17% said that the First Amendment contained the “right to drive a car,” and 38% believed that “taking the Fifth” was part of the First Amendment.
In fact, while some educators want students to learn about freedom, they do not necessarily want them to exercise their freedoms in school. As the researchers conclude, “Most educators think that students already have enough freedom, and that restrictions on freedom in the school are necessary. Many support filtering the Internet, censoring T-shirts, disallowing student distribution of political or religious material, and conducting prior review of school newspapers.”
Government leaders and politicians are also ill-informed. Although they take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution against “enemies foreign and domestic,” their lack of education about our fundamental rights often causes them to be enemies of the Bill of Rights.
As Jefferson wrote in 1820: “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of our society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”
From the President on down, anyone taking public office should have a working knowledge of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and should be held accountable for upholding their precepts. One way to ensure this would be to require government leaders to take a course on the Constitution and pass a thorough examination thereof before being allowed to take office.
Some critics are advocating that students pass the United States citizenship exam in order to graduate from high school. Others recommend that it must be a prerequisite for attending college. I’d go so far as to argue that students should have to pass the citizenship exam before graduating from grade school.
Here’s an idea to get educated and take a stand for freedom: anyone who signs up to become a member of The Rutherford Institute gets a wallet-sized Bill of Rights card and a Know Your Rights card. Use this card to teach your children the freedoms found in the Bill of Rights.
If this constitutional illiteracy is not remedied and soon, freedom in America will be doomed.
Our national priorities need to be re-prioritized. For instance, some argue that we need to make America great again. I, for one, would prefer to make America free again.
“It’s time for us to resist,” U.S. Senator Ron Paul asserted to his fellow Americans.
“They can’t arrest all of us. They can’t keep all of your kids home from school. They can’t keep every government building closed – although I’ve got a long list of ones they might keep closed or might ought to keep closed,” Paul said. “We don’t have to accept the mandates, lockdowns, and harmful policies of the petty tyrants and bureaucrats. We can simply say no, not again.”
“Nancy Pelosi — you will not arrest or stop me or anyone on my staff from doing our jobs. We have either had COVID, had the vaccine, or been offered the vaccine,” Paul added. “We will make our own health choices. We will not show you a passport, we will not wear a mask, we will not be forced into random screenings and testings so you can continue your drunk-with-power rein over the Capitol.”
Paul went on to say that that Americans should not accept “anti-science” positions from the Biden administration, adding that he will “stop every bill coming through the Senate with an amendment to cut their funding if they don’t come to work in person.”
Paul also mention the importance of getting children back to school, stating that “every adult who works in schools has either had the vaccine or had their chance to get vaccinated.”
“Children are falling behind in school, and are being harmed physically and psychologically by the tactics that you have used to keep them from the classroom during the last year. We won’t allow it again,” Paul said. “If a school system attempts to keep the children from full-time, in-person school, I will hold up every bill with two amendments. One to defund them, and another to allow parents the choice of where the money goes for their child’s education.”
“Do I sound fed up to you? That’s because I am. I’m not a career politician. I practiced medicine for 33 years. I graduated from Duke Medical School, I’ve worked in emergency rooms, I’ve studied immunology and virology, and I ultimately chose to become an eye surgeon,” Paul added.
Paul also unleashed on Dr. Anthony Fauci.
“I’m not the only one who is fed up,” Paul continued. “I can’t go anywhere these days without people coming up and thanking me for standing up for them. Whether I’m at work, or at events in Kentucky, at airports, in restaurants, or in stores, people thank me for taking a stand. They thank me for standing up for actual science. For standing up for freedom. For standing against mandates, lockdowns, and bureaucratic power grabs.”
“I think the tide is turning as more and more people are willing to stand up. I see stories from across the country of parents standing up to the unions and school boards,” Paul said. “I see brave moms standing up and saying, ‘My kids need to go back to school in-person.’ I see members of Congress refusing to comply with Petty Tyrant Pelosi. We are at a moment of truth and a crossroads. Will we allow these people to use fear and propaganda to do further harm to our society, economy, and children? Or will we stand together and say, absolutely not? Not this time. I choose freedom.”
Editor’s Note: Mr. Kerik was the 40th Police Commissioner of the New York City Police Department.
Democrats and the mainstream media have been aggressively denouncing the Maricopa County, Arizona election audit from the beginning.
At, first I didn’t understand why.
I thought that it was because they were afraid of what the results would be, but I now believe it’s something far worse.
The Democrats aren’t “just” afraid of the outcome – but they’re afraid that the audit results will be irrefutable and unimpeachable. They know that their efforts to discredit the audit process in Arizona will not stand up to scrutiny and here’s why.
The Arizona audit is being run impeccably, utilizing security and surveillance procedures with a longstanding track record of effectiveness.
To say that I was impressed after viewing the audit process for myself would be a massive understatement. I’ve spent decades working in security and law enforcement at the highest levels, and this is exactly the level of conscientiousness and attention to detail that I would demand for a sensitive or high-profile investigation.
They’re not trying to reinvent the wheel; they’re using the same methods casinos have used for decades to catch cheaters.
It’s common knowledge that casinos are exceptionally good at catching cheaters, and if anybody tries to pull a fast one during the Arizona audit, they face the same long odds of getting away with it.
Before a person can even enter the premises, their name must be on a pre-approved list. After winding their way through a maze of corridors, they arrive at a security checkpoint where their ID is checked.
From that point forward, visitors are escorted at all times by audit personnel.
After being briefed, visitors must forfeit cell phones, cameras, and any writing implements they might be carrying before they can be escorted to the audit floor. That’s why the Democrats’ claims of seeing auditors wielding blue and black pens are so implausible.
On the coliseum floor, the audit is conducted in several stages, each of which takes place in a designated area. The tables in each section are color-coded, and workers wear shirts with corresponding colors, making it easy for anyone to spot if someone strays from their assigned area.
At every table, there is accountability and supervision, all of it live streamed and viewable by the general public.
Just like in a casino, where “pit bosses” keep a close eye on a relatively small section of tables, there is an audit supervisor responsible for groups of two to three tables. If any problems arise or anything appears to be even slightly amiss, the supervisor immediately steps in to address it.
And just as casinos use high-resolution cameras in the ceiling to monitor every single table, the auditors in Arizona labor under the scrutiny of state-of-the-art cameras positioned directly above each table.
Every ballot reviewed by the auditors goes through distinct stages, starting with a simple count. One by one, ballots are placed on rotating stands in the middle of each table, and each one is viewed and counted by three separate people, whose independent tallies must line up. Each batch has 50 ballots, and once all of them are counted they’re boxed, sealed, and marked with the name of each counter, much like an evidence label.
The box is then taken to a locked cage until it is ready for review at the next station.
Next, the ballots undergo digital imagery examination, which is done at such a high resolution that it’s almost better than reviewing the ballot itself, because you can zoom in without losing resolution.
When I was there, one of the auditors showed me an example of a ballot that was flagged as suspicious because every single oval was filled out perfectly, without a single stray mark – something that would be easy for a machine to accomplish, but is almost impossible to do by hand.
After being imaged, the ballots are re-boxed, a new tabulations page is attached, and the box is sent to a different cage. From that point on, the ballots are kept under lock and key, with 24/7 video surveillance.
If every state performed an audit like this one after every election, public faith in our democracy would be absolute and unshakable.
The audit process being used in Arizona has accuracy, integrity, and accountability, and there’s no way to cheat because everything is captured on film.
Now that I’ve seen the process for myself, I finally understand why it has the Democrats so hot and bothered.
They know that if anything improper happened in the 2020 election, this audit will catch it – and they also know that they have no hope of refuting any improprieties this audit reveals.
“Texas is open 100%. Texans should have the freedom to go where they want without any limits, restrictions, or requirements. Today, I signed a law that prohibits any TX business or gov’t entity from requiring vaccine passports or any vaccine information,” tweeted Greg Abbott, the Governor of Texas. He made the announcement on Monday and the news went viral across social media platforms and independent media outlets. It hasn’t really received much substantial coverage from mainstream media, in fact, debating or calling into question the idea of “vaccine passports” has not really been a welcomed conversation despite the fact many health experts have been condemning the idea since they were first introduced.
Texas will be the seventh state to sign such a measure into law. Alabama, Indiana, Iowa, and North Dakota have also banned businesses and government entities from requiring proof of vaccination, while Utah and Arkansas have barred just governments from requiring proof of vaccination
As far as the United States as a whole, the Biden administration has said on multiple occasions that a national vaccine passport won’t happen. Instead the U.S. is working on a system that will allow Americans who travel internationally to show proof that they have been vaccinated. This will be required given the fact that multiple countries around the world will saying they will require it, like several European Union nations, and Canada.
Why ban vaccine passports? Well, there are multiple reasons, and I’ve covered these reasons in depth before. In an article I published in April titled “The top four reasons why some people, doctors & scientists refuse to take the COVID vaccine,” many of the points outlined indicate why freedom of choice and informed consent are paramount when it comes to COVID vaccines.
The fact that many of these points, as well as the doctors, scientists, and peer-reviewed papers that are raising concerns about the COVID vaccine, are being completely censored, and in some cases ridiculed and called a “conspiracy theory,” is also very unsettling and suspicious. You would think in a time of a global pandemic, all concerns that are being raised would be open to discussion, transparency and a healthy debate.
Critical criminology repeatedly has drawn attention to the state-corporate nexus as a site of corruption and other forms of criminality, a scenario exacerbated by the intensification of neoliberalism in areas such as health. The state-pharmaceutical relationship, which increasingly influences health policy, is no exception. That is especially so when pharmaceutical products such as vaccines, a burgeoning sector of the industry, are mandated in direct violation of the principle of informed consent. Such policies have provoked suspicion and dissent as critics question the integrity of the state-pharma alliance and its impact on vaccine safety. However, rather than encouraging open debate, draconian modes of governance have been implemented to repress and silence any form of criticism, thereby protecting the activities of the state and pharmaceutical industry from independent scrutiny. – Paddy Rawlinson, Law Professor, Western Sydney University. (source)
Editor’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.
If you find yourself scratching your head at recent Washington COVID-19 headlines, don’t worry, you are not alone.
Last week, the Attorney General of Washington sued two gym owners for remaining open, threatening severe penalties. That was the day after four more Washington casinos reopened. You still can’t get a haircut here, but you can buy pot. Crowded parking lots at Home Depot are a common occurrence, but if you participate in a religious service in a church parking lot, you cannot open your windows or get out of the car. A cashier at McDonald’s drive thru can hand you a burger, but a priest may not hand you a bag of communion bread and grape juice. You can shop for a new shirt inside Target, but small local clothing shops cannot let you in without violating the law.
Some people are confused; some are getting angry.
Looking south to Oregon, a judge last week found coronavirus restrictions “null and void” only to be halted by the Oregon Supreme Court hours later. A different result occurred in Wisconsin where their state Supreme Court struck down its stay-at-home order.
In North Carolina, a federal judge ruled the governor’s coronavirus restrictions violate religious expression. In Minnesota, the governor’s May 13 order allowed the giant Mall of America to re-open, but restricted religious gatherings to 10 or fewer.
This past weekend President Trump reentered the fray, demanding that governors allow places of faith to open right now. The next day, Minnesota’s governor changed course. U.S. Attorney General Barr says, “There is no ‘pandemic exception’ to the U.S. Constitution.”
What is going on?
Fundamentally, governors are pushing the limits of their “emergency powers.”
For the last two months, governors have wielded king-like authority, controlling our day-to-day lives in ways previously unimaginable, at times, in seeming violation of the U.S. Constitution.
They have forbid us from peaceably assembling (what about the First Amendment?), we can’t gather for religious services (First Amendment?), we can’t freely travel (Privileges and Immunities Clause, Fifth Amendment?), we can’t operate our businesses (Fifth and 14th Amendments?).
Can governors really infringe upon our civil liberties in times of trouble? What is the source of these emergency powers? And what are the limits?
First, the source: You may remember from high school civics that ours is a system of limited federal government. The federal government does not have a police power; state governments do. It’s the police power that allows states the ability to regulate in the interest of the health and safety of citizens — which of course, is what governors are doing with their proclamations, orders and directives keeping us home, closing businesses, and schools to slow the spread of COVID-19.
Specifically, here in Washington, Gov. Inslee is purporting to act under RCW 38.08, Powers and Duties of Governor, 38.52, Emergency Management, and 43.06, State of Emergency Powers (but maybe it should be RCW 70.26, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness, time will tell.)
There are several lawsuits pending against the governor, including suits by public school parents, state legislators, and small business owners. And last Friday, two more suits were filed by local folks right here in town.
The governor’s emergency powers are vast, but not without limits.
The most obvious limit is that emergency powers last only for the duration of the “emergency.”
Who decides when the “emergency” ends? Here in Washington, the governor. Are Chelan and Douglas counties in a state of emergency right now? Gov. Inslee says yes.
What criteria is he using to make that decision? Well, that’s a moving target: Most recently it was having an average of less than 10 new coronavirus cases per 100,000 in a county over 2 weeks’ time, but the governor’s spokeswoman recently said additional criteria could be announced this week.
Here is another limit: the Constitution forbids arbitrary government action. Government action — even governor “directives” issued using those broad emergency powers — must, at a bare minimum, be rationally related to a legitimate public interest.
Government action that affects First Amendment rights must meet an even higher standard, which makes sense given the importance of such rights.
Remember back in March? The “legitimate public interest” given for the shut-down was “flatten the curve!” Preventing the health care system from becoming overwhelmed was a legitimate public interest at the time, given what medical professionals were projecting about COVID-19 mortality and transmission rates.
But that was months ago. We have learned more about COVID-19 since then. Just last week the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lowered its estimates for future coronavirus infections and deaths. Testing shows that many have had COVID-19 and produced antibodies while never experiencing symptoms. Our health care system here in Wenatchee is not overwhelmed. Our state just sent 400 more ventilators back East because we do not have the shortage we anticipated.
The rationale that initially justified shutting down our whole state is now, with more information and changed circumstances, called into question.
Yes to Target, no to local clothing shop; yes to Home Depot, no to church; yes to marijuana, no to gyms: things are starting to look arbitrary.
If governors’ directives restrict some, but not others, using changing criteria we can no longer understand, and under circumstances that no longer look like the original “emergency,” the constitutionality of those directives is called into question.
At this point, governors’ use of emergency powers is undermining the checks and balances in our federal and state government. It’s time to call our state legislature into special session. We need more local, representative voices at the table to lead us through the coming phases of COVID-19.
Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: Libertarians, as you can see from the Foundation for Economic Education’s annual freedom ranking of the fifty U.S. states, California ranks near the bottom with Hawaii and New York. Perhaps this correlates with the draconian lockdown orders coming from each of these states during the COVID-19 crisis.
By Jim Breslo
President Donald Trump is rightly talking about when we can reopen the country for business, noting that we cannot allow the cure to become worse than the disease. However, Trump does not have the keys to the shop. It is the country’s governors and mayors. Thus far they have not been expressing the same sentiment. If they do not loosen their shutdown orders within a reasonable time, we may have to turn to the courts. It turns out that many, if not all, of these orders would likely be struck down as unconstitutional.
The federal government thus far has only issued “guidelines,” not enforceable orders. Many states and cities, however, have issued enforceable orders whereby violation subjects one to fines or imprisonment.
Mark Meuser is a constitutional law attorney and former Republican nominee for California secretary of state. He reported this week on my Hidden Truth Show podcastthat the California Constitution does not permit state officials to order every resident, regardless of their individual health condition, to “self-quarantine” or “shelter in place.”
Article I of the California Constitution reads: “All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.” Most state constitutions contain similar language.
Neither the governor nor the mayors have the authority to suspend the state constitution, regardless of the emergency. According to Meuser, state officials may declare a state of emergency, and may quarantine individuals known to have the virus or known to have been in contact with those who had the virus pursuant to the state’s health and safety laws. But a sweeping ban prohibiting people from leaving their homes, according to Meuser, is a clear overreach. It arguably violates numerous parts of Article I, such as Californians’ “inalienable right” to be “free and independent,” enjoy “life” and “liberty,” to “acquire, possess, and protect property,” and pursue “happiness.”
California’s Appellate Court ruled on a case brought soon after the time of the Spanish Flu, stating, “A mere suspicion [that someone is infected], unsupported by facts giving rise to reasonable or probable cause, will not justify depriving a person of his liberty under an order of quarantine.” [Ex parte Arata (App. 2 Dist. 1921) 52 Cal.App. 380, 198 P. 814.]
Granted, the case involved imposing a quarantine on a single individual, not on the entire populace. But, think of it this way: If state or local officials required that just you stay home, even though you do not have the flu and have not been in contact with someone known to have the flu, your reaction would likely be, “You can’t do that!” Well, the directive is no more constitutional if it applies to everyone like you. It may seem more “fair,” and not violate the equal protection clause, but it would still equally violate individual liberty. A government violation of individual constitutional rights does not become less violative simply by applying it to more people.
Meuser argues in the interview that the orders are also a clear violation of the constitutional right to “protect property” since Californians are being prevented from tending to their property unless it happens to be deemed “essential.” If a Californian cannot visit, let alone operate, one’s business, it cannot be protected.
Mayor Eric Garcetti’s order requires “all residents of the City of Los Angeles to stay inside their residences.” The order expressly prohibits, “Travel to or from a vacation home outside the City.” In other words, Angelenos are prohibited from going to their own garage, getting in their own car and driving it to their own vacation home. Such conduct, according to the order, is punishable by “fine or imprisonment.”
The orders may also violate the United States Constitution. The First Amendment prohibits both state and federal government from “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion or “the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” Clearly, the orders prevent people from engaging in religious gatherings or joining in any group activity. Since the bans are not narrowly tailored to those with the virus or known to have been subjected to it, they likely violate the First Amendment. Further, the orders violate at least the intent of the Fifth Amendment, which provides, “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Shutting down businesses for the public good arguably requires the state to provide compensation to those businesses.
It is certainly up for debate whether shutdown orders in California, New York and other states is the smart thing to do. It seems that about half of people support them, and half do not. They are wreaking economic havoc on businesses and employees, while at the same time no doubt slowing the spread of the virus. Only with time will we be able to know whether the trade-off was worth it. We make similar trade-offs between freedom and health all the time. The most obvious example being the choice to allow people to drive automobiles despite the fact that they cause about 40,000 deaths every year in the U.S. Importantly, the coronavirus has killed far less than that worldwide, yet we are restricting people to their homes, a far more restrictive measure than prohibiting people from driving.
But whether the trade-off is smart or not, it is irrelevant to the question of whether it is constitutional. The orders clearly are not. State and federal constitutions provide a vital backstop to protect the people against government overreach, which often comes at times of crisis. We saw this happen after 9/11. It is human nature to panic and to overreact out of fear. The Constitution, which we all swear an oath to by nature of being citizens, stands on guard to protect us against such overreach in times like this. This is not the time to abandon it.
Editor’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!
By Mari Groff
Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: Libertarians, as you can see from the Foundation for Economic Education’s annual freedom ranking of the fifty U.S. states, California ranks near the bottom with Hawaii and New York. Perhaps this correlates with the draconian lockdown orders coming from each of these states during the COVID-19 crisis. 
Liberty International News 