by Jon Rappoport
“You think you got the horses for that? Well, good luck and God bless, but I tell you this…the last place you want to see me is in court.” (attorney Arthur Edens, in the film, Michael Clayton, 2007)
Memo to lawyers: What are you waiting for? File big cases now.
I’ve been covering the decision in the Pennsylvania COVID case and the court filing in Ohio. They give us the templates for potential victories in other states and countries.
(‘Lawsuit’ article archive here)
In Pennsylvania (ruling), a federal judge just ruled that Governor Wolf’s COVID containment measures are unconstitutional. The judge went further. NO emergency cancels the Constitution. There is a line that cannot be crossed. The right to assemble, to have freedom of movement, to earn a living—they can’t be wiped off the board by lockdowns for ANY reason.
This is, indeed, a heroic ruling. It affirms the unmistakable rays of light emanating from the basis of the American Republic.
In Tom Renz’s gigantic Ohio filing against Governor Mike DeWine, both the Constitution and issues of fact/science are asserted. Facts mean something. A declaration of emergency must undergo scrutiny, to determine whether a clear and present danger justifies the declaration.
Otherwise, a government can destroy the Constitution, the rule of law, and human rights by falsely claiming danger when there is none. We would be back in the time of Royal Edict, with the king’s army as the “rationale.”
(Attorney press release posted here; Attorney plaintiff document filed with court posted here.)
In 2020, lunatic cultural proclivities, media propaganda, political jockeying, pretensions of science, scare tactics, rigging of “facts,” and profit motives are in the mix. They produce amnesia about basic principles.
The law, when correctly applied, refreshes memory and sweeps away a blizzard of claims and counter-claims. The law comes to the point.
Using the law, one can say to governors and their public health advisors, “You’ve been going on for months now about the COVID spread and the emergency and the containment measures, but we want to reduce this to basics: do you have the Constitutional right to strip away our freedoms, and is there a factual reason to believe a state of emergency is necessary—so we’re going to court.”