ICWA Weekly News 9-19-23
Court says a sneeze in any county can lockdown the entire state; Federal judges tell FDA y'all ain't doctors; Survey says Seattlites done with mask mandates; ChiroFEST a love fest for ICWA & CHD.
By Gerald Braude
In this issue:
Radio Show Links
Washington Court System Delivers a Tough Blow to Medical Freedom
Fifth Circuit Court’s Ivermectin Ruling Provides Hope for Washington Doctors
WCRC Surveys Green Lake Area on Mask Mandates
ICWA & CHD Feeling the Love at Chirofest
Pacific Northwest Events in October
September 15 Episode of An Informed Life Radio - show links
Guest: Journalist Jeremy Hammond
Jeremy Hammond's Website - Empowering Independent Journalism
The War on Informed Consent: The Persecution of Dr. Paul Thomas by the Oregon Medical Board (Author: Jeremy Hammond) - Amazon link
CHD 2023 Conference • Children's Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)
The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines—Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future - The 2019 study on whooping cough by James Cherry, Journal of Infectious Diseases Society, as posted at WA DOH
ICWA’s Appeal to Governor’s Office re: DTaP/Tdap requirement
Petition: Stop Scientific Censorship Via the Backdoor - Hold Journals Accountable
References to ACIP meeting 12-Sept to recommend new COVID shots:
See slide 49 & 65 COVID-19 Hospitalizations prevented versus potential myocarditis cases for every million mRNA doses age 12-17.
Washington Court System Delivers a Tough Blow to Medical Freedom
In law circles, a common saying is justice depends on the judge you get.
In the case of the Silent Majority Foundation’s (SMF) lawsuit in Thurston County superior court challenging Governor Jay Inslee’s March 11 and 23, 2022 emergency proclamations, Pete Serrano argued in court on October 7, 2022 that, under Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”), section 43.06, the governor may declare a state of emergency but that RCW 43.06.010 requires the governor to “find” a state of emergency prior to declaring one.
SMF argued that there was not an emergency in all of Washington's thirty-nine counties as fourteen counties had ten or fewer cases of COVID-19 in their data reports.
In the courtroom, Serrano made the following arguments:
I think problematically, Your Honor, when the governor says all counties, he means all counties, not some counties, not most counties, not 36 of 39 or 33 of 39, but where he declares an emergency and it does not exist by the data that he relies upon to declare it, the data produced by the State of Washington. You know, these aren't numbers that we've manufactured. These are the State Department of Health's numbers that we've pulled up. Zero COVID cases means it does not exist.
When we challenged these proclamations as soon as we could after their issuance, COVID did not exist in some counties. I understand it fluctuates, but you cannot use your power to declare an emergency in all counties and not mean it if it doesn't exist in some counties. And that's the position that we've taken since day one. It's the position that will continue.
Arguing the case for Governor Inslee were Emma Grunberg and Jeffrey Even from the state attorney general’s office. Presiding over the case was Thurston County Superior Court Judge Carol Murphy, who before her election to the court in 2008 had “practiced in Olympia with the Attorney General's Office for more than seventeen years.”
How can Judge Carol Murphy objectively decide cases against the Governor since she used to represent and defend that office?
In her decision against Pete Serrano and the SMF, Murphy said the following:
The court is prepared at this time to issue a ruling on the motion before it. The central issue here is whether the governor must find a state of emergency and terminate that state of emergency based upon information on a county-by-county basis. A key determination here is what is meant by the phrase "affected areas." The court agrees as a matter of law that the governor must identify a state of emergency by specifically identifying the areas affected and that the governor must terminate once order has been restored to the identified areas affected.
Based upon this record and the authorities cited by the parties, the court concludes that the phrase "for all counties" is identifying the affected area. The court finds no legal requirement to identify the affected area by county. In addition, the court finds that the particular emergency here presents an adequate record supporting the authority for the governor's action and inaction challenged here.
While a fire or flood may affect a particular area of the State, which may be one or more counties or some other area, those events may impact other areas as well. An example that I have come up with that doesn't apply to this case is a flood in Lewis County that causes an extended closure of Interstate 5. That may have severe impacts in other parts of the state, even though beyond the flooded area. Here, the issue surrounds an airborne virus that may have impacts across county lines.
Because the legal question presented here answers the issues presented in this particular motion as to the governor's authority to issue the challenged proclamations and to terminate the proclamations once order is restored, the motion is granted.
As this case proceeded, the Silent Majority Foundation provided an update on its website:
The judge in Thurston County Superior Court held that COVID-19, as an airborne virus, did not respect county boundaries and that the virus need not be regulated on a county-by-county basis, hence, it was properly regulated on a statewide basis. We’ve appealed the case, noting that the Governor employed local/regional decision-making throughout the pandemic and that the challenged proclamations were not properly declared. We anticipate a decision from the Court of Appeals in fall 2023.
On this past Tuesday, September 12, the Silent Majority Foundation reported that the Washington State Court of Appeals had denied review of their case. The report said, “SMF v. Inslee is officially dead.”
It was hoped that this case would have limited the Governor’s ability to declare an emergency. Rather, it confirms a Governor’s ability to declare states of emergency and to gain access to “emergency powers” in any situation that can affect multiple regions or counties. We are reminded of the 2019 measles outbreak when only two counties, King and Clark witnessed 36 cases of measles, yet the entire state was placed under emergency. Was the small measles outbreak used as a test of these Governor powers?
While serving his last year as Clallam County Sheriff, Bill Benedict gave a group of Olympic Peninsula residents in March of 2022 his thoughts on the governor’s misuse of his emergency powers:
Nobody in our legislature has a problem with how the governor used the emergency. The problem has been how it got extended, and essentially what happened in it is so true. It is true in our country. It was true in the Roman Empire: It’s legislative bodies allowed their power to be usurped by the executive branch, and that’s exactly what’s happening in our country at the federal and the state level. Our senators and congressmen – I’m going to use a technical term here – are too chickens@!#% to debate and vote on these issues. Frankly, I agree with you folks a little bit on that the emergency law was somewhat abused. But if we believe in process, Sheriff Benedict can’t say anything about this. Somebody needs to have standing. Somebody needs to bring it up to where there’s a court decision.
As for the case SMF vs. Inslee, that court decision has been made: under current law, a Governor can declare emergencies across the state if only small regions are directly impacted, and even when order is restored to many other areas of the state. And the reasons to declare a health emergency remain wide open - don’t sneeze in the Governor’s general direction.
It looks like a new law will be necessary to prevent future abuses of power. HB 1535 and SB 5014 were filed this year to place checks on gubernatorial powers and declared emergencies. HB 1535, titled “Increasing legislative involvement in gubernatorial proclamations relating to a state of emergency,” is more likely to move forward in the 2024 session starting in January since it has twenty-three sponsors.
Fifth Circuit Court’s Ivermectin Ruling Provides Hope for Washington Doctors
Hope is hitting the medical freedom news circuit:
September 3 in The Defender: IVERMECTIN: Federal Court Ruled FDA Likely Abused Its Authority
September 15 in Sharyl Attkisson’s blog: Court smacks down FDA's ivermectin warnings: 'FDA is not a doctor'
September 18 in the The Vaccine Reaction: Federal Court Sides With Doctors on Ivermectin Lawsuit Charging FDA Overreach
As we referenced in last week’s ICWA news on this court decision, four appellate judges wrote, "FDA is not a physician. It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise—but not to endorse, denounce, or advise. The Doctors have plausibly alleged that FDA’s Posts fell on the wrong side of the line between telling about and telling to."
Sharyl Attkisson wrote:
The court decision is a major victory for Dr. Mary Tally Bowden and two others who sued the FDA; FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf; and its parent agency, HHS. The plaintiffs argued that the FDA overstepped its authority in warding people away from a drug that they say had proven to work for Covid. Bowden says the FDA propaganda about ivermectin interfered with her ability to help patients.
The ruling leads to the question of its impact on the cases involving Washington doctors Ryan Cole, Scott Miller and many others whose medical licenses have been suspended by the Washington Medical Commission (WMC).
In October of 2021, the WMC suspended Miller’s medical license for prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
The WMC web site said:
WMC alleges PA Miller’s treatment of COVID-19 patients fell below the standard of care. Miller began a public campaign promoting ivermectin as a curative for COVID-19, and prescribed it without adequate examination to at least one person, with no reliable clinical studies that establish its efficacy in preventing or treating COVID-19.
On January 21, 2023, The Epoch Times wrote an article about Dr. Cole ‘s prescribing of ivermectin to patients:
Cole was part of MyFreeDoctor.com, according to archived versions of the website. The website is a telehealth service that enables doctors to correspond with and see patients remotely using the internet. The charges say Cole treated patients for COVID-19 over a "virtual telemedicine platform."
Cole prescribed medicine to four patients after reviewing their records and speaking with them over an instant chat function on the platform, according to authorities. He prescribed ivermectin multiple times. Ivermectin is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat conditions caused by parasitic worms but the administration says it should not be used against COVID-19, though some of the studies it cites actually support its use.
In its investigation and suspension of Dr. Cole’s medical license, the WMC wrote the following in their summary section:
Respondent made numerous false and misleading statements during public presentations regarding the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines, the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, and the effectiveness of masks that were harmful and dangerous to individual patients, generated mistrust in the. medical profession and in public health, and had a wide-spread negative impact on the health and well-being of our communities.
On behalf of Dr. Cole, the Silent Majority Foundation filed a complaint in Benton and Franklin Courts against the WMC. The complaint reads, “The commission issued SOC 2022-207 against Cole on January 10, 2023. The SOC and other investigations have negatively impacted Cole and his practice as Cole has been required to dissolve his pathology practice, Cole Diagnostics, with significant reputational and financial loss.”
Even with many studies showing the efficacy of ivermectin, a Tennessee law making it easily available without a prescription, and court decisions to back up a doctor’s ability to prescribe, the FDA continues to drag their feet and have not removed their warnings against ivermectin. The Epoch Times Reported over the weekend that the warning is still posted on FDA web sites.
But Dr. Robert Apter, the lead plaintiff in the case that led to the ruling, said that the FDA should still take action and told The Epoch Times:
“From an ethical point of view, the FDA has been told not to do what they are doing. They have an ethical and moral obligation to follow the court’s directive and stop giving advice against using effective repurposed drugs for early treatment of COVID."
WCRC Surveys Green Lake Area on Mask Mandates
On a sunny September day in the park, a sign next to a Washington Civil Rights Council (WCRC) table asked, “Should they mandate masks again?”
A short video remains posted on YouTube, where the surveyors list their favorite responses:
“There should be a choice…It’s America.”
“No masks, I got the vax, and still got COVID six times.”
“Not with this mustache.”
And their favorite: A solid two thumbs down from a bright six-year-old boy.
Victoria Palmer of the Seattle Truth Network observed that two-thirds of the people said, “No.” She added, “So this is very encouraging going into the fall.”
Larisa, also from the WCRC, said about the responses, “A lot of people have a strong ‘no’ or ‘hell no’ with a thumbs down, but they don’t want to talk about it.”
The WCRC surveyors said another purpose of the table was to inform the public about the differences between a law and a mandate.
When a law becomes a law, you must follow it. But a mandate is binding only when you agree to it. So, with a mandate, you have the choice on whether you want to follow it or not. So you can say, ‘I don’t agree, I won’t comply,’ and you are not bound. So that’s a big difference that I think people would be happy to know.
In her Seattle Truth Network newsletter, Victoria reported the following bonus news about a WCRC court victory:
Larisa shared news of a recent WCRC victory in a wrongful termination suit. It's their first monetary award for a Seattle-based federal contractor terminated for not vaxxing. More details coming soon.
More information about the WCRC can be found at its web site.
ICWA & CHD Feeling the Love at ChiroFEST
On September 15 and 16, Informed Choice Washington and CHD’s Washington chapter tabled at ChiroFEST 2023 in Vancouver USA, an energy-packed conference for chiropractors and their staff to earn continuing credits and learn new ways to elevate their practices. Many of the 600 attendees visited the booth with expressions of gratitude and support for our work, eager to subscribe to our emails, donate, and volunteer. We reciprocated their appreciation and found reassurance that so many others share our mission of eliminating vaccine mandates in Washington State. Chiropractors are diligently educating their patients every day on healthy immunity and a pharma-free approach to vitality.
Pacific Northwest Events for October
On Thursday, October 12, the Seattle Truth Network is hosting a “Connect in Person” meeting from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at Razzi’s Pizzaria in Greenwood. Dinner and conversation will start at 6:00. The meeting will start at 7:00. The address is 8523 Greenwood Avenue North in Seattle. No registration required. Questions? Email Victoria Palmer.
On Saturday, October 21, The Great Northwest Awakening by Patriots United Washington, whose mission includes protecting medical freedom and the elimination of vaccine mandates. Speakers will provide insight and actionable solutions to protect parental rights, health freedom, the Second Amendment, election integrity, and ideas to work with legislators. Informed Choice Washington and Children’s Health Defense WA are proud sponsors of the event. Click HERE For more details and tickets.
.
Sweet nice to know someone hasn’t drank the cool aid that has some power of this.