Cartels vs. libertyCommon law rightsEmergencyPanic 2020

Judges insist on prejudicing CV-19 TN appeal

The court of appeals says I am “mistaken” to read an earlier order as approving of my demand for an “in-person” hearing in Knoxville.
My hearing to uphold the constitution is set on YouTube. Here is the link:

No, you cannot make your arguments on appeal in person.

No, we disagree with Art.1, sect. 17, that “That all courts shall be open,” and we will not be open Feb. 15.

By David Tulis / NoogaRadio

And no, we are not prejudiced in believing that we have a real health crisis as declared by the governor and keeping up protocols on COVID-19 long, long established – for the past two years.

So says the Tennessee court of appeals in denying a second motion on whether I have a right to a prejudice- and bias-free court to hear the case against the governor regarding his fraudulent state of emergency under a fraudulent cause, that being the so-called CV-19 or SARS-CoV-2 pandemic used by elites worldwide to overthrow national and state governments and replace them with bio-security czardoms and totalitarian nightmare administrative states.

The world appears to be reopening, throwing of “mask mandates” and health “controls.” But in Tennessee the rights of the people remain in a state of overthrow, with Republican Gov. Bill Lee seeking re-election on his conservative values and promising he will use his emergency powers again in a pinch.

New justice Sarah K. Campbell

Fighting to protect these rights is my petition for equity and for a writ of mandamus, filed October 2020. I am seeking an order declaring him in disobedience to state law, and commanding him to obey state law. I have personally stewarded this action for 497 days, on my own dime, as a private prosecutor against acts that violate the criminal statute against official misconduct. 

Meanwhile, Gov. Lee has named a new justice to the high court, Sarah Campbell, who for the past six years has worked in the attorney general’s office as the associate solicitor general and special assistant to AG Herbert Slatery III. “l thank Governor Lee for putting his trust in me to serve Tennesseans in this capacity,” she says, noting that “the job of a judge is to decide cases fairly and impartially by applying neutral, objective principles. That is how I will approach each case that comes before me.”

Mr. Slatery’s staffer, Janet Kleinelter, is making William Byron Lee’s defense in court, admitting the entire time he is in violation of the statute because it doesn’t apply to him and because he has agents (a commissioner). Her arguments are a fraud on the court, and legally frivolous, because I caught Gov. Lee in flagrante dilecto, in the middle of an adulterous wassail, as it were.

Biased against us

If a court sides with one of the parties beforehand in its arranging a hearing, that is prejudicial to the other party. The court is scheduling my oral arguments as it were just another civil case. The premise for a court change of plans, to have February oral arguments by video, is the “uncertainty” surrounding the “pandemic.”

This notice from clerk Jim Hivner presupposes I am wrong. It assumes there is a lawful status in Tennessee called pandemic, when the statute goes only to epidemic, which hasn’t been declared in Hamilton County. The complaint and the evidence show clearly the entire operation is based on a breach of law, an act without warrant, cause, reason or nonfraudulent exigency or necessity.

And, hence, unconstitutional, void, unlawful, due for a rebuke and a restoration of the law at T.C.A. § 68-5-104, and of the constitution, that Gov. Lee — with full agreement of local and state politicians — abrogated at many, many points.

My suit, which has generated a case file of more than 600 pages, challenges the executive orders that created a state of emergency March 12, 2020. The next day, then-chief justice Jeff Bivins joined the conspiracy by declaring a judicial department state of emergency and closing down the courts.

I am owed at least the appearance of impartiality in the oral arguments. The case in which I represent the state of Tennessee on relation doesn’t even get that. It gets a panel that has already prejudged the case, and it makes no bones about the conclusion being drawn by setting up oral arguments on YouTube because of the viral crisis hovering around the courts building in Knoxville.

That’s where we are due an in-person hearing, at 505 Main St. SW in that city.

Officials reject clear law

The law requires that what is called the “contagious principle” Tenn. Code Ann. § 68-1-202 be determined as part of the state’s public health response to a disease or outbreak. The public health apparatus is bent on stopping spread of any “known or suspected communicable, contagious or infectious disease” § 68-5-102, and notice by doctors empower local health officials “to proceed to carry out such rules and regulations as the department of health may prescribe, having for their object the prevention and restrictions of such disease or diseases” § 68-5-103. The law all the offficials disobeyed is the next provision in this sequence.

(a)(1) It is the duty of the local health authorities, on receipt of a report of a case, or suspected case, of disease declared to be communicable, contagious, or one which has been declared by the commissioner of health to be subject to isolation or quarantine, to confirm or establish the diagnosis, to determine the source or cause of the disease and to take such steps as may be necessary to isolate or quarantine the case or premise upon which the case, cause or source may be found, as may be required by the rules and regulations of the state department of health.

§ 68-5-104. Isolation or quarantine

Before the power of a state official can be applied to ANYONE, the disease has to be “confirmed or established” and a “[determination]” made as to the “source or cause.”

No official has agreed to obey the law to make a determination of the source or cause. Perhaps because SARS-CoV-2 is a chemical or biological warfare agent, contrived by genetic manipulation in labs in the U.S. and at the Wuhan Institute for Virology. Whatever the reason they can’t or won’t make a determination, the failure to make one means no grounds exists for any mitigation effort or any state of emergency, which Gov. Lee et al admit in legal filings are a fraud.

Possible repeat

The judicial branch should have immediately and jealously said “no” when Gov. Lee stirred up panic in state government. It should have said, “Based on what law? Is your health department obeying 68-5-104 that requires a determination be made as to the cause, origin and nature of the ‘novel’ virus?” It should’ve said, “A cop can’t arrest someone without a warrant, probable cause, ‘articulable suspicion’ or indictment. You can’t have a Title 58 state o emergency without a legal reason.”

But Judge Bivins et al did not crack a lawbook in this panic. The thesis of James Madison, one of the founders, writing in Federalist 51, has failed. His thesis for the constitution was that government would be divided into competing parts. In Tennessee, the judicial and executive branches entered a joint venture to “save” the people by leveling the government, voiding distinctions, and creating an executive dictatorship of opinion.

My lawsuit challenges this whole deceptive operation down to the roots, for purposes of appeal.

One motion ignored, another denied, I file a notice of objection condemning the open prejudice against our cause.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.