Ohio Takes the Lead in Rolling Back COVID Orders
Ohio health expert Pam Popper announced last week on her YouTube channel that her group, Make Americans Free Again, has posted a federal lawsuit from a group of plaintiffs under the heading “Ohio Stands Up”, alleging that there is no COVID emergency, and calling for a permanent injunction on lockdowns and other COVID prohibitions, including masks.
This suit is different from others who have argued in state courts on basic state and federal constitutional grounds, such as violations of the fourth and fourteenth amendments. Those cases to date have been largely unsuccessful, with minor strikedowns of parts of COVID orders coming from a few states. In these cases, and in the only Supreme Court challenge coming from a California church, states and Chief Justice Roberts have used the 1905 Jacobson case as a blanket justification for all COVID executive orders. States have been issued “pandemic bench guides” such as this by state judicial apparatchiks. The Ohio Stands Up case, written and argued by attorney Tom Lenz, is a federal district case, which is what it needs to be to be an effective constitutional challenge.
But the genius of this case is that is basically argues on the facts: there is no COVID emergency. The case shows that the death statistics have been fraudulently manufactured by changes to the CDC’s autopsy protocols, which have heretofore been the same since 2003, and by financially incentivized medical fraud on the part of hospitals and health officials. The suit further charges coercion and fear-mongering by state authorities, to make the case that Ohio Governor Mike DeWine’s COVID orders have been levied in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner. They also show that extra emergency facilities, like those in New York and Los Angeles, and likely everywhere else, were shut down unused.
Another salient positive point in this lawsuit is that it does recognize that no virus was ever isolated, and forces the court to take consideration of this fact, though it refers to this in reference to the creation of PCR tests. It is not clear why they don’t yet understand that a new virus was never isolated, period. But nonetheless, the point is well made and the case forces the court to take a “strict scrutiny” review of the case. Thus far, courts have declined to question any scientific assertion of public health officials, citing ‘uncertainty’.
This case marks a landmark action in rolling back the new abnormal and most importantly, in beginning to stop the AI, digital bag-and-tag trainwreck headed our way.
We encourage everyone to share this and to begin to connect to with others to flood the federal courts with these cases. Importantly, the suit requests that a jury trial under “normal” court conditions in order to avoid prejudice against the plaintiffs’ case – six out of eight of whom are female, by the way (to people like Gerry Celente and others castigating “pussies” these days). So people should not fear having to wear masks and get temperature-tested just to get into court, if the court accepts these terms.
Thus far, Popper reports this morning that the case has been accepted for discovery and is moving along very well. Health freedom radio host Robert Scott Bell did an interview this afternoon with attorney Tom Lenz on his YouTube channel.
Here are the case PDFs below. The first is the complaint and the second is the 627-page appendices.