Pale Horse In Play: The CDC Is a Criminal Organization That Should Be Dissolved for the Benefit of the Public’s Health and Safety

HNewsWire: In summary, the requirement was unconstitutional because the CDC lacked the legislative jurisdiction to establish such a regulation. Its execution was likewise illegal under administrative law.

The administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how the federal government implements certain agency policies. The Biden administration made a mistake by neglecting to seek public opinion on the policy... [Mizelle] also decided that the requirement violates the APA's limitations on 'arbitrary' and 'capricious' government acts since the CDC failed to fully explain its justification for enacting the policy...
CNN — The fact that the CDC and White House have been doing what they are constitutionally prohibited from doing tells a lot about the status of our country. At the highest echelons, lawlessness prevails. According to CNN: "The first section of the judge's 59-page ruling focused on the definition of'sanitation,' as it operates in the 1944 Act that grants the federal government the right — in its efforts to battle communicable illnesses — to establish rules concerning'sanitation.'

Mizelle found that the statute's usage of the term was confined to "measures that clean things." 'Wearing a mask doesn't clean anything,' she wrote. 'At most, it captures viral droplets.' However, it neither'sanitizes' the individual wearing the mask nor'sanitizes' the vehicle.

She claimed that the requirement was illegal because "the CDC enforced mask wearing as a measure to maintain something clean — claiming that it restricts the spread of COVID-19 via prevention, but never asserting that it actively destroys or eliminates it."

Mizelle suggested that the government's implementation of the mandate, in which noncompliant travelers are "forced removed from their airplane seats, denied board at the bus steps, and turned away at the train station doors," was akin to "detention and quarantine," which are not contemplated in the section of the law in question...

'As a consequence, the Mask Mandate is best understood as an exercise of the CDC's ability to conditionally release persons to travel despite fears that they may transmit infectious illness (and to detain or partly quarantine those who refuse),' she wrote. 'However, the authority to conditionally release and detain is normally confined to those entering the United States from a foreign nation.'

She also said that the requirement contradicted a portion of the law that allows for the detention of a passenger if he is found to be diseased following inspection.

'The Mask Mandate does not comply with any of these subsections,' the court said. 'It applies to all passengers, regardless of origins or destinations, and makes no effort to categorize them based on their health.'

Mizelle went on to say that the administration also violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the procedures that the federal government must follow when enacting certain agency rules.

The Biden administration made a mistake by neglecting to seek public opinion on the policy... She also determined that the requirement violates the APA's limitations on 'arbitrary' and 'capricious' government actions since the CDC failed to fully explain its justification for enforcing the policy...

Other cases aimed against the requirement... have been unsuccessful... Unlike in earlier instances where justices were deliberating on emergency or provisional orders, Mizelle was deliberating on the legitimacy of the mandate on its own merits."

The White House Justice Department is filing an appeal at the request of the CDC.

The Justice Department stated[13] immediately after Mizelle's judgment that it would appeal if the CDC determined that the mask order "remains essential for the public's health." The primary petitioner, Health Freedom Defense Fund (HFDF), published the following statement in response:

"The Department of Justice's statement is puzzling to say the least, and it seems like it came from health policy activists rather than government attorneys." The US District Court's decision is a question of law, not CDC preference or an appraisal of 'current health circumstances.'

Isn't there an urgent need for action if there is a public health emergency with clear and incontrovertible research backing the CDC's mask mandate? Why would the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention not file an instant appeal?

HFDF is left with no choice but to conclude that the Mask Mandate is purely political in nature and has nothing to do with pressing public health problems or scientific needs. While the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention play politics with Americans' health and liberties, the HFDF trusts individual Americans to make their own health choices."

Unfortunately, the CDC does not agree, as the DOJ revealed late Wednesday, April 20, 2022, that the CDC has filed an appeal in a federal court in Tampa, Florida.

Simultaneously, the CDC published a statement stating that they had done so to "defend their public health authority beyond the current assessment": [16]

"At this point, the CDC believes that an order mandating masking in the indoor transit corridor is still required for public health... The CDC thinks this is a legal order that falls well within the CDC's legal jurisdiction to safeguard public health."

You can help the Health Freedom Defense Fund and fight back against the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by using social media. Please follow and/or like the HFDF on the platforms listed below, share their material, and encourage your followers to do the same:

@healthfreedomdefensefund on Instagram
@theHFDF on Twitter
@healthfreedomdefensefund on Facebook
Me on Telegram: @HealthFreedomDefense
We are the Health Freedom Defense Fund.

You may also assist the HFDF by posting something similar to this supporter!