Every elected US official mandating lockdowns is acting unconstitutionally!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I previously forwarded a correctly worded post on US constitutional law attributed to a wrong authorship. Here is the text and the link to where it may be verified:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt is sometimes argued that the existence of an emergency allows the existence and operation of powers, national or state, which violate the inhibitions of the Federal Constitution. The rule is quite otherwise. NO emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution.” Section 71<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“\u2026Neither the legislature nor any executive or judicial officer may disregard the provisions of the Constitution in case of an emergency\u2026” Section 98<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Therefore, ANYONE who declares the suspension of constitutionally guaranteed rights (to freely travel, peaceably assemble, earn a living, freely worship, etc.) and\/or attempts to enforce such suspension within the 50 independent, sovereign, continental United states of America, is making war against our constitution(s) and, therefore, we, the people. They violate their constitutional oath and, thus, immediately forfeit their office and authority and their proclamations may be disregarded with impunity and that means ANYONE; even the Governor and President!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cA law repugnant to the Constitution is void. An act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution cannot become a law. The Constitution supersedes all other laws and the individual\u2019s rights shall be liberally enforced in favor of him, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary.\u201d \u2013 Marbury vs. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (SCOTUS\u20141803)<\/p>\n\n\n\n