Michigan Supreme Court Ruling Boosts CA Lawsuit Against Gov. Newsom’s ‘One Man Rule’

October 5, 2020 | By Katy Grimes | California Globe |

Governor Gavin Newsom. (Photo: Kevin Sanders for California Globe)

“Court’s opinion closely resembles Kiley and Gallagher’s briefing to the California Court”

“The Michigan Supreme Court on Friday struck down the 1945 law that Governor Gretchen Whitmer has been using to keep the state in lockdown since April.

In September, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled that Governor Tom Wolf’s lockdown orders were unconstitutional, violating both the First and 14th Amendments.

This is significant because California Assemblymen Kevin Kiley and James Gallagher are suing to stop California Governor Gavin Newsom’s “one man rule.”

Assemblymen James Gallagher and Kevin Kiley. (Photo: Facebook)

“The Michigan Supreme Court has just struck down their Emergency Powers of the Governor Act as unconstitutional, adopting the very arguments we are making in our case against Gov. Newsom,” Kiley wrote. “This decision is a major boost to our case.”

“The Michigan ruling terminates all of the Governor’s emergency orders. It is undoubtedly the most important decision yet. And it comes just two days after we told the California Court that ‘the time for a judicial check has arrived, as has already occurred in numerous other states.’”

Breitbart reported:

A group called “Unlock Michigan” lead a petition drive to repeal the same 1945 law. On Friday, the group submitted 593,000 signatures to force a vote by the legislature, Mlive reported.

“We argued from the beginning that unlimited powers for a politician were a terrible idea. Today, we know that they are also unconstitutional,” spokesman Fred Wszolek told Breitbart.

Breitbart explained the Michigan case:

The Court concluded the Emergency Powers of Governor Act:

…is in violation of the Constitution of our state because it purports to delegate to the executive branch the legislative powers of state government–including its plenary police powers–and to allow the exercise of such powers indefinitely. As a consequence, the EPGA cannot continue to provide a basis for the Governor to exercise emergency powers.

Kiley and Gallagher explain their lawsuit:

“We are asking the court for two things: (1) “a judgment that the Executive Order so issued is null and void”; (2), a court order stopping the Governor from further exercising any “legislative powers in violation of the California Constitution.”


Link To Full Article @ Source  





Michigan Supreme Court: Governor did not have authority to issue or renew any executive orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic







UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT– NEW MEXICO, MISSISSIPPI“There is no pandemic exception to the Constitution.”

18 U.S. Code § 1038. False information and hoaxes;

18 U.S. Code § 1040. Fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency benefits.

Research: 18U.S.Code § 1038. False information and hoaxes.


“(a) Criminal Violation.–

In general.—Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2, 10, 11B, 39, 40, 44, 111, or 113B of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284), or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123(b) of title 49, shall—

(A) be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;

(B) if serious bodily injury results, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(C) if death results, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any number of years up to life, or both.”

Link To Source 





The Healthy American Peggy Hall Link To Video   Support






18 U.S. Code § 1040. Fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency benefits. Source






Filed 04/14/20

“There is no pandemic exception, however, to the fundamental liberties the Constitution safeguards. Indeed, “individual rights secured by the Constitution do not disappear during a public health crisis.” In re Abbott, — F.3d —, 2020 WL 1685929, at *6 (5th Cir. Apr. 7, 2020).” Link

Link To Full_ecf_us_statement_of_interest_in_support_of_plaintiffs_0







Filed 09/21/20 


“Although the precise legal tests may change based on the specific restriction at issue, the bottom line remains the same: there is no pandemic exception to the Constitution. Individual rights set forth in the Constitution are always operative and restrain government action.”

Link To Full_united_states_soi_peterson_v_kunkel_file_stamped_0







“Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is a consumer protection trial lawyer in Germany and California. He is one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. In this video he is describing how there is no legal doubt about the possibility of a class action lawsuit against those responsible for the lockdowns. From the local level all the way to the WHO and many pharma companies in between. Please take a look as he is working very hard to end the insanity and make those responsible financially liable.”

Re: PCR Tests — “Contrary to official assurances they are completely unsuitable for detecting an infection.”

Link To Video