ZEROHEDGE: U.S. Military Now Authorized to Kill Americans on U.S. Soil? Ah, by "American," do you mean citizens only?

US Government is getting ready to kill its citizens. It must be clear to everyone that all our governments in the West are run by traitors.

Ron Paul warns that the US military was just “authorized to kill Americans on US soil … "

Daniel McAdams:
“It’s not a law, it’s a DoD… pic.twitter.com/ePXbk8I2IN

— Mads Palsvig (@Palsvig) October 16, 2024

US Government is getting ready to kill its citizens. It must be clear to everyone that all our governments in the West are run by traitors. Ron Paul warns that the US military was just “authorized to kill Americans on US soil … " Daniel McAdams:

“It’s not a law, it’s a DoD Directive. So, this is the administrative state, where they take over, they don’t pass laws".

I thought that the Chevron Deference eliminated this.

"It’s a DoD Directive that was re-issued September 27, 2024".  

"It governs the Department of Defense intelligence activities, and now includes provisions authorizing lethal force in certain circumstances, and it supplants the 2016 version which did not mention that.”

"U.S. Military Now Authorized to Kill Americans on U.S. Soil?" Ron Paul points out what no one else likes to see. "This would open up the door for the careless and legal use of the military to kill Americans. And by Americans, does the DoD really mean that illegal and undocumented are exempt from murder by your government? "Send in the troops. We need you to shoot a couple of these people."

PETER ST ONGE: Many more suits are coming, perhaps tens of thousands given there are roughly half a million federal regulations almost none of which were actually authorized by Congress.

The administrative state is unraveling as hundreds of unconstitutional rules are being challenged after the Loper Bright decision.

Rules range from SEC mandates and anti-farming rules to transgender mandates and citizenship for migrants.

The left, gloriously, is panicking. pic.twitter.com/4GFbFWyUTh

— Peter St Onge, Ph.D. (@profstonge) September 19, 2024

Some rare good news as left-wing mouthpiece, Politico, worries a recent Supreme Court decision will be "abused" to erase the "legacy of the Biden Harris nightmare."  The decision in question of course is June's Loper v. Bright case that gutted Chevron Deference, as it said that major regulations actually have to be passed by Congress, not by unelected Deep State bureaucrats.  This is because the Constitution very clearly states that Congress, who works for the people in theory, is supposed to make laws, not random bureaucrats who indisputably work for themselves.  

Source: Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution.

Loper Bright gutted a "cornerstone of progressive policymaking their ability to sneak laws in through the administrative state and running voters," which, fun fact, converts democracy into tyranny.  So what's upsetting Politico is that if Congress is supposed to make the rules, it turns out the vast majority of rules in existence at the moment were not made by Congress.  They just sort of spawned from the moist bowels of the deep state.  Politico is upset that "small government conservatives are suing to eliminate these apparently unconstitutional mandates." Worse for them, in a separate Supreme Court case Corner Post said that "there is no statute of limitations to challenging unconstitutional regulations," meaning they're all at risk even the old ones.  So which moist spawnings in particular are at risk?  Well, we're only two and a half months into Loper Bright and such things do move slowly, but we've already seen a Mississippi judge void transgender mandates; a Texas judge block an unconstitutional non-compete ban; and an Ohio appeals court block a rule regulating internet companies.  Another Texas judge struck down so-called "parole in place" that puts illegals on a path to citizenship.  They struck it down specifically because the rule "illegally bypassed Congress."  Others involve former mandates, small business mandates, manufacturing, abortion benefits, price controls, and, of course, the Biden-Harris student loan bailouts that would make blue collars pay for other people's gender degrees.  None of these were actually voted by Congress, meaning they are all gloriously unconstitutional.  In theory, Congress could turn around and actually pass the rules, replacing bureaucratic diktat with clean law.  In reality, almost no federal rules are actually popular; that's why Congress passes the buck in the first place.  So in all likelihood, the vast majority of mandates that are struck down will stay down.  Democrats know this and being the party of the administrative state they realize that even if cackles gets the White House they are losing the game.  The activist industrial complex is being dethroned. Some major suits have already been filed, one to dismantle a massive market surveillance system run by the SEC.  Other challenges a raft of "conservation measures on small farms that would drive them out of business."  Many more suits are coming, perhaps tens of thousands given there are roughly half a million federal regulations almost none of which were actually authorized by Congress.  As each mandate melts away, the economy gets stronger and the space for Liberty expands how you run your farm, how you run your business, earn a living, and how you educate your children.  It may not feel like it, but we are winning.  Thanks to the Constitution, things will get worse before they get better but we're turning the corner thanks to some very brave men 200 years ago and the greatest constitution in history that they left us.

01:38. One of the things that we talked about was the growing administrative State, the Deep State, whatever you want to call it, and the tentacles that they've had in [American law and culture].  One of the things about this Chevron Doctrine we had seen that the Supreme Court was going to rule on it and they did just that.  A lot of different takes on the Chevron Doctrine and the Supreme Court's ruling on it, can we start by getting your take on the Chevron Deference and the Supreme Court's?

02:00. The Chevron Deference was handed down in 1984 and as far as I'm concerned it's probably the most consequential . . . the repeal of it is probably the most consequential well okay the ruling itself is probably the most consequential advancement of the tyrannical state in the United States since Marbury vs. Madison, 1803, it was terrible, or maybe the Dred Scott Decision, 

PETER ST ONGE: So the Deep state is effectively passing 98.8% of our laws numbering roughly 11 per day

Last week the Supreme Court gutted the imperial bureaucracy that has usurped the will of the people and left us with a rabid mutant federal government no sane voter ever wanted.

Now begins the fun part -- hacking back at tens of thousands of rules that stunt the economy and… pic.twitter.com/OdZuOv4GPP

— Peter St Onge, Ph.D. (@profstonge) July 3, 2024

The Supreme Court just gutted the administrative state, the unelected deep-staters who have usurped the will of the people and left us with a rabid, mutant federal government no sane voter ever wanted.  Last Friday, the Supreme Court released a ruling Loper Bright vs. Raimondo that dethroned the so-called Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that for 40 years effectively forced judges to assume that government bureaucrats have whatever authority they want.  Since the 1970s, Chevron had become a keystone of the Administrative State cited by 70 subsequent Supreme Court decisions and over 17,000 rulings in lower courts.  Now it is gone.  The ruling itself involves a fishing boat that was forced to pay for regulator ride-alongs at a cost of $700 per day which would have bankrupted them.  So they sued, saying the agency did not have Congressional Authority; they just made up the rule.  The court agreed.  The larger issue is whether Congress makes law or do unelected bureaucrats make law?  This ruling says Congress makes laws, as it says in the Constitution.  The New York Times was positively horrified, mourning that the ruling "transfers power from the Executive branch to Congress."  In other words, it transfers powers from the unelected bureaucrats to the elected politicians, who actually have to answer to voters.  This matters because Federal bureaucrats currently spawn roughly 4,000 rules per year, which all have the force of law, compared to 50 actual substantive laws passed by Congress every year.  So the Deep state is effectively passing 98.8% of our laws numbering roughly 11 per day.  This is partly because the vast majority of rules are unpopular and would never be able to pass Congress.  So try running for election banning gas stoves or raising the gasoline tax, and see how far you get.  It's much easier to pass the buck to some bureaucratic Rando who cannot get fired.  The Loper ruling will lead to hundreds or possibly thousands of challenges to rules that were made without Congressional authority which is roughly all of the rules.  These range from environmental mandates and diversity to OSHA and the SEC, and they include the more totalitarian parts of the deep state.  For example, the COVID era tyranny never could have happened without Chevron deference.  No 6 ft distancing, no bans on going to church, no vax mandates, leaving your loved ones to die alone, none of those would ever have been passed by Congress.  All are now illegal.  Same for self-defense and the Second Amendment, where Rogue bureaucrats have banned bump stocks or directed banks to effectively close down gun shops again without Congressional authority.  And, of course, the border where Congress has famously passed nothing the entire open borders, human trafficking industrial complex is made of rules the administrative state made up.  In short, Loper reins in the rogue bureaucrats, who are currently running our country into the ground.  We've already seen fruits.  Two weeks ago, the Supremes struck the ban on bump stocks, and last week saw a separate case where the Supremes ruled the SEC cannot use its own in-house tribunal to impose fines which seems obvious given courts are supposed to be impartial but that was Chevron deference for you.  As for the economy, reining in the totalitarian administrative state means less crony regulation, less more jobs, more growth hiring, incomes, and less inflation.  It will take time for Loper to clear out the overgrowth clogging our economy, but the healing has begun. 

GREG REESE: Chevron deference: It's how OSHA was able to decide that everyone who worked for a large company had to get the jab or be fired. No law gave them that authority. They just made it up.

Greg Reese on the Chevron Deference, 

It's how OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, was able to decide that everyone who worked for a large company had to get the jab or be fired.  No law gave them that authority.  They just made it up.  

It's how the ATF, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, was able to decide a piece of plastic was a machine gun.  

It's how the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service, the NRCS, is able to decide that a small puddle is a protected wetland.  --Greg Reese

Recent Key Decisions of Supreme Court pic.twitter.com/8VRdMObfL5

— Greg Reese (@gregreese) July 2, 2024

1:40. A family fishing company, Loper Bright Enterprises, was being driven out of business because they couldn't afford the $700 per day they were being charged by the NMFS, the National Marine Fisheries Service to monitor their company.  The thing is federal law doesn't authorize the NMFS to charge businesses for this.  They just decided to start doing it in 2013.  Why did they think they could get away with just charging people without any legal authorization?  Because in 1984 in the Chevron decision, the Supreme Court decided that regulatory agencies were the experts in their field, and the courts should defer to their interpretation of the law.  So for the past 40 years, federal agencies have been able to interpret laws to mean whatever they want, and the courts had to just go with it.  It was called "Chevron deference," and it put bureaucrats in charge of the country.  

It's how OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, was able to decide that everyone who worked for a large company had to get the jab or be fired.  No law gave them that authority.  They just made it up.  

It's how the ATF, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, was able to decide a piece of plastic was a machine gun.  

It's how the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service, the NRCS, is able to decide that a small puddle is a protected wetland.  

It's how out-of-control agencies have been able to create rules out of thin air and force you to comply, and the courts had to simply defer to them because they were the experts.  

Imagine if your local police could just arrest you for any reason, and no judge or jury was allowed to determine if you'd actually committed a crime or not, just off to jail you go.  That's what "Chevron deference" was.  It was not only blatantly unconstitutional, it caused immeasurable harm to everyone.  Thankfully, it's now gone.  We haven't even begun to feel the effects of this decision in the courts.  It will be used for years to come to roll back federal agencies, and we'll all be better off for it.  And that's why politicians and corporate media are freaking out about it.

Spike Cohen,

In an era of bad news, the US Supreme Court has brought us some good tools that we the people can wield to work on restoring America.  Happy Independence Day.  

Reporting for Infowars this is Greg Reese. 

As a follow-up, please read this by James T. Moodey @ Lew Rockwell.  Looks like there was momentum building for this at least since last year, January 2023.  Check out Judge Napolitano's essay, titled, "A Government by Experts," January 12, 2023.

Tom Luongo has got his claws on this as well at least since March 23, 2024, 

This is yet another example of the desperate need for the Supreme Court to take up the Chevron Deference and strike it down. The agencies should not be making law. That’s Congress’ job.

And I don’t care if Congress is allergic to doing its job, new emission regulations should not be in the hands of unelected bureaucrats run by chiefs who are chosen by the current political party. 

MANOOKIAN: we're in the middle of World War 2, and Congress passes something called the Public Health Services Act, 1944?

What does SCOTUS overturning the Chevron deference mean for medical freedom cases? https://t.co/hDsSjrAuJ7

— Leslie Manookian (@LeslieManookian) July 1, 2024

Leslie Manookian.   

"[T]his Chevron case is huge...because it means that the courts will no longer defer to the administrative agencies or to these federal agencies...they actually have to be held accountable and prove in a court of law that the rules that they are issuing are based on science..." Writer, filmmaker, former Wall St. business executive, and President of the Health Freedom Defense Fund (@theHFDF) Leslie Manookian (@LeslieManookian) describes for Brandon Bushong of TrialSite News (@TrialsiteN) why the Supreme Court overturning the long-standing Chevron doctrine is such a big (positive!) development.

Transcription of the clip: "It's a huge, huge case. So there's been a Supreme Court case called Chevron versus Natural Resources Defense Council that's been in place since 1984, and this has been controlling law across the entire country. What it says is that if so when we sued CDC, the court, when we sued CDC over its mask mandate, and defeated it, the court is required to give deference to the agency if there's some question about, interpretation of the law. Okay? And that's not what happened in our case because we argued that the CDC had overstepped its lawful, authority under the Administrative Procedure Act. "But, basically, there was a case called Loper Bright Enterprises in front of the Supreme Court. And what happened was EPA ordered this...fishery group, Loper Bright Enterprises, to take on board an observer and pay for him or her, someone who would ensure and this is a small group, small business, ensure that they are not overfishing, and they had to pay for it. And so, basically, it was this massive overstepping of authority. So what Chevron doctrine says is that if there's an issue before the courts involving a federal agency, then the courts should defer to the expertise in terms of interpreting...the intentions of Congress, but also the expertise of the agency itself. And, therefore, its rules should be upheld. "Well, the Supreme Court right now does not seem very favorably inclined on that, and there have been several cases where the power of the agencies have been overturned in the last couple of years. There was one...when the CDC issued the eviction moratorium in...I don't know if it was 2020 or 2021, that was overturned. "And so, basically, this has huge implications for us because what's been happening for the last 40, 50, 60, 70 years, really since 1944 when the Public Health Services Act was implemented in the middle of war, which I find very bizarre. You know, we're in the middle of World War 2, and Congress passes something called the Public Health Services Act, which grants all of this power to the CDC, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the FDA. And, what's happened now as a result of this overturning of Chevron is that they're going to be held accountable. They're gonna be held to a higher threshold than they were because they've been given all this deference for the last 40 years. And many critics of the Chevron deference is, their opinion is and it and I agree with this, that what's happened as a result of Chevron is that...a fourth branch of government has developed, the administrative state. "All of these agencies are what make up the administrative state, and they are all underneath the federal, branch of government. So, you know, we've got the Executive, the President. You've got the Legislative, Congress, and you've got the judiciary, all the courts. But now you've got this fourth branch, this huge administrative state, which is unelected and unaccountable to the electorate. And they sit under the President, and this is exactly what happened. When President Biden was elected and inaugurated, in his first full day in office, he instructed the CDC to issue the mask mandate, and they dutifully did so in one week. "This was not something that Congress had told them to do or delegated power to them to do. It was purely an administrative and executive order. And so what's happened is the growth of the administrative state has really destabilized the balance of power in our system and given way, way too much power to the executive. And so this Chevron case is huge for us because it means that the courts will no longer defer to the administrative agencies or to these federal agencies whether they're health or environmental or anything else, they actually have to be held accountable and prove in a court of law that the rules that they are issuing are based on science, fact, and have a true public interest. "This is very, very big, and it has an impact for all of us in the Health Freedom arena."

BROOK JACKSON: What does overturning Chevron mean? Let's consider an actual case involving FDA - Bruesewitz v. Wyeth.

Chevron Deference Aspect: The court acknowledged FDA's expertise & regulatory authority in approving & monitoring vaccines. The court implicitly deferred to the FDA's judgment that vaccines are safe & effective when they meet regulatory standards, thus preempting state law claims based on design defects. What are the implications of overruling Chevron Deference:

Courts would independently interpret the NCVIA & other relevant laws without automatically deferring to the FDA's expertise. WIN!! Brook Jackson

🚨What does overturning Chevron mean? Let's consider an actual case involving FDA - Bruesewitz v. Wyeth

Background: The case involved Hannah Bruesewitz, who suffered seizures & developmental problems after receiving a DTP vaccine manufactured by Wyeth, now a part of Pfizer. The… https://t.co/gMYFfIswbp

— Brook Jackson 💜 (@IamBrookJackson) June 28, 2024

What does overturning Chevron mean? Let's consider an actual case involving FDA - Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. Background: The case involved Hannah Bruesewitz, who suffered seizures & developmental problems after receiving a DTP vaccine manufactured by Wyeth, now a part of Pfizer. The family sued Wyeth, claiming the vaccine was defectively designed. Legal Context: The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 established a no-fault compensation program for vaccine injury claims & removed the liability of vaccine manufacturers. The FDA's role in approving vaccines & its interpretation of safety standards were central to the case. Court's Decision: In 2011, SCOTUS ruled in favor of Wyeth, holding that the NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by vaccine side effects. Chevron Deference Aspect: The court acknowledged FDA's expertise & regulatory authority in approving & monitoring vaccines. The court implicitly deferred to the FDA's judgment that vaccines are safe & effective when they meet regulatory standards, thus preempting state law claims based on design defects. What are the implications of overruling Chevron Deference: Courts would independently interpret the NCVIA & other relevant laws without automatically deferring to the FDA's expertise. WIN!! Plaintiffs might be more likely to challenge FDA approved vaccines in court, arguing that the FDA's safety standards or approval processes are insufficient or flawed. WIN!!

Courts would scrutinize FDA decisions more closely, likely leading to different outcomes in cases involving vaccine injuries or side effects. WIN!!

Vaccine manufacturers will face more uncertainty regarding liability & regulatory standards impacting vaccine development & availability. WIN!!