The state government’s Covid lockdowns have been struck down by a third California court in a week, all of which sided with ‘We the People’ and the United States Constitution against Newsom’s unconstitutional Covid-19 lockdowns.
This from thegatewaypundit.com.
Constitutional attorney and U.S. Senate candidate Mark Meuser (R) said that California courts are deciding that the government:
[M]ay have overstepped its authority when they followed Gavin Newsom’s shut down orders.
Meuser wrote on Twitter:
THIS IS HUGE! Los Angeles Superior Court allows COVID-19 case against the government to continue.
He added:
The court refuses to dismiss Tinhorn Flat’s case that Burbank targeted it because it expressed its opposition to Newsom’s shutdown orders.
This is the third California court in a week that has ruled in favor of We the People and against the government.
He clarified:
California courts are ruling that the government may have overstepped its authority when they followed Gavin Newsom’s shut down orders.
He concluded:
First, a court ruled that courts can’t sanction a church for refusing to shut down since it was later determined that Newsom overstepped his constitutional authority in shutting down churches.
[Second] a court ruled that since Newsom picked which businesses were allowed to remain open to “flatten the curve,” the government may be liable for the damages those businesses suffered as a result of following the governor’s order.
[Third] a court ruled that businesses are allowed to sue the government for targeting them because they were vocal in opposing Newsom’s shutdown orders. Government must enforce the laws equally, they cannot target those who exercise their First Amendment rights.
More from California Globe:
Meuser said that in the San Jose Calvary Chapel case, the 1st court ruled that courts can’t sanction a church for refusing to shut down since it was later determined that Newsom overstepped his constitutional authority in shutting down churches. Meuser said the Governor and state government never had the authority to shut down churches.
In the Orange County nail salon case, the 2nd court ruled that since Newsom picked which businesses were allowed to remain open in order to “flatten the curve,” the government may be liable for the damages those businesses suffered as a result of following the governor’s order. Meuser said the nail salon lawsuit used the “commandeering law” to address when the government seizes a business. If government made the decision to use your property and fight the emergency, the government has to pay fair market value for it. When Gov. Newsom decided which businesses would be locked down and which were not, that was commandeering the locked down businesses.
In the Los Angeles Tinhorn Flats restaurant case, a 3rd court ruled that businesses are allowed to sue the government for targeting them because they were vocal in opposing Newsom’s shutdown orders.
Meuser said:
This was a restaurant targeted by government for daring to question the constitutionality of the lockdown orders and defying them.
The government cut off their power and built walls around the outside of the business, to keep them closed, and send a message to other businesses.
Meuser added:
Meuser concluded:
The Los Angeles Superior Court is allowing the Tinhorn Flats COVID-19 case against the government to continue. The court refuses to dismiss Tinhorn Flat’s case that Burbank targeted it because it expressed its opposition to Newsom’s shutdown orders.
