On January 27, 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, Chief Judge Jeffrey Howard, ruled in “US Dep’t of Justice v. Jonas, No. 19-1243,” that the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) can “legally” access New Hampshire’s prescription drug database via an administrative subpoena, not a warrant. This is despite New Hampshire and United States laws to the contrary.
While 48 states have submitted to maintaining a networked prescription database (Prescription Drug Monitoring Program / PDMP), most people would argue that their personal medical and prescription records are protected by the 4th amendment (“no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”) Personal healthcare and medical information is generally protected under doctor-patient confidentiality laws and is regarded as almost sacrosanct in the healthcare world (think HIPAA.) In this case, confidentiality was further supported by the 4th amendment to the US Constitution.
Overwhelming Support From the Liberty Community
Michelle Ricco Jonas, manager of the New Hampshire PDMP in 2018, refused the DEA’s request to fork over 2.5 years’ worth of prescription data of a “person of interest.” After being subpoenaed she argued that the records belong to the state, not an individual person. Since March 12, 2019, when the notice of appeal was docketed, Michelle Jonas and New Hampshire state received an outpouring of support from the ACLU of California, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island – in other words, all the districts represented by the 1st Circuit Court.
Over the past two grueling years of appeal, the ACLU supported Jonas, and questioned whether issuing a subpoena to a state employee is within the bounds of the district court. They argued that medical records, for all intents and purposes, are considered private information. While the DEA has the ability to subpoena an individual, the ACLU asked if that gave them the right to subpoena a representative, or employee, of the state. They also argued that the 4th Amendment requires law enforcement “to obtain a warrant based on probable cause only to secure records over which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.” The ACLU argued that medical records warrant an expectation of privacy.
The prescription records at issue in this case reveal intimate, private, and potentially stigmatizing details about patients’ health, including details of those patients’ underlying medical conditions. For that reason, as with other medical records, people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in them.” – Summary of Argument, US Dep’t of Justice v. Jonas, No. 19-1243
Brodie Deshaies at the hearing looking guilty while Carla Gericke calls him out for using scare tactics
Representative Brodie Deshaies from Wolfeboro, New Hampshire testified in front of the State-Federal Relations and Veteran Affairs Committee on January 20, 2022 concerning CACR 32. The legislation seeks to let the people of New Hampshire vote to amend the Constitution and become an independent nation, breaking ties with DC. He was the legislator asked by the committee chairman to do the bulk of the research before the hearing.
Looking closely at all the claims Deshaies made about the legality of this bill and the implications concerning lawmakers voting to recommend that the House pass it, it is hard to decide if he is ignorant and easily swayed by empire-loving “constitutional scholars” from DC or if he gave a speech full of lies to sway the vote. He used fear-mongering language directed at the committee, implying that they may be charged by Washington DC if they vote ‘Ought To Pass’ and supported the bill through the legal process. This article is a close-up look at his claims and will look at all the material he references to see if he is really making a constitutional argument against CACR 32.
Deshaies starts off with an acknowledgment of how the public perceives him. “There are some people who are pretty upset with me in the room,” he says. This is already very indicative of his character. He sent Elliot “Alu” Axelman (the editor-in-chief of LibertyBlock.com and the author of multiple books on secession) an email full of misinterpretations of the US and New Hampshire Constitutions a few weeks ago. When Alxelman politely asked if he wished to engage in a public debate on the topic, Deshaies cowered and declined. Without the opportunity to debate Deshaies, and with no legislator agreeing to debate him, Alu published his rebuttal to Deshaies’ anti-independence letter on his website. The article destroys the few arguments that the anti-freedom legislator sought to make in his letter. Instead, Deshaies went on to publish the exact same letter in an op-ed article on NHJournal.com. So, now we know he knows how people feel about his twisting of the facts, but he just goes on to ignore the people and doubles down on his way of thinking. We see from this very first sentence that he isn’t the sort of person who feels he should be in office doing what the people of New Hampshire want. He feels he’s in office to rule over the citizens of New Hampshire with an iron fist.
He goes on to say that after speaking to many “constitutional scholars” such as David Williams, author of “The Mythic Meanings of the Second Amendment”, that he believes this committee was engaged in a “constitutional process” by voting Ought to Pass or Inexpedient to Legislate. Which means every vote cast is “aiding in the constitutional process,” and “approving it at each time along the way”.
Deshaies claims, “Every vote cast has a constitutional ramification judging by amendment fourteen of the US Constitution, section three. Some scholars would argue that this is rebelling, even if it’s peaceful. This very well could be an argument where voting for this, aiding and abetting in that process could very well be unconstitutional.”
So, there it is, folks. Deshaies spoke to a man who wrote a book arguing that the second amendment doesn’t really give all Americans the right to bear arms for advice on what the Constitution says. Then, he came up with a clever way to subtly scare the other members of the committee out of voting Ought to Pass on this bill. He used a mildly veiled threat of ‘insurrection’ and ‘rebellion’ to convince everyone on the committee to vote 21-0 against recommending the bill to be passed. Even the two committee members who told Axelman that they would support the legislation ultimately caved to the fear and voted to kill it. (more…)
It was standing-room-only this Thursday afternoon as the state house Federal Relations committee held a historic hearing on CACR 32, likely the first-ever proposed constitutional amendment to peacefully declare independence from the United States. Freedom-loving activists packed the large-sized room, nearly forcing the hearing into Rep’s Hall, which can hold four hundred. Many people testified in favor of the bill and with the exception of a few Empire Loyalist state reps who spoke against it, everyone else who spoke was in favor of it, except for one guy. I was able to get independent video of the entire three-hour hearing as well as the press conference prior to it. Thank you to everyone who turned out.
In September, Free Keene covered the filing of a first-ever constitutional amendment to declare peaceful independence from the United States federal government. Now, that bill has been officially assigned a bill number, CACR 32.
As reported today by the NH Exit blog, the next step is the bill will go before a state house committee for public hearing. In a historic first for all 50 states, people of New Hampshire will have a chance to speak to the state reps about secession – whether for or against.
If passed without amendment by 60% of the NH House and Senate, CACR 32 will appear on the ballot with the following wording:
Are you in favor of amending the first part of the constitution by inserting after article 7 a new article to read as follows:
[Art.] 7-a. [Independent Nation.] New Hampshire peaceably declares independence from the United States and immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution, state statutes and regulations are nullified.
To pass, it must receive at least 2/3rds of the vote. Visit the NHexit.US post for the full story.
Thanks to two heroic state representatives, New Hampshire has now taken the lead nationally in the independence movement. Yesterday, five-term state rep Mike Sylvia filed the text of a constitutional amendment that would, if passed, declare independence from the United States:
“Are you in favor of amending the first part of the New Hampshire Constitution by inserting, after article 7, a new article to read as follows:
[Art.] 7-a. [Independent Nation.] New Hampshire declares itself as independent from the United States and peaceably, immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution and state statutes and regulations are nullified.”
To pass, it must first receive over 60% of the vote in both the state house and senate. If it does, it will then be placed on the 2022 ballot and then must receive over 2/3rds of the vote to be enacted. If so, it goes into effect immediately. There would be no political games like with United Kingdom’s “Brexit” from the European Union, which took several years to hammer out after the vote. New Hampshire will instantly declare our independence and nullify all standing agreements with the federal government gang. Compare this to the thus-far unsuccessful attempts in other US states.
In recent years, secession movements around the country have sprung up and made headlines in California and Texas, but with very little legislative support. In Texas, a state rep filed a bill this year that if passed, would merely have placed a non-binding referendum on the ballot for Texas voters to register their opinion on whether the Texas legislature should begin an arduous process of figuring out how to leave the United States. This bill’s filing resulted in plenty of media coverage and discussion, however, it died before even receiving a committee hearing. A key reason that New Hampshire was chosen as the destination for the Free State Project is that EVERY bill gets a public committee hearing, no matter how much support it has from the state reps. Most states are like Texas, where it’s a political game whether a bill even gets a hearing.
New Hampshire Independence
In California, a left-leaning group called “Yes California” has been trying for years to get an independence question on the ballot by gathering the hundreds-of-thousands of required signatures. If passed, the measure would require the legislature to declare independence from the US and become its own republic. So far, they have been unsuccessful despite garnering significant media coverage. Currently their website is offline, though their Twitter is still active. Even if they do get the question on the ballot and it passes, they may not survive the inevitable court challenge given the CA state constitution provides that California, “is an inseparable part of the United States of America.”
While I want to see both Texas and California exit the United States, it’s clear that with the filing of this constitutional amendment bill – called in NH a “CACR” or, “Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution” – that New Hampshire has taken the clear lead in the race to see who will leave the union first. Plus, unlike California, the NH constitution clearly protects the “Right of Revolution” in Article 10 and “State Sovereignty” in Article 7 of the NH Bill of Rights.
Representative Sylvia, in an exclusive interview with Free Keene, had this to say on why he filed the proposed amendment, “The people of America have forgotten their history, if we take the time to look at our roots we can see that our constitutions have received ‘lip service’ for far too long. While I can not change the direction of the federal government, I can hold up the New Hampshire constitution and demand that we honor its clear directives. Article 10 reads in part, ‘whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government.'”
The 2018 liberty “Legislator of the Year” representative Sylvia is joined by freshman state rep from the Keene area, Matt Santonastaso as the co-sponsor of the amendment. Other state reps have been approached and have expressed support and a full list will be released when the amendment is assigned a CACR number and moves onto a committee.
NH Independence NOW!
The process is just beginning, with Sylvia submitting the proposed text to NH Legislative Services on Monday. It may take several weeks for them to officially draft the CACR and send it back to Sylvia for final approval. It then is assigned to a committee which will then hold a public hearing sometime in early 2022. What happens from there is up to the committee and will largely depend on how much public support the amendment receives at its hearing.
Even if it doesn’t pass this time, it will get many conversations started about the evil federal government and why peacefully declaring independence is the best solution. Minds will be persuaded and changed. Many media and political attacks will be brought against us, as the power-seekers will be desperate to keep the status quo. Potential migrants to New Hampshire will be energized and make-the-move.
To help the movement, you can contact your local state reps in support of the amendment, connect with other supporters online, and more. Visit the “How You Can Help” page on NHexit.us for a full list of ideas.
Crowd of Revolutionaries Gathered Monday to Read and Sign the new Declaration of Independence for 2020.
Hey New Hampshire government gang: Merry Christmas… YOU’RE FIRED!
In Concord on Monday December 21st of 2020 at ten a.m., a group of over one hundred people from across New Hampshire gathered at the now-closed state house steps to invoke their Right of Revolution as specified in Article Ten of the Bill of Rights of the NH Constitution. It states:
Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
Dan Richard of the NH Committee of Safety at COSNH.com
The new Declaration cites various tyrannies, including the unconstitutional “emergency powers” statute that led to the over seventy-five emergency orders issued this year by King Sununu that has trashed the New Hampshire economy and freedoms here generally. Plus, the now-hidden nature of the state gang’s activities makes them completely unaccountable, violating Article Eight of the NH Constitution’s Bill of Rights which requires its government to be open and accountable. Further, the new Declaration claims the voting system was illegally and unconstitutionally manipulated out-of-view from the people and calls the entire election fraudulent as a result.
It calls out the state bureaucracy’s endless harassment of the people as well as the “standing armies of enforcement agents” enacting the tyranny, and the now-secret courts. The new Declaration states that effective means for redress of grievances have been abolished and that, “Our form of government, has become a complete system of tyranny. The Same party is the legislator, the accuser, the judge, and the executioner by declaring themselves invested with power to legislate in secret in all cases whatsoever.”
Citing NH’s Article Ten, the new Declaration dissolves all political connections between the state and the citizenry, absolving us of any allegiance to “the state”.
Afterwards, a copy was delivered to the Secretary of State’s office and the Attorney General’s office. It was subsequently served on “governor” Chris Sununu hiding in his home on Christmas Eve. Here’s video of Monday’s visit to the state house and AG’s office including nearly all of the reading of the new Declaration of Independence. I missed the first few paragraphs due to a dead camera battery:
Kudos to the heroic folks who came out to end the failed experiment of the New Hampshire government.
