Update from Action 4 Liberty
1. Why don’t we sue Governor Walz?
There are several lawsuits currently in the Minnesota court system. One lawsuit filed in Ramsey County was thrown out by the judge. Other counties are considering the merits of cases involving the business shutdown and mask mandates.
We are crossing our fingers that these lawsuits are successful, but take the position that the political route is a much better route than hoping a judge rules in favor of the Constitution. In these days, judges rarely rule against the government in favor of liberty.
2. How does the ruling against the Pennsylvania governor affect us?
Although rare, the cases in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are ones that actually ruled in favor of liberty. As you may remember, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled against Governor Evers earlier this year.
The ruling in Pennsylvania was decided by a federal judge, a Trump appointee. “The Wolf administration’s pandemic policies have been overreaching, arbitrary and violated citizens’ constitutional rights” wrote the judge in his opinion.
I know what you are thinking…substitute “Walz” for “Wolf” and the same thing should apply. Unfortunately, that case was specific for the state of Pennsylvania and is in a completely separate federal district than the one Minnesota is in.
3. What’s the status of the Recall Walz effort?
Our team is supporting the great patriots behind the Recall Walz effort. This governor should pay the price for what he did to our economy and liberties. We’ve found out since taking on this battle that Minnesota recall law is one of the worst in the country and is proving to be a difficult, but not impossible, objective.
There have been two recall petitions accepted by the Secretary of State and presented to the MN Supreme Court. Both of those petitions were rejected by the Chief Justice. Every time this happens, it requires the legal team to evaluate the reason behind the rejection, then make adjustments with the next submission.A new petition was submitted this last week which establishes that Walz, in mandating face coverings under EO 20-81, acted contrary to substantive legal precedent. This time, the Court cannot ignore Walz’s brazen misconduct.As this Petition explains, Walz has acted unlawfully by giving himself the power to usurp and suspend three Minnesota statutes. Two statutes are even within the Emergency Management Law. In particular, Walz’s face covering mandate requires Minnesota to violate Minn. Stat. § 609.735, which criminally prohibits face coverings unless, as relevant here, for medical treatment. If Walz argues the face coverings are treatment, then he violates Minn. Stat. § 12.39 prohibiting the governor from mandating treatment. Finally, Walz ignores Minn. Stat. § 12.32, which does not allow the Governor to suspend statutes even during a declared emergency.If we succeed at the Supreme Court level, then we will have to gather voter signatures statewide. We’ve helped build signers of the Recall effort to prepare for the 90 day period where the law requires us to capture over 600,000 voter signatures.