SB 277 Lawsuit � The �Do Not Cross� Line�

This case is a decision point. It will set policy nationwide for a long
time to come on two basic issues � �who owns our children,� and �what can
be forced on them?�

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen


Attached to this article is a transcript of the Oral Arguments held in the
Preliminary Injunction Hearing August 12th, 2016. You can read every word
that was said. But, before you do I am going to give you some background,
some definitions, and a roadmap so you can follow what was being said.
Why? These are very technical legal arguments I am going to attempt to
make simple, and common-sense.

This case is NOT about vaccines � although those ultra-dangerous
Made-in-China-death-pus-tubes are the problem the case seems to revolve
around.

Some background�

The real point of the case is simple � what are the limits that the State
can do claiming �The Greater Good?� If today they can force dangerous
vaccines into our children, tomorrow they can drag our nine-year-olds into
sexual slavery, or grind them up into food for cattle for that same claim
of �The Greater Good.�

I�m not joking.

It gets really scary when you think that a grinning psychopath/sociopath(?)
like California Senator Dicky Pan gets to decide what, exactly, defines
�The Greater Good� and who it applies to.

What the Plaintiff�s attorneys are saying to the Court is simple �Where�s
the line Judge?� Legal precedent says that the State, under a Strict
Scrutiny review, must follow specific rules to make laws. Our side is
saying that the State of California did not follow the rules with this law.

Before these issues can be argued in court they have to be broken down into
legal components. And, that�s where our attorneys are taking the case.

To read the entire article, click on:

http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-not-cross-line/#more-4699