In a move that some might celebrate with relief, or cries of vindication, or some other, perhaps unmentionable, emotional expression, the U.S. CDC Sunday lifted its mandate that incoming international air travelers must take the oft-mentioned, oft-misused COVID19 “tests.”
Mitchell Clark reports for The Verge:
(T)he Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will reevaluate the decision in three months. That means people flying into the US won’t have to worry about taking a COVID test before take-off, at least until the summer travel season is over.
Airlines called on the government to drop the testing requirement
That requirement was put into place in January 2021 amid concerns about the spread of the Alpha variant (which was later upstaged by the Delta and Omicron variants). It’s the latest airline safety requirement to be dropped; most airlines stopped requiring masks in April after the mandate requiring masks on public transport was struck down by a federal judge.
And, of course, the survival rate for each variant increased, and the original survival rate, the CDC told us way back in September of 2020, actually was nearly 100 percent when averaged across all age groups.
Specifically, let’s not forget the numbers for the original COVID19, as told to us by the feds, and reported by Breitbart almost two years ago:
…Breitbart News confirmed the updated age-specific survival rates: 0-19 years old, 99.997 percent; 20-49 years old, 99.98 percent; 50-69 years, 99.5 percent; and 70 years old or older, 94.6 percent.
So, practically, many folks wondered why the CDC would impose these orders (and why Joe Biden still keeps in place his jab mandates for international truckers trying to bring goods into the U.S.).
But there’s a larger problem that goes beyond the practical.
Though the CDC overlords have given people a reprieve, they still claim the power to impose a new mandate – of any kind – at any time. Strictly and explicitly, this is toweringly unconstitutional and immoral, and it stems from two dark troubles in American political history.
The first is the fact that many Americans blithely accept the existence of the CDC when there is no provision allowing for it in their U.S. Constitution.
The second is that many Americans also assume the central government has a say in allowing or stopping foreign people from entering any state in the union.
As I have told students and written for MRCTV, this simply is not the case, and it would behoove conservative folk who are frustrated by how Joe Biden is handling the immigration issue to remember that the U.S. Constitution does not contain the word “immigration.”
Related: Biden’s Supply-Chain Strangler: The Jab Mandate For Incoming Foreign Truckers Begins | MRCTV
It’s a state issue.
The “power” to form rules for naturalization – or how immigrants can become citizens -- was included in the U.S. Constitution, but not immigration. When John Adams and his cronies imposed the “Alien Act” in 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote the fourth of his famous “Kentucky Resolutions” exposing the unconstitutional federal power grab and nullifying it, stating:
IV. Resolved, that alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the state wherein they are; that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual states distinct from their power over citizens; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that ‘the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people,’ the act of the Congress of the United States passed on the 22d day of June, 1798, entitled ‘An act concerning aliens,’ which assumes power over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force.
When Texas completed its state constitution in 1869, it included in it a Bureau of Immigration.
It was not until 1875, with a terrible Supreme Court ruling in the case of Chy Lung v Freeman – a case that negated a California law prohibiting the immigration of certain people from China -- that the federalization of immigration began. And the centralizing, disastrous results are clear.
And this is a key point to remember: as I wrote on page 79 in my 2007 book, “Live Free or Die”:
In numerous Supreme Court cases of the early 19th Century (‘Miln v New York,’ ‘Smith v Turner,’ and ‘Norris v Boston’) participants cited numerous laws enacted by the state legislatures that put restrictions on the kinds of people (such as paupers) that shipmasters could allow in the respective states, and many of the laws were passed after the adoption of the US Constitution…
The California statute which the Supreme Court overturned in 1875, basically seeing the "justices" invent the nonexistent “federal control of immigration,” was a statute barring Chinese women whom politicians in California claimed would work as prostitutes and carry diseases. Whether that was true, or whether there were other motives, one may never know. But we can see the parallels to “disease control” and federal versus state "prerogatives" today.
The central government has utterly no constitutional power to handle immigration, and unless politicians in DC claim that people from a foreign land are “invading” as part of an army, and then the DC politicians in Congress declare War against that nation-state, the Executive Branch is supposed to be hands off.
That goes double for the already Constitution-defying bureaucracy of the CDC.
These lessons don’t get discussed very much nowadays, but moments such as this, with the CDC granting people its wondrous “beneficence” of “no testing needed, serfs” can give us the chance to dig in and grab intellectual ammo, then share it with others.
Related: Dragging The Supply Chain: Biden’s Vax Mandate For Non-Resident Truckers At Border | MRCTV