The accused farmer Vernon Hershberger, was charged with 3 counts of producing food for the public without licenses and 1 count for violation of a food-holding order declaring that the food could not be sold or distributed outside of farm owners, workers and family.
Wisconsin statute exempts licenses for farms where only farm owners, workers and family consume the food and is not available to the public. All food was and is only consumed by farm owners, workers and family.
Those charges and order against Mr. Hershberger were made by a woman allegedly posing as an agent for the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection's (DATCP) . Research has proven that this agent of DATCP, Jackie Owens, has no oath of office on file, which would make her a rogue agent at best.
Grazin' Acres Farm and Club members withdrew from DATCP licenses and other jurisdiction years prior to the charges and raids of 2010.
After the raids, in late 2010 The DATCP's Steve Ingham openly stated in an interview with T.V. News Channel 3 of Madison that "DATCP did not have jurisdiction" over Grazin Acres and Mr. Hershberger.
What laws did Mr. Hershberger cite in his 14 page filing? The Declaration of Independence, The U.S. Constitution, The Wisconsin Constitution, and case law, (People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980); Melo v. U.S. 505 F 2d
1026; Joyce v. U.S. 474 2D 215; Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F 2d 416; Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York 37 F Supp. 150; Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U. S. 417, 433–436 (1998) ). What Mr. Hershberger did not quote was ATCP Code.
Apparently Judge Reynolds has never heard of Marbury v. Madison either.
Marbury v. Madison, 1803
“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.”
Did Judge Reynolds sleep through his college class when the professor taught about the State and Federal Constitutions, as to why they are the supreme law of the land and not regulations?
Regulatory intrusions into the social and economic fabric of America have reached crisis levels in their attack on individual and collective freedom.
What can be done to restore constitutional control over regulatory law?
When a constitutional challenge to a regulation is warranted, relevant authorities in the Congress can file suit in Federal Court to have that regulation or any generalized regulatory authority struck down. If there would be a constitutional challenge on a state level, most likely Mr. Hershberger's Assemblyman or State Senator would have to file the suit.
The 9th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution seems to provide firm legal ground for us to eat by our best understandings, asserting "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Thomas Jefferson certainly advised us to claim and exercise the right of food choice when he wrote, “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
Article Six of the U.S. Constitution establishes the Constitution and the laws and treaties of the United States, made in accordance with it, as the supreme law of the land.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Are you sure Judge Reynolds that Mr. Hershberger did not cite any laws?
Oh, wait, one more thing Mr. Hershberger quoted was, the word of God, the Holy Bible. Obviously, Divine Law has no place in Judge Reynolds court room either. What would Thomas Moore have thought?