Letter to Ashley Moody from Brian Ward

Re: Coordinated Plot by the FDA and the Judicial Branch to Coercively or Covertly Expose Americans to Experimental Drugs and Federally Funded Research, and to Nullify the Due Process Clause—A National Security Threat

I write to you as my Senator and as Florida’s former Attorney General to inform you that rogue political actors within the federal judiciary and Executive Branch agencies have forced our country into a post-constitutional form of government, inflicting irreparable harm on the American people. Because this letter will be shared with the nation, please forgive the footnotes explaining legal terms with which you are already familiar.

I am an expert in the regulatory affairs of biomedical research and in the Fourteenth Amendment rights of those who participate in it.

Over the past four years, I have consulted on more than thirty federal and state cases in which individuals were subjected2 by governments, under threat of penalty, to unwanted federally funded medical research activities and required to prospectively waive their right to sue if injured by those activities, in violation of federal law, federal contracts, and the Due Process Clause.

That work has led me to network with hundreds of lawyers and insiders nationwide, giving me firsthand knowledge of the conduct of rogue governors, the FDA, HHS, the CDC, and select judges in federal and state courts.

I write to inform you that these actors are engaged in a highly coordinated assault: overthrowing valid Acts of Congress and amending the Constitution outside Article V's constitutional requirements.

The instrument is the federally regulated biomedical research industry—long forgotten by Congress and almost unknown to the country.

By the end of this letter, no reader will be able to dispute three facts. First, judges in federal and state courts have amended the Constitution’s due-process protections in operation.

They have armed criminals to wage a proxy war on the American people by stripping victims of assault and battery of the right to sue—and by treating the crime itself as the victim’s waiver of their due process guarantee, thereby placing this Nation under a post-constitutional form of government. Second, the federal judiciary is laying down a doormat for the World Health Organization to control this Nation through the Democrat-led Governors Public Health Alliance. Third, the Judicial Branch and federal agencies are corruptly permitting Americans to be stripped of their private health information, conscripted into covert biomedical experimentation, and forced to choose between their livelihoods and the waiver of two rights: the right to refuse an unwanted investigational drug injection and federally funded research, and the right to sue in court if compliance results in injury. This unprecedented attack on the American people will result in death on an unimaginable scale.

(1) In 2018, the FDA proposed a new rule governing biomedical experimentation on humans, stating that the requirement for legally effective informed consent would remain without exception. In January 2024, the FDA lied and unlawfully issued the final rule, 21 C.F.R. § 50.22, which permits covert experimentation on the American people without consent or notice of their involvement, even when injury results from the research.

The rule violates numerous federal statutes, which offends the separation of powers, sanctions battery, and invalidates Americans’ due process rights.5 In summary, the rule permits researchers to covertly expose humans to experimental drugs, biologics, and other testing articles, each of which could carry more than one billion potential adverse contraindications. These secret exposures can occur in schools, hospitals, and doctors’ offices, and through coordinated efforts by governors and mayors across large populations—in the food supply, in the water, and by atmospheric delivery.

It authorizes the wholesale theft of Americans’ identifiable private health information and the collection of their biometric data and biospecimens, even if those biospecimens were collected 20 or more years ago. It also permits attaching that data, along with research information, to secret files, now dubbed by industry insiders as “shadow files,” to be sold, shared, or stolen on the black market.

That information carries civil, criminal, and reputational risks without due process protections. Hospitals can now covertly collect biometric data from every newborn under this FDA rule and create a medical file—hidden from the parents— that follows them for the rest of their lives.

Most concerning, the rule permits consent-free mass population research, including activities to capture this Nation’s biomarker data6—data foreign governments will use to design bioengineered weapons aimed at particular traits and people groups using software encoded mRNA technology. Congress must immediately confront this national-security threat, which may already be in operation under the FDA rule.

The Nation’s healthcare workers, across every field of the medical industry, face the gravest risk of adverse effects from these secret experiments.

(2) The Judicial Branch has usurped and overthrown the constitutional authority of the coordinate branches. Sixteen lawsuits were filed in federal court against persons who, under threat of penalty, subjected others to unwanted injections of investigational drugs and to federally funded research. Federal statutes, federal contracts, and the Due Process Clause prohibit coerced participation in such activities.

The federal framework regulating this conduct is unknown to the Nation and to Congress because HHS legal counsel and the Office for Human Research Protections, under the Assistant Secretary for Health, have effectively concealed it from the public by design, a practice that continues as of the date of this letter.

Forty federal judges dismissed every case with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6), despite the questions being matters of first impression in each court.

As a condition of receiving federal funding, the federal government placed the defendants under two distinct contractual obligations8 requiring them never to pressure an individual to accept an investigational drug or to participate in federally regulated research activities. These contracts form the basis of the Executive Branch’s compliance with 42 U.S.C. § 289, which requires the HHS Secretary to protect the safety and rights of Americans involved in unlicensed medical treatments and related research.

The judges took over the cases, violating the party presentation principle, and disregarded the defendants’ obligations under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act, and their implementing regulations and executive agreements to issue an opinion permitting the very conduct federal law prohibits— nonconsensual administration of unlicensed medical treatments.

They declined to permit discovery of the contracts that prohibited the conduct, declined to address federal preemption, declined to permit expert testimony on the defendants’ obligations, and declined to decide whether the federal programs created an entitlement not to participate in the drugs or related research without penalty or loss of a benefit. Defendants had received federal funding precisely on the promise that they would not coerce use of the drugs or related activities, but the federal judiciary is denying victims their due process rights for the sole purpose of shielding persons such as Governor Newsom from civil liability.

The judges then issued a Rule 12(b)(6) ruling authorizing defendants to engage in conduct they never claimed authority to pursue and never disputed—conduct that directly contradicted the plaintiffs’ allegations supported by judicially noticeable documents, and that nullifies nearly eighty years of congressional action.

These rulings have stripped away the protections Congress designed to protect the American people from unwanted or unsafe federal research activities and removed the Secretary’s exclusive authority under federal law to determine when, where, and how the public is involved in such activities.

Most shocking to the conscience is the Ninth Circuit’s holding that public employees and licensed professionals may be forced to accept experimental drugs even when those drugs are known to “pose” a “significant threat of adverse effects” to life, liberty, or property. That holding invents a new common-law standard that violates federal law.

It treats a state “legitimate interest” as authority to compel involuntary participation in dangerous activities the state is under federal contract not to compel, and it nullifies the Institutional Review Board requirement that administration of such drugs be the product of voluntary, informed consent without exception. Senator, this is not a single egregious ruling. More than twenty district judges, and nearly as many appellate judges, have engaged in a coordinated course of conduct: overthrowing the federal government by refusing to acknowledge valid acts of Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Constitution, and enforcing only their personal policy preferences—preferences shaped, in this author’s view, by outside forces, for the sole purpose of giving the World Health Organization control of this Nation through rogue governors, as outlined below.

Additionally, based on several factors, I believe the judges and defendants’ counsel coordinated their responses to the pleadings, either directly or through a third party.

(3) Most troubling is the coordinated effort to render the Due Process Clause dead on arrival.

Since the Founding, the Supreme Court has affirmed that the Constitution does not allow the government to deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. When that deprivation occurs outside of consent, the right to sue for a remedy is “the alternative of force,” “the right conservative of all other rights,” and “one of the highest and most essential privileges of citizenship.” Chambers v. Balt. & Ohio R.R. Co., 207 U.S. 142, 148 (1907). The Supreme Court has long held that such a right can only be waived voluntarily, not by “coercion,” intimidation, or deception, nor can such a waiver be presumed. (see below).

Yet more than twenty federal and state courts have, in effect, nullified the Due Process Clause.

When one person tells another not to touch him, is touched anyway, and is injured, those courts hold that an Act of Congress bars the victim from obtaining a judicial remedy—and thereby strips the victim of the enumerated right to due process. The victim loses that right for one reason only: someone else committed a criminal act of violence with a product Congress has placed under civil immunity.

Congress is forbidden to treat nonconsensual violence as a waiver of the victim’s rights, and Congress has not done so.

The courts are intentionally reading that waiver into the statutes by refusing to address the due-process rights the Constitution guarantees to victims of violence.

Congress may shield a product from civil liability, but it cannot constitutionally authorize the taking of life, liberty, or property through nonconsensual violence involving liability-shielded products, because Congress cannot, by statute, extinguish rights enumerated in the Constitution. No court in this Nation’s history, until the pandemic, had treated a victim’s due-process right as forfeited because criminal conduct involving a liability-shielded product inflicted the injury.

This is a new doctrine of tyranny—invented to nullify the Due Process Clause and to empower one American to inflict irreparable harm on another with complete impunity.

Worse, in most cases the federal government is paying the person who overrode consent and forcibly administered the injection—the act that constitutes battery against the American who refused it. HHS is thereby funding criminal conduct. The Ninth Circuit goes further.

It unconstitutionally holds that States and mayors may require this Nation’s front-line heroes and licensed professionals to waive, in advance, the right to sue if a public-health policy injures them—even when that policy is “known” to pose a severe threat to life, liberty, or property—on the condition of maintaining their livelihoods.

In practice, the Ninth Circuit is arming governments with unconstitutional authority to force a police officer or teacher to play Russian roulette with their lives, with no remedy if the chamber lands on a live round. Refusal does not save them because the government can secretly inject them with impunity. That is a forced barter of a constitutional right for a public benefit—an unconstitutional condition.

I ask you, Senator: if an American can be made to barter away the highest privilege of citizenship—the right to sue when injured—in order to enjoy a public benefit, or can lose that right when injured by criminal conduct, what force of law does the Constitution still possess? It has none; enumerated rights are mere promises our grandparents enjoyed, stolen from this generation by corruption at the highest levels of the Judicial Branch.

Every public employee and licensed professional in the Nation is now subjected to a waiver of constitutional guarantees whenever a public official believes an investigational drug is beneficial—even when that official is barred by federal law and contract from ever including such drugs under a mandate. This occurs solely because federal judges are supplanting Congress and federal agreements with their radicalized agenda.

If We the People have no right to refuse a covert biomedical experiment, no right to keep our identifiable private health information private, no right to refuse an investigational drug that courts treat as posing a severe risk to life, liberty, or property, no right to exercise federally funded benefits without punishment, no right to refuse a waiver of constitutional rights as the price of a public benefit, and no right to a judicial remedy when injured by criminal acts, then this Nation is no longer operating under the Constitution. It has been subjected to a post-constitutional form of tyranny.

As outlined below, federal agencies, 40 federal judges, and 4 state supreme courts have placed the country under the tyranny of rogue political actors and criminals, not the rule of law. Over the past five years, governors and officials at the FDA, HHS, the Department of Justice, and the CDC have advanced that tyranny by deliberately failing to comply with and enforce federal law. I tell you the truth: the American Revolution began over far lesser stakes than the life-and-death questions discussed in this letter.

The indisputable conclusion of these actions, and others not mentioned, is that there is a coordinated effort to secretly or coercively inject the entire nation with mRNA drugs; to capture the nation’s biometric and biomarker data through covert experimentation using collected biospecimens; to deny anyone the right to sue when physically or constitutionally injured; and to deny Congress its supreme authority over drug regulation.

For the first time in its history, the Supreme Court has left standing—by declining review—lower-court rulings that extinguish constitutional guarantees, bar suits for battery, override federal contracts, ignore the Supremacy Clause, invent terms to invalidate Acts of Congress, and render the Due Process Clause meaningless. Those denials raise a serious question: whether the Supreme Court is participating in the coordinated effort described herein to permit rogue actors to wage a proxy war on behalf of those who hate our Nation and its great people. What other view can be taken when it permits the Ninth Circuit, and its sister courts, to rewrite the Constitution without a single dissent?

Please forgive the length of this letter. The historic nature of these charges requires an indisputable record of legal fact, or they will be dismissed as hyperbole.

Because I was raised to never discuss a problem without offering a solution, I offer, at the end of this letter, potential remedies you are uniquely positioned to pursue for the Nation’s benefit.

First let me state that I have no idea who or what Brian Ward is. I tried my best to discover who he might be. His website Bio doesn't say much.

https://covidpenalty.com/about/

But this is a well researched and foot noted letter outlining how Congress and Judges was gutted the Constitution. And how they used COVID to put the final nail in the coffin.

The full letter is 29 pages. But the executive summary is worth the read if you are into the Constitution.

I came across it by way of the 'Dark Horse Podcast'. They get into the discussion of this letter at about the 16 minute mark.

https://rumble.com/v7hisqo-the-349th-evolutionary-lens-with-bret-weinstein-and-heather-heying.html?e9s=src_v1_mfp%2Csrc_v1_mfp_a

Sorry for any foot note numbers I missed deleting.

Okay, I was correct it is about the Covid mRNA shots that were mandated illegally. So, I hope the Supreme Court takes on the activist judges, and allows Biden the manufactures, and most importantly the little tyrant Anthony Fauci.

I fully support the author Brian Ward. He is 100% correct with his statemments. Very good discussion at the bpodcast I night add. I haven't watched the enire broadcast because the podcast is an hour & 42 minutes in length. However, one can already see that these two know what they are speaking about, even on the constitutional issues.

I will continue listening based upon it being an accurate discussion that is dealing with facts.

I just heard the male say that he wshes te Constitution didn't exist, which I disagree with his reasoning, because without the Constitution there is nothing on wich to determine & prove that what was done was unconctitutional, and therefore was a criminal act. Without a written Constitution you could never prove that our rights were violated.

But his misstep there does not make this podcast wothless. just because I disagree with his opinion.

If I remember correctly the only crime set forth in the Constitution is treason.

Sometimes I could almost think that we did not have a constitution. Except that people are discussing it all the time.

You could almost think that people were discussing an imaginary creature because other than the discussion it hard to find any evidence of its existence.

Judges talk about the constitution and then do what they want.

Elected officials take an oath to defend it and then do nothing while it is violated in the most egregious ways.

Many of these oath takers even speak of the constitution in the most vile manners.

And the most precious document our founders bequeathed us is barely touched on in our government funded schools.

Yes, we have a constitution but of what value it is can be debated. If the citizens who's rights it exist to protect ignore it and don't understand it of what value can we say it has.

Yes, I understand that is his argument, but I still disagree with him. No matter what you have, it can be ignored or subverted.

But the reason to have a written Constitution is that it documents what the founding fathers believed in.

If you learn it & understand it than you become a better citizen who can then stand to protect iy.

It becomes the responsibility of each citize to understand our constituton, and not leave it up to constitutional scholars, judges or any other group to interpret it for us. For the better we understand our constitution the more we can can stand to protect our constitution.

That would never be possible if the citizens did not have a written document from which we can read & educate ourselves from, could it.

Sadly, many of us, including myself, do not read our own constutution to know what it actually says, which is why the constittuion can be used against us, anmd even used to deceive us. I have started reading it more in order to educate myself about our constitution, because that is my responsibility to do so.

It's not entirely our fault, because our schoold do not teach us our constitution. Most educators do not know our constitution, and worse yet, many of our educators do not believe in or honor our constitution.

That is why I disagree with his argument.

Thank you for providing his words. I was too busy offering up my disagreement in a hasty manner, to do so myself. 😁🤙

I actually had something else that was vying for my attention wich I could not ignore. My dogs informing me of their needs to relieve themselves. 😁🤙

Most educators do not know our constitution, and worse yet, many of our educators do not believe in or honor our constitution.

That is the root of our problems and it well rooted in our halls of education. Our schools are better at socialist indoctrination than they are at teaching the Three Rs.

We send our youth to college in the hope that they will receive an education. In most of our colleges they will walk in and receive mal-education and then walk out with less wisdom than they walked in with.

Socialism infiltrated our colleges in the very early years of of the 20th century or earlier. Socialist now have nearly complete control of the our higher education system.

If Trump can completely dismantle the Department of Education before he leaves office it may be his greatest achievement. It would be a great blow to the socialist agenda.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.