California Underground Podcast: Discussing California Politics Through a Lens of Sanity

It seems health officials across the state have given themselves the impression that they are now anointed complete rulers over our everyday lives and the Constitution no longer applies to them. Where are our elected leaders to rein them in?

In the midst of a pandemic, California Assembly continues to chip away at Second Amendment rights in California.

Is Newsom's "order" as scary as people are making it out to be? Or is it all bluster?

Show Links

Assembly Passes Two Bills With More Firearm Restrictions

• https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/two-firearms-bills-to-face-senate-after-passage-in-assembly/
  
• Newsom Order Mask Mandate Statewide
  
  • https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/the-miserable-pseudo-science-behind-face-masks-social-distancing-and-contact-tracing/
    

Many people who have been watching the news are starting to see the absolute hypocrisy of the actions of our elected officials. Protests that were for reopening businesses were deemed selfish and dangerous, protests for George Floyd are righteous and altruistic. Most are getting fed up with it and are starting to see through it all.

Quick update on the mask lawsuit that was filed in federal court in San Diego.

A bill passes the California Assembly to create a task force to look into reparations for slavery. Is this type of identity politics helpful in times like this when you are trying to bring people to solve issues?

Show Links

California Assembly Passes Bill to Examine Reparations

• https://apnews.com/9ed249a03a6d382f84834cf8cce2f295
  
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB3121&search_keywords=reparation
  

My firm recently filed a federal lawsuit against the County of San Diego regarding the mandatory requirement of masks when in public. This episode is a audio copy of the interview done with Brittany from the Instagram handle rooted.wings, discussing out stance while taking questions from viewers.

This show is all about the Executive Order regarding 230 protection for social media companies. We break it down and discuss what it was created for and why it's being brought into question now. Also whether or not it will end up working has yet to be seen.

With more and more information coming out about the severity of this pandemic, people are starting to wake up to the reality of what is really going on, and they aren't happy. As we continue to see the sharp drop off from the doomsday predictions back in March, citizens are starting to ask why their governments aren't letting them out.

Alan Dershowitz, respected attorney and professor, gets it completely wrong on the notion that the Constitution does not grant you the right to not have the state "plunge a needle into your arm." We discuss the police power and how far government can go, and it's much less than Dershowitz says.

Show Notes

• Alan Dershowitz States Government Absolutely Has the Power to Plunge Needle In Your Arm
  
  • https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/05/19/watch-alan-dershowitz-makes-the-case-for-government-mandated-coronavirus-vaccine-n2569134
• Text from California Supreme Court Case Miller v. Board of Public Works of City of Los Angeles :
  • The police power of a state is an indispensable prerogative of sovereignty and one that is not to be lightly limited. Indeed, even though at times its operation may seem harsh, the imperative necessity for its existence precludes any limitation upon its exercise save that it be not unreasonably and arbitrarily invoked and applied. Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 239 U. S. 394, 36 S. Ct. 143, 60 L. Ed. 348, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 927; District of Columbia v. Brooke, 214 U. S. 138, 149, 29 S. Ct. 560, 53 L. Ed. 941. It is not, however, illimitable and the marking and measuring of the extent of its exercise and application is determined by a consideration of the question of whether or not any invocation of that power, in any given case, and as applied to existing conditions, is reasonably necessary to promote the public health, safety, morals (Railroad Co. v. Husen, 95 U. S. 465, 470, 471, 24 L. Ed. 527; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25, 24 L. Ed. 989), or general welfare of the people of a community (Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Ill., 200 U. S. 561, 592, 26 S. Ct. 341, 50 L. Ed. 596, 4 Ann. Cas. 1175). In short, the police power, as such, is not confined within the narrow circumscription of precedents, resting upon past conditions which do not cover and control present day conditions obviously calling for revised regulations to promote the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the public; that is to say, as a commonwealth develops politically, economically, and socially, the police power likewise develops, within reason, to meet the changed and changing conditions. What was at one time regarded as an improper exercise of the police power may now, because of changed living conditions, be recognized as a legitimate exercise of that power. This is so because:
  • ‘What was a reasonable *485 exercise [of this power] in the days of our fathers may to-day seem so utterly unreasonable as to make it difficult for us to comprehend the existence of conditions that would justify same; what would by our fathers have been rejected as unthinkable is to-day accepted as a most proper and reasonable exercise thereof.’ Streich v. Board of Education, 34 S. D. 169, 147 N. W. 779, L. R. A. 1915A, 632, Ann. Cas. 1917A, 760. Miller v. Board of Public Works of City of Los Angeles (1925) 195 Cal. 477, 484–485 [234 P. 381, 383]