Here’s a question for millions of Americans glued to CNN and living in mortal terror.

At WHAT point do you want to go back out? What would it take to convince you to go to a movie, or to the grocery store without a gas mask, or to take a walk on the beach? Or go to a retail store? Or let your children go back to school, or see their friends? Forget the government here. When are you WILLING to do any of these things?

You are unwilling to do any of these things right now because physicians you consider to be in a place of authority told you it would kill you, as well as kill other people. At first they said stay inside for several weeks. Then several months. Now these same authorities are saying it will be longer than that — how long is not known. Certainly through the summer and maybe into the fall school year. Bill Gates says 10 more months, at least. Obamacare’s architect, a top aide to Barack Obama when he was President, says it will be years.

THESE are the people you chose to believe when you opted to give up living for a couple of months. Will you continue to believe them beyond that time? Or maybe even forever? If not — if you actually find this indefinite state of house arrest intolerable — then what objective criteria do you plan to use, in place of these people you have considered undisputed authorities, up to now? How will you know it’s time to go back outdoors?

And what about the next virus? How will you know it’s safe to go out when there could be another virus looming? Even when (and if) a vaccine exists for this virus — something that will take years, at best?

Our freedom and Bill of Rights do us no good if millions of people remain too petrified and paralyzed to embrace them. THAT’S the biggest issue.—Michael J. Hurd

JERUSALEM—Roman authorities are investigating controversial religious leader Jesus of Nazareth for violating the Empire’s clear “stay in tomb” order. After crucifying him and laying him in the tomb, Roman guards put Him under strict orders to stay there and not come back, rising victorious over sin and death.

But Jesus, answering to a higher authority, refused to stay dead and busted out of the tomb, establishing a kingdom that would never end — again, in clear violation of the government’s orders.

“Jesus is a dangerous rebel, refusing to bend the knee to Caesar and not abiding by the law of sin and death,” said one Roman official. “He clearly broke the law by leaving the tomb, and we’re going to be issuing a citation and placing him under mandatory quarantine for these crimes.”

After coming into contact with many large groups over the course of approximately 40 days, Jesus ascended into heaven and is currently thought to be reigning on high.

Authorities are also investigating Him for planning to gather with a large multitude of every tribe, tongue, and nation. He says he currently has no plans to obey any earthly king on the matter, pressing ahead with the gathering of those who believe He died and rose again and trust Him alone for their salvation.

Leading criminal and civil rights attorney and author Joseph Tully addresses the Government’s scope and authority to quarantine, isolate, restrict, and control during the COVID-19 outbreak, or any other crisis.

There is no doubt that COVID-19 is a deadly virus that is destroying thousands of American lives. Please protect yourself, your family, and the vulnerable from infection and transmission. At the same time: know your rights. Protect the rights of all while protecting those same rights for yourself, your family, and the vulnerable.

We are open to help you, even if the Courts are not. The latest court announcements and closures are updated here on the CA Courts site.

That said, there is a worse virus than COVID-19 that is destroying millions of American lives, livelihoods, and jeopardizing their Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness. The virus of authoritarianism, is used under the cover of crisis and safety, to come after your rights. There is much confusion about what Government officials can and cannot do during this time. The defense team at Tully-Weiss.com is working every day to protect your rights and defend your Liberty.

As I wrote in my book California: State of Collusion, it is not above psychopaths lurking in power to jump on a crisis to assert their authority over the innocent. In fact, it is their nature; “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Among the good police, prosecutors, judges, and politicians working for us, are the bad; self-serving sociopaths that will enhance their careers and pad their pockets by violating your rights. The best way to support our communities, and the many good public servants out there, is to vigilantly defend the rights of everyone.

More insidious than the few bad actors are the majority that act against Liberty for the “common good”. As we see below, C.S. Lewis warned against omnipotent moral busybodies.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” ~ C.S. Lewis

Flatten the Curve! Observe Social Distancing! Go Back Inside!
These are the calls of people enforcing their moral high-ground for the common good. Making demands without regard to evidence, data, or a complete understanding of the situation. These are the people that call the cops on a family playing in their front yard, or co-habitating joggers taking a run, during the current lock down.

Our office has had many calls about the legality of quarantines, martial law, shelter-in-place, and other safety edicts announced in City Halls, Sacramento, and DC. I’d like to address some of those questions and help us understand our rights and the limitations on Government.

First of all: Be Safe. Protect the vulnerable and avoid spreading the virus. Our office is working remotely as much as possible and taking protective measures when we venture out to visit clients. The criminal justice process is hampered by closed courts and delayed hearings, but it must continue for all. With the social and commercial restriction in place, many types of arrests have decreased; but these new conditions will eventually lead to an uptick of quarantine related arrests like domestic violence, illegal gatherings, and non-essential travel. It is curious that attorneys are only listed as “essential workers” by many State and Federal restrictions in the context of supporting other essential workers and businesses.

Second of all: don’t talk to cops. If a law enforcement officer questions you, be respectful, polite, and safe, but don’t feel the need to explain anything to the police if they are questioning you about something which they believe to be an illegal activity. Anything you say that’s bad can and will be used against you in court and if you say something good, the prosecutor and judge will keep it out of court. Anything that’s neutral will be twisted into something bad and used against you. There is no point arguing with police about Liberty, the Bill of Rights, or how “essential” your activity is during lock down.

The fundamental rules have not changed:

Reasonable Suspicion – to be stopped and questioned
Probable Cause – to be arrested
Innocent until proven guilty – at trial
by the government
beyond a reasonable doubt
During an emergency, local authorities may assume too much power, and wield it injudiciously. There may be a plethora of Constitutional and civil rights violations by governments and government agents during this time. You may be on the receiving end of one, but don’t argue with cops. Cops are not paid to interpret laws and are not paid to argue. Remember that you are more likely to contract COVID-19 in police custody than at home. So be respectful, polite, and wish them safety and health and hopefully get on with your day.

Quarantine is a neutral word. Self-isolation can be voluntary, or it can be enforced by law. Many of us should self-isolate to protect the vulnerable. When people in power mandate isolation, things get dicey. Laws and the Constitution can protect our rights over the long term, should we as Americans decide to exercise them. However, in the short term, expect some areas to react with an iron fist (that is also wearing a protective medical glove).

FEDERAL
https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantineisolation.html

Note the CDC highlights the laws and precedents that define what the Government may do, but they neglect to discuss what they cannot do under the law.

For the sake of argument, and since parts of the law are sufficiently vague and left to Executive Order, assume that the Government assumes they can do almost anything they want in a time crisis. Note that Federal powers are limited to International and inter-state commerce, so local travel is not covered by Federal mandates, though the State and Local mandates may be even stricter. Federal Regulations say that an individual travelling State to State can be stopped and inspected if they are reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease and may be detained as reasonably necessary. Any regional travel or commerce restrictions in your town are levied by your Governor or local officials.

42 U.S.C.
United States Code, 2011 Edition
Title 42 – THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
CHAPTER 6A – PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
SUBCHAPTER II – GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES
Part G – Quarantine and Inspection

The New England Journal of Medicine explores the powers of Government during this time, in their article COVID-19 – The Law and The Limits of Quarantine

Governments must have a strong basis for the restrictions. Looking to case law regarding civil commitment, many scholars and some lower courts have concluded that isolation and quarantine are constitutional only when the government can show by clear and compelling evidence that they are the least restrictive means of protecting the public’s health. However, at least two federal courts reviewing post-detention challenges to Ebola quarantines held that the standard was not sufficiently well established to allow the claims to go forward. Persons who are detained, or whose liberty is otherwise restricted, are entitled to judicial review — traditionally under the writ of habeas corpus. Finally, when governments detain people, they must meet those people’s basic needs, ensuring access to health care, medication, food, and sanitation.

STATE AND LOCAL
The real abuse of power can happen at the local level, under the guise of “community safety.” Mayors, Governors, and Sheriffs have wide discretion to enact restrictions for the benefit of public safety. Consider the point that cannabis has been legal medicine in the California since 1996, yet the majority of counties still do not have safe access due to local whims (or more nefarious motives). The same goes for smoking, firearms, and occupational licensing. Don’t blame DC when you are not allowed to hire your neighbor to cut your hair while she carries a concealed weapon. This same principle applies to the coronavirus shut down orders.

According to the Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, the landscape is fractured: 27% of states solely retain the powers, 18% of states provide some power to local governments, and the remaining 55% delegate the powers to some combination of both. Currently, six counties in the greater San Francisco Bay Area have imposed some of the Nation’s broadest ‘protection’ measures.

There will be lines crossed in the name of safety, some of those actions may be justified in the greater scheme of things but others will not be. The Constitution exists to reign in these abuses, if not prevent them in the first place. The important thing to remember is that there will be a time for proper review. If lockdown or other restrictions are unnecessarily broad, they could be struck down by judges, both local and Federal.

California law in this area is very vague and broad. The State empowers the Department of Health Services to adopt and enforce regulations that are necessary “in the opinion of the department.” There is no mention of the need for reasonable or practicable considerations by authorities, though this is the standard they will be held to eventually in court.

In California, here is a look at health and safety statutes:

Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120175-120250; § 120195-120235
Authority. Health officers should take all necessary steps to prevent the spread of a contagious disease within their jurisdiction. Officers are required to enforce quarantine of state Department of Health and cannot enforce a quarantine against another jurisdiction without state approval.

Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120275-120305
Penalties. Anyone who violates or refuses a regulation or order of quarantine is guilty of a misdemeanor. A first offense is punishable by forced compliance with quarantine up to a year and two years’ probation with a repeat offense punishable by confinement of not more than a year.

Cal. Health & Safety Code § 120175-120250 (1995)
Police Power and Limitations. In the event of the outbreak of a communicable disease, a health official may have access to all supplies necessary from health providers that can either assist in responding to the outbreak or are implicated in the outbreak. If disinfection of goods or property would be unsafe, officers may destroy items, with proper compensation to owner.

Covid Rights Concerns Venn

Our Concerns are NOT Mutually Exclusive
It is OK to be afraid of the virus. It is OK to be afraid of authoritarianism. It is OK to be afraid of economic impacts.

Many in the media and government are pushing us to “flatten the curve” at all costs. The real goal should be to save the most lives. A collapsed economy and deprivation of rights can be as deadly as any virus. As we get more data on the biology of the virus, we can make better decisions on how to contain it, while we keep the other parts of our lives healthy as well. So speak out. Ask for more testing and more data on the outbreak. Prepare for the economy to reopen. And always be aware of your rights.

Defense attorneys will defend your rights in Court. You must defend your rights (and the rights of everyone) every day. Speak up on social media, with friends, and in letters, phone calls, and emails to your politicians.

Our office is open and our attorneys are vigilantly working to keep our clients safe while defending their liberty. Reach out to us if you have a criminal legal matter you would like to discuss. We can do it by phone, video conference, or we can meet with you as safety and restrictions allow.

Criminal Defense Attorney Joseph Tully
Attorney Joseph Tully BioAuthor and Lawyer Joseph Tully has a passion for law practice rarely seen among criminal defense lawyers, and it drives his extraordinary record of positive outcomes. The firm covers California from offices in the Bay Area, Redding, and Fresno.

Mr. Tully and team outwork and out-prepare prosecutors to combat the California’s massive law enforcement and judicial advantages over an individual. This imbalance of power against the innocent is the topic of Mr. Tully’s book California: State of Collusion. Joseph Tully is a Certified Criminal Law Specialist, an elite certification awarded to less than 1% of California lawyers by the California Board of Legal Specialization.–Joseph Tully

President Trump remains our ONLY firewall, standing between us and a dictatorship. Things have reached a point that people will have to EXERT EFFORT to avoid a dictatorship. Because if the economy does not rebound — and quickly — then the excuse will be there to institute, first, a benevolent dictatorship (“let’s make the stimulus permanent, and triple the spending, and while we’re at it nationalize the Internet so service can be free, forgive student debt and make health care an immediate right for all”); and then, as dictatorships always do in the end, take away our guns and our freedom of speech. At that point — only if the economy totally collapses — then Trump — who does not want a dictatorship — will either be irrelevant or out of office. Elections will be cancelled too, once we have a Democrat in office. It doesn’t matter who it is. Biden will do fine, because he seems affable, and the DNC can pull the strings and later put in Hillary, Michelle O, Cuomo or whomever they prefer. It’s not impossible. It’s not inevitable, but it’s not impossible, either.

Look where we are at this moment. Statist Democrats and others are testing the boundaries. So far, the citizens are showing they will take ANYTHING. OK, maybe it’s just temporary to fight a virus. But Governors, mayors, government doctors, Democrats in particular, will push and if we the people don’t push back at some point, even a little, we will have sent the message that we’re too afraid or indifferent for anything other than an outright dictatorship. It’s not outlandish to speculate this way, because our economy is in dire danger, no matter how much you think social distancing has been justified. Many of the elites — such as Obama’s former aide, the architect of Obamacare — have said we must continue on as we are now — restaurants, stores, business all closed — for at least another 1-2 years. At least. He is basically calling for a dictatorship without using the word. This is Obama’s aide — not Bernie Sanders’ aide; and Obama, we’re now told, is the “moderate”.

It is incumbent upon all of us to leave the world a better place for Keith Richards and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.—The Artful Dilettante

In my years of clinical experience I’ve seen many human relationships that are not everything they could be. Marriages routinely end in chronic dissatisfaction and eventually divorce. More and more I see people treating one another poorly. I suspect that one reason for that is the idea that we all owe one other something. Not because we promised or freely agreed to something. We just owe them, simply for being alive.

Day after day, especially in times of crisis, people love to hear themselves say, “We all owe each other. We should all love our fellow man, give back and take care of one another before we take care of ourselves.” On the surface, it sounds quite virtuous to assume each of us owes mankind something. “All for one, and one for all,” right? Well … maybe not so much: Nobody ever stops to think about how dishonest, disingenuous, hypocritical – and patently impossible – that is. The simple fact is that nobody can or will practice it, short of martyrdom or suicide. It’s nothing more than virtue-signaling: “Look at me! See how compassionate I am?”

Other than having the basic concerns for other human beings, how can we actually love everyone in general? How can we love all mankind the same as we love ourselves or the individuals we cherish? And even more importantly, why should we pretend we do? We’re not supposed to discriminate, and I don’t just mean as a legal matter; I mean it psychologically as well. We’re supposed to love everybody the same. We don’t, but we’re supposed to pretend that we do. There’s the hypocrisy. And when you take that idea to heart, you start to assume that everyone owes you the same thing. It’s only fair, right? Wrong.

In the contemplatory quiet and privacy of counseling sessions, people frequently say to me, “I don’t mean to be unkind or mean, but….” They apologize for their feelings — even to a therapist — despite the fact their feelings are often grounded in reality and fact. I almost always interrupt at this point to say, “Just be honest. Always be honest with yourself. Put the truth first.” With what resources I have, I’m trying to do my part to preserve the minds and psyches of individuals against the onslaught of unearned guilt created by the false idea that we’re all supposed to love everybody. And 100 percent of the time, those counting on you to believe that poppycock are standing ever-vigilant, waiting to file a claim on your storehouse of guilt.

Rise above this scam: You’re not obliged to love anyone. Not even yourself. Of course, if you want a satisfactory life, it’s necessary to love and value yourself. As an extension of loving yourself, you will love — even cherish — significant others whom you choose to bring into your life. It makes rational sense to be open to such emotions, because the experience of loving/valuing and being loved/valued by another can be immensely rewarding, despite the built-in possibility of pain or loss.

But we’ve got to get past this childish fantasy that we’re all supposed to love everyone the same. It doesn’t even make sense on its own terms, so why foist this guilt on others, especially kids? Even in their immaturity, children with whom I have spoken don’t naturally expect everyone to love everyone the same. In fact, before their minds are poisoned by flawed “education” concocted by the government (standing first in line for your guilty handouts, by the way), children are often the most honest ones. But then they are brainwashed with these absurd fantasies, often carrying them into adulthood to perpetuate the myth, indoctrinate others and perhaps even end up, guilt-ridden, in my office.

The simple prescription for a healthy psychological life is to love yourself, and definitely love others — WHEN AND IF they earn it. Never treat your regard for others as an entitlement anyone deserves. And never treat another’s love of you as something you deserve. Being loved is not a birthright. None of us are entitled to anything, other than the right to be left alone to figure out what to do, whom to love, and how to live. I said it before in my second book, “Grow up, America,” and I’m still saying it now.

Ben Franklin on the Welfare State

Benjamin Franklin was one of the most prominent Americans of the colonial period. As a young teenager, he had run away from his home in Boston to Philadelphia with barely a few coins in his pocket, and eventually became one of the wealthiest men in America. He was a great scientist, an advocate of colonial unity, and a tireless defender of American rights against the encroachments of the British Parliament. He was also an extraordinarily charitable person, believing that, as he said in his Poor Richard’s Almanac, one should “Proportion your Charity to the Strength of your Estate, or God will proportion your Estate to the Weakness of your Charity.”[1]

From 1757-1775, Franklin spent much of his time in London serving as the agent for several colonies in their attempt to convince Parliament to repeal the taxes it had imposed on the colonies. During those years, Franklin was able to travel elsewhere in Europe, and his letters and other writings from the period are full of fascinating insights and observations.

Among the topics he spoke most forcefully about was how to properly provide for the poor.

For many centuries, England had had some sort of legal provision for the poor. The laws Franklin was likely familiar with went back to 1601, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, with several amendments over the next century or so.[2] However, there were several loopholes which allowed both local authorities, and the poor, to take advantage of the generosity of others.

These laws created what could be deemed England’s first “proto-welfare state.” They were well-intended, but Franklin was not impressed with the results.

So in 1766, Franklin wrote an editorial on this attempt of the government to “help” the poor, entitled On the Price of Corn, and Management of the Poor.[3] In it, Franklin articulated a principle he held throughout his life with respect to poverty and work:

I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

He then put his attention on Great Britain in particular:

There is no country in the world where so many provisions are established for them; so many hospitals to receive them when they are sick or lame, founded and maintained by voluntary charities; so many alms-houses for the aged of both sexes, together with a solemn general law made by the rich to subject their estates to a heavy tax for the support of the poor.

He then pointed out some uncomfortable truths about the results (regardless of the intent):

Under all these obligations, are our poor modest, humble, and thankful; and do they use their best endeavors to maintain themselves, and lighten our shoulders of this burden? On the contrary, I affirm that there is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent. The day you passed that act, you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality, and sobriety, by giving them a dependence on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health, for support in age or sickness. In short, you offered a premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder that it has had its effect in the increase of poverty.

Franklin believed that gratuitous welfare offered a powerful incentive to not work, and thus remain poor, rather than rise out of poverty. Citing the book of Exodus, Franklin asserted the importance of work to virtue, and rising out of poverty:

Repeal that law, and you will soon see a change in their [the poor’s] manners. St. Monday, and St. Tuesday, will cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labor [Ex. 20:9; 34:21], though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them.

Franklin knew there were only “Two D’s” to choose between: Dignity, or dependence. At the end of the day, hard work, and personal responsibility are the path to health, wealth, and happiness for most people. For the few who are genuinely disabled or suffer from circumstances beyond their control, provision should be made—and as a private citizen, Franklin initiated, and gave generously to, many charitable efforts.

But thinking that charity, alone, without any expectation of work or self-improvement, can help the poor, is a fool’s errand.

Few things in life corrupt as much as unearned wealth. Dignity and dependence, for the able-bodied, are inversely proportional. The more you have of one, the less you have of the other. Franklin, as a man who worked his way from absolute poverty to comfortable wealth, knew this better than anyone. He knew that work was ennobling, and that lowering the standard was nothing but “the bigotry of low expectations.” Work provides a sense of self-accomplishment, which in turn encourages the individual to raise their aspirations. Idleness transforms us into our own worst enemy; work into our own best friend. Short-circuiting this process is not charitable, but does greater damage than the problem it intends to fix.

We would do well, in an age far more comfortable than Franklin’s, to remember his timeless wisdom.We should prioritize results over intentions; Dignity over dependence.

When men abandon reason, physical force becomes their only means of dealing with one another and of settling disagreements.” (Ayn Rand, from “Atlas Shrugged”)

Leading up to coronavirus, it’s clear that many people had abandoned reason. On that point, if no other, nearly all factions could agree.

Reason enables you to handle a crisis. It allows you to consider the source of information of those telling you about the crisis; to digest the facts without acting rashly or inappropriately; to place confidence in your OWN mind, not just the minds of others, to determine what makes most sense to do.

If reason hadn’t been largely abandoned by most people, we would not be in the crisis we’re in now. The media would not be able to convince most of us to PANIC, PANIC, PANIC, FOR GOD’S SAKE PANIC!!

Coronavirus would be a concern. It would be a major stress, for sure. But we would not have placed responsibility for every last decision in the hands of a bunch of career politician Governors and a lone career bureaucrat of 50 years who happens to have an M.D. and lives in the Swamp of Washington D.C.

I’m not saying government would be irrelevant. We don’t live in a state of anarchy, and we need a government to protect basic rights. During a crisis, individual and property rights become more precious and important than ever before. We need businesses and individuals to be able to THINK and therefore FUNCTION. Instead of clamping down on business and individuals, we might have invited them to THINK, judge, make decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. We might have used government to enable them to do so, through tax and regulation vacations; instead, government came down with a heavy-handed fascist-like sledge hammer and in the span of two short weeks has managed to literally nuke our amazing world economy.

Do you feel safer? Do you feel healthier because of this? How about your mental health — even if you’re not physically sick?

Whatever the solution, it can’t be THIS. But any rational alternative starts with THINKING. If you’re unable to exercise that necessity during stress, you will tend to leave the job of reasoning to others. Big mistake!

The problem with abandoning reason is that you lose your independence. If you’re unable or unwilling to think or reason, then you’re counting on the guy or girl next door to do your reasoning for you. “I don’t know what to do. What are these other people doing?” But they’re just as paralyzed and uncertain as you are.

So, by default, you allow that one career bureaucrat doctor in D.C. and your local mayor or Governor to decide your entire fate and future for you. Everything. For all time. You never heard of that government bureaucrat doctor three weeks ago, and you never would have trusted these career politician governors to so much as babysit your child before coronavirus. And now they control everything, for the foreseeable future. THINKERS would never have let this happen, not even this far.

You never should have abandoned REASON, people. It’s still there for you to pick up and exercise now. That means taking the responsibility of judgment and [insert gasp here] being willing to experiment and take some RISKS. We no longer live in a risk-free world. WE NEVER DID. If you thought we did, and that you could get by without your reason, you made a horrible mistake.

Without a willingness to think, you’re never going to be free again. It’s literally now or never.

P.S. Now is a great time to read Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand. Your mind — and therefore your life — literally depends on it.