Judge hears jurisdictional argument in ATI v. EPA (human testing lawsuit)

Federal Judge Anthony Trenga listened to about one hour of argument today in American Tradition Institute v. EPA, our lawsuit to end ongoing illegal scientific experiments involving human beings conducted by the EPA. At the conclusion of argument, Judge Trenga took the case on advisement. Stay tuned for his decision on the jurisdictional matters in dispute.

12 thoughts on “Judge hears jurisdictional argument in ATI v. EPA (human testing lawsuit)”

  1. Good idea, but considering Gleick’s lack of prosecution despite confessing to wire fraud and identity theft in a public forum, I doubt that would go anywhere. It would be a move of desperation.

    However, should the civil courts fail us, I’m game.

  2. I wonder if a better approach would be to argue that the EPA’s tests, due to the lack of informed consent, constitute a battery (criminal). Perhaps file private citizen arrest warrants to the magistrates of the jurisdiction where the study(ies) was conducted?

  3. There is no way on earth nor hell you’d get the ‘independent’ court in the Hague to even being to consider to charge the USA. That’s reserved for the rare cases they find some single person without means. Expediency is their motto, not justice. It’s a clown court full of pompous clowns.

  4. The Hague cannot provide relief, but it could provide a public relations nightmare for EPA and Obama.

    I can see the footnote in the history books now.
    “President Obama was the first US President convicted of crimes against humanity by the World Court.” Do you think Obama can see that far into the future?

  5. The Hague is useless, and they have no power on US soil that the US government does not give them. That would be as effective as the wolf knocking on the pig’s door and politely asking if he would come out to be eaten.

    The journals have failed to act
    The Medical Boards, whose jobs include preventing such actions, have failed to act
    The Investigator General has failed to act
    The Media has failed to act
    Should the Courts fail to act, we are left with Congress alone.

    Heaven help us

  6. The problem is this: The EPA enjoys widespread immunity from the courts in effectively any case aside from “you aren’t regulating this pollutant” cases. This extends to effectively making “you don’t have authority to regulate that” cases unchallengeable (the tailoring rule decision was not based on the merits of the case. It was simply a decision that effectively no one has standing to challenge it).

    However, that produces an obviously absurd result in this case.

    I find it good that the judge is taking his time to rule in this case. A quick decision should not be made in any important case. Should the EPA lose, appeals will certainly hang on this decision more than any other.

  7. If for some inexplicable reason, the US courts cannot find reason to claim jurisdiction, will you file an action in The Hague?

  8. Ah, I get it. I wasn’t familiar with this expression and imagined a larger gap to be filled.

    So it appears, the Honorable Justice has no idea in whose jurisdiction this case is, unlike his predecessors who totally knew it was not in theirs.

    It is beginning to look very funny.

  9. Steve, it looks like you skipped a bit in this sentence: “Judge Trenga too the case on advisement”. What did the judge do?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.