Will we ever get away from a government of, for and by the CORPORATION? In Hawaii, three island counties are appealing to have their laws appealed.
Observers packed a federal courtroom in downtown Honolulu last week to watch attorney for several of the world’s agricultural giants, otherwise known as the Biotech Industry, and opponents of genetically engineered farming, otherwise known as normal, intelligent, health conscious people, battle over three county laws that target GMO crops and deadly pesticide use.
Three bought and paid for judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals heard oral arguments from both sides of the debate for about three hours, while both supporters and opponents of the county laws watched intensely from seats in the courtroom set up with television monitors for the overflow.
The biotech pimps, including Syngenta and Monsatan, and multiple local groups from the University of Hawaii and bought and paid for farmers, sued the neighbor island counties over passage of the laws enabling the counties to have GMOs labeled and farming banned near schools and homes where the wind pollutes them by inundating them with the pesticides, winning all three of cases in federal court in Honolulu.
The counties, environmental groups, and GMO opponents are asking the 9th Circuit to overturn the decisions and support what the voters wanted.
In 2013, the Kauai County Council passed a law that could lead to stiff fines for employees of the large agricultural companies if they don’t divulge information about pesticide use, abide by setback rules for spraying pesticides, or disclose specifics about genetically engineered crops.
Shortly thereafter, the Hawaii island Mayor signed a bill into law prohibiting the biotech companies from operating on the island and banning farmers from growing any new genetically altered crops. The law exempted the island’s GMO papaya industry.
In 2014, Maui County voters approved a ballot initiative that prohibited testing and cultivation of genetically altered crops until an environmental and public health study is conducted that finds the agricultural practices safe.
While the laws differ, the fundamental legal issue pervading all three of the court cases in whether the counties (the people) overstepped their bounds and preempted state and federal authority to regulate deadly agricultural crops and pesticides.
A parade of top Honolulu and mainland attorneys focused on that issue for most of their orl arguments. Each party was allowed 15 minutes to make its case, which was often extended as the hooker judges peppered them with questions and poked holes in their arguments.
Paul Achitoff, an attorney for Earthjustice an environmental law firm in Honolulu representing various parties in the court cases and one of the good guys, has been an early and strong supporter of the county laws restricting the GMO industry and pesticides.
He consistently argued that the counties have power to oversee agriculture and pesticides as long as rules and restrictions do not conflict with state regulations.
First of all, there is no state policy or law or regulation that gives anybody a right to grow whatever they want, wherever they want. There is no such right and no such state policy. It is correct that the state Department of Agriculture has the authority to designate or restrict harmful plants. The question is, is that authority exclusive? It’s a given that the Department of Agriculture has broad authority, but broad authority isn’t the same as exclusive authority.
The attorneys for parties supporting the county laws also argued that federal and state agencies had failed to adequately regulate GMO crops and pesticides, necessitating the counties to exercise their power to protect public health.
But, the hooker attorneys argued that the counties (the people) don’t have the authority to regulate genetically engineered crops or pesticides because that has to stay in the hands of the federal and state agencies (that benefit from kickbacks).
The big question is do the people have rights or are those rights preempted by the government if they go against the companies giving “benefits”.
In Hawaii, the government is centralized. There are no townships and no towns. It’s a state government which covers everything and has four counties. There is no evidence that the corrupt state politicians have delegated any regulatory authority to the counties. If they did, their kickbacks would be heavily scrutinized. And, God forbid that should happen.
The federal hookers will render rulings in each of the three cases in roughly three to nine months.
Anyone wanna take a guess on what it’ll be?
In God we trust. All others pay cash!
Aloha!
Three bought and paid for judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals heard oral arguments from both sides of the debate for about three hours, while both supporters and opponents of the county laws watched intensely from seats in the courtroom set up with television monitors for the overflow.
The biotech pimps, including Syngenta and Monsatan, and multiple local groups from the University of Hawaii and bought and paid for farmers, sued the neighbor island counties over passage of the laws enabling the counties to have GMOs labeled and farming banned near schools and homes where the wind pollutes them by inundating them with the pesticides, winning all three of cases in federal court in Honolulu.
The counties, environmental groups, and GMO opponents are asking the 9th Circuit to overturn the decisions and support what the voters wanted.
In 2013, the Kauai County Council passed a law that could lead to stiff fines for employees of the large agricultural companies if they don’t divulge information about pesticide use, abide by setback rules for spraying pesticides, or disclose specifics about genetically engineered crops.
Shortly thereafter, the Hawaii island Mayor signed a bill into law prohibiting the biotech companies from operating on the island and banning farmers from growing any new genetically altered crops. The law exempted the island’s GMO papaya industry.
In 2014, Maui County voters approved a ballot initiative that prohibited testing and cultivation of genetically altered crops until an environmental and public health study is conducted that finds the agricultural practices safe.
While the laws differ, the fundamental legal issue pervading all three of the court cases in whether the counties (the people) overstepped their bounds and preempted state and federal authority to regulate deadly agricultural crops and pesticides.
A parade of top Honolulu and mainland attorneys focused on that issue for most of their orl arguments. Each party was allowed 15 minutes to make its case, which was often extended as the hooker judges peppered them with questions and poked holes in their arguments.
Paul Achitoff, an attorney for Earthjustice an environmental law firm in Honolulu representing various parties in the court cases and one of the good guys, has been an early and strong supporter of the county laws restricting the GMO industry and pesticides.
He consistently argued that the counties have power to oversee agriculture and pesticides as long as rules and restrictions do not conflict with state regulations.
First of all, there is no state policy or law or regulation that gives anybody a right to grow whatever they want, wherever they want. There is no such right and no such state policy. It is correct that the state Department of Agriculture has the authority to designate or restrict harmful plants. The question is, is that authority exclusive? It’s a given that the Department of Agriculture has broad authority, but broad authority isn’t the same as exclusive authority.
The attorneys for parties supporting the county laws also argued that federal and state agencies had failed to adequately regulate GMO crops and pesticides, necessitating the counties to exercise their power to protect public health.
But, the hooker attorneys argued that the counties (the people) don’t have the authority to regulate genetically engineered crops or pesticides because that has to stay in the hands of the federal and state agencies (that benefit from kickbacks).
The big question is do the people have rights or are those rights preempted by the government if they go against the companies giving “benefits”.
In Hawaii, the government is centralized. There are no townships and no towns. It’s a state government which covers everything and has four counties. There is no evidence that the corrupt state politicians have delegated any regulatory authority to the counties. If they did, their kickbacks would be heavily scrutinized. And, God forbid that should happen.
The federal hookers will render rulings in each of the three cases in roughly three to nine months.
Anyone wanna take a guess on what it’ll be?
In God we trust. All others pay cash!
Aloha!
RSS Feed