Subject: RE EMF Another U.S. Supreme Court petition (Mitchell).
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 102700 -0500
From: Roy Beavers
To: guru
--------------------------------------------------
..........I strongly recommend the following "http" for the lawyers and
others in our group who are involved in the current round of cases....
.......guru.....(Not given full EMF-L distribution......)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: EMF: Another U.S. Supreme Court petition
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 07:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell
To: SupremeLaw@egroups.com
CC: roy@emfguru.com, dahlberg@cord.edu
See also the Federal Register Act.
The Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR")
is considered a legal supplement to the
Federal Register.
There are clear public protection
provisions in the Administrative
Procedures Act, the Federal Register
Act, and the Paperwork Reduction Act.
For a set of visual aides which were
used against the IRS in a criminal
defense, see:
http://www.supremelaw.com/cc/vroman/visaides.htm
The respective public protection provisions
are cited, and quoted, in these visual aides.
I hope this helps.
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
http://www.supremelaw.com/egroups/subscribe.htm
--- Jeff Gordon wrote:
> (This was posted to the EMF-l mail list.)
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Roy Beavers
> -----
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 19:37:08 -0500
> From: Roy Beavers
> Reply-To: roy@emfguru.com
> Subject: Another U.S. Supreme Court petition
> (Dahlberg)....
>
>
>
> .........Another Courageous Group......From
> EMF-L.......
>
> The more the merrier...... Does anybody have any
> reports of these law
> suits (or the Amicus Brief) having been given any
> attention by U.S.
> Press????........ It is shameful -- the way the
> press ignores this
> subject...... In the long march of history -- it
> just could be more
> significant than the U.S. Presidential
> election...... Think about
> that!!!....guru......
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Another U.S. Supreme Court petition
> Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:30:04 -0600
> From: "Duane A. Dahlberg"
> To: guru@emfguru.com
>
> Dear Roy:
>
> In addition to the organizations reported in
> "Citizens petition U.S.
> Supreme Court on telecommunications laws" by Libby
> Kelley, the Cellular
> Phone Taskforce on September 13, 2000 also
> petitioned the Supreme Court of
> the United States for a Writ of Certiorari. The
> questions included in this
> petition are:
>
> 1. Whether an agency other than the Environmental
> Protection Agency can be
> excused in its rulemaking from compliance with
> National Environmental
> Policy Act procedures by use of the "functional
> compliance" doctrine.
>
> 2. Whether, consistent with both the Administrative
> Procedures Act and the
> National Environmental Policy Act, an agency without
> expertise in health
> matters can engage in rulemaking without submitting
> significant
> health-related comments and evidence to the federal
> agencies concerned with
> health and safety matters, and do so on the grounds
> that, despite its lack
> of expertise, it does not believe the comments or
> evidence significant
> enough for such a submission.
>
> 3. Whether, consistent with the delegation
> provisions of the federal
> Constitution, Congress can delegate a federal agency
> the power to set
> national standards for a pervasive industry, the
> effects of whose
> operations are experienced by all, without choice,
> with entirely
> standardless delegation legislation.
>
> 4. Whether federal agency rulemaking, mandated by
> an act of Congress,
> which preempts local governmental zoning decisions
> related to health and
> safety, constitutes a "program or activity" under
> the Rehabilitation Act,
> requiring adherence to its provisions.
>
> The specific issues raised in this petition are:
>
> 1. The FCC failed to do an environmental impact
> study of its radio
> frequency exposure guidelines, issued in 1997.
>
> 2. The FCC failed to ask the federal health and
> safety agencies to
> evaluate the evidence about health submitter by the
> public.
>
> 3. Congress improperly delegated authority over our
> nation's health to the
> FCC.
>
> 4. The FCC discriminated against electrically
> sensitive people in its
> rulemaking.
>
> Arthur Firstenberg, President of the Cellular Phone
> Taskforce did much of
> the preliminary work in the development of this
> petition. The petition was
> filed by attorneys Jeanette Lebell and Richard I.
> Targow, both of
> Sebastopol, California.
>
> If anyone would like additional information or a
> copy of the petition,
> contact Arthur Firstenberg, Cellular Phone
> Taskforce, P.O. Box 1337,
> Mendocino, CA 95460. Arthur is electrically
> sensitive and cannot
> communicate by e-mail.
>
> Duane
>
> Duane A. Dahlberg, Ph.D.
> Consultant
> The Electromagnetics Research Foundation, Inc.
> 1317 6th Ave. N.
> Moorhead, MN 56560-2118
>
> 218-233-8816
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
>
> -- Jeff --
>
> "There's nothing left in the world to prove. All
> that's worth doing
> is to love one another, using whatever means are
> available to serve."
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com