The Biden Administration is Sued for Handing U.S. ‘Sovereignty’ Over to the World Health Organization
The Biden administration is poised to sign onto an international commitment to cede leadership of its pandemic response to the World Health Organization, according to new reports on Monday.
In an article published on Monday entitled “Why the U.S. Should Oppose the New Draft WHO Pandemic Treaty,” The Heritage Foundation discussed the “zero draft” of the deal.
The “zero draft” of that agreement, called WHO CA+, was released on February 1, 2023.
“Despite its failure during COVID-19 and complicity in China’s cover-up, the World Health Organization (WHO) has drafted a new global pandemic treaty,” the report noted. “The draft treaty focuses on expanding WHO power, trampling intellectual property rights, and ‘equitably’ redistributing knowledge, technology, and other resources.
“It has been misreported that the WHO CA+ draft would give the WHO authority over U.S. domestic pandemic policies,” the authors claim. As the draft states:
States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedess, response and recovery of health systems, pursuant to their own policies and legislation, provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries. (World Health Organization, “Zero Draft of the WHO CA+,” pp. 10 and 11.)
Nonetheless, the draft treaty is “deeply flawed” and, as currently drafted, should be rejected by the Biden Administration, the authors argued.
The WHO’s international draft treaty contains sections that directly clash with the U.S. Constitution. The treaty calls on the parties to “tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation.” This is a flagrant violation of free speech.
As has been shown to be true repeatedly throughout the Covid pandemic response, public health officials were consistently wrong on issues ranging from the effectiveness of masks to the baseless argument that Covid vaccines stop transmission. Even if the experts were right, it is a violation of Americans’ citizens rights for the government to suppress or censor speech.
The U.S. Senate’s approval of the treaty would be forbidden to contain provisions, called reservations. The draft WHO CA+ prohibits such reservations.
The WHO-CA+ treaty also contains passages on “equity” that would arguably be found unconstitutional on the basis that they violate equal protection.
In 2021, the leaders of 23 countries and the World Health Organization “backed an idea to create an international treaty that would help the world deal with future health emergencies like the coronavirus pandemic now ravaging the globe.”
“The idea of such a treaty, which would ensure universal and equitable access to vaccines, medicines and diagnostics for pandemics, was floated by the chairman of European Union leaders Charles Michel at a G20 summit last November,” the World Economic Forum noted.
The treaty got the formal backing of the leaders of Fiji, Portugal, Romania, Britain, Rwanda, Kenya, France, Germany, Greece, Korea, Chile, Costa Rica, Albania, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, the Netherlands, Tunisia, Senegal, Spain, Norway, Serbia, Indonesia, Ukraine and the WHO.
“There will be other pandemics and other major health emergencies. No single government or multilateral agency can address this threat alone,” the leaders wrote in a joint opinion article in major newspapers.
“We believe that nations should work together towards a new international treaty for pandemic preparedness and response,” they said.
The treaty would also state that “the health of humans, animals and the planet are all connected and should lead to shared responsibility, transparency and cooperation globally.”
“We are convinced that it is our responsibility, as leaders of nations and international institutions, to ensure that the world learns the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic,” the leaders wrote.
HHS’ definitions for the Biden administration’s public health declaration come directly from the WHO, the complaint asserts.
“The Biden administration is in the process of finalizing a deal that would give the WHO near-total authority to dictate America’s policies during a pandemic,” The Epoch Times earlier reported. “This includes vaccine policies, lockdown policies, school closure policies, the contact tracing of U.S. citizens, and even the monitoring of online speech if that speech goes against the official narrative.”
The Biden administration is thus being sued over a public health rule they argue illegally gives power to the World Health Organization (WHO).
As the legal complaint states, “The Department’s definition of ‘public health emergency’ in 42 C.F.R. § 70.1 exceeds the agency’s authority, as it unlawfully delegates to the World Health Organization (WHO) the authority to invoke emergency health powers in the United States—infringing on U.S. and state sovereignty.”
“The Plaintiffs oppose the unlawful regulation because it encroaches on their reserved powers, authority, and sovereignty,” the complaint added.
In a February Fact Sheet, the Biden administration expressed its commitment to “global health.” One of its commitments was “supporting and strengthening the WHO.”
- Supporting and strengthening the WHO. Among his first acts in office one year ago, President Biden declared the United States would reengage with the World Health Organization (WHO), highlighting our nation’s commitment to advancing multilateral cooperation in a time of international health crisis. Last week, the United States once again demonstrated that commitment, by leading a successful decision at the WHO Executive Board meeting to strengthen the International Health Regulations (2005). This strengthening will enhance the world’s ability to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to infectious disease outbreaks in the future. Beyond COVID-19, the United States is collaborating with global partners through WHO on a wide range of global health challenges such as childhood immunization, nutrition, polio eradication, strengthening the global health workforce to achieve universal health coverage, and tackling the threat that climate change poses to health. These and other issues remain critical priorities, especially in the wake of COVID-19, and demonstrate the importance of strong, equitable health systems that serve those most at risk.
The states of Texas and Oklahoma accuse the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of “unlawfully” delegating the authority to declare a public health emergency in the U.S. to the WHO, according to a copy of the complaint. The plaintiffs assert that a 2017 rule relinquishes HHS authority to the WHO to determine when there’s a public health emergency involving a communicable disease in the U.S.
HHS’ definitions for the declaration come directly from the WHO, the complaint asserts.
“The Department’s definition of ‘public health emergency’ … exceeds the agency’s authority, as it unlawfully delegates to the World Health Organization (WHO) the authority to invoke emergency health powers in the United States — infringing on U.S. and state sovereignty,” the complaint says.
The states petitioned in July for a repeal of the rule, a move the Biden administration denied, according to the complaint. Now, they’re seeking court intervention to declare the rule “unlawful” for depending on the authority of a foreign body.
America First Legal, which was founded by former Trump administration officials, is representing Texas in a lawsuit, which was filed in a Texas district court.
“The last several years have been a horrifying tutorial of how U.S. global elites working in concert are prepared to use the pretext of a healthcare emergency to impose draconian and totalitarian controls over the lives of our people – that is what this historic lawsuit is all about,” former Trump administration adviser and current president of American First Legal Stephen Miller said in a statement to the DCNF.
The Biden administration has extended the nation’s public health emergency over Covid-19 until May, despite the former president saying in September that Covid was “over.” The national emergency declaration has been in place since January 2020.
The WHO has faced scrutiny in recent years due to its alleged reliance on China, which led former President Trump to pull U.S. funding from the global health organization. During a 2021 congressional hearing, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said there were “indications” of Chinese influence on the WHO.
“We are proud and honored to represent the great State of Texas and to work with courageous patriot Attorney General Ken Paxton in filing this lawsuit against Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services for unlawfully relinquishing America’s national sovereignty to the World Health Organization–empowering corrupt foreign governments and bureaucrats to make life and death decisions about our society, our economy, our families, and our most essential freedoms,” Miller said.
The U.S. Constitution’s Article II, Section 2 clause states the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.”
Treaties to which the United States is a party also have the force of federal legislation, forming part of what the Constitution calls ”the supreme Law of the Land.”
“The Senate does not ratify treaties. Following consideration by the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Senate either approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the United States and the foreign power,” the U.S. Senate notes.
All treaties or international agreements must comport with the U.S. Constitution or they are non-binding, null, and void.
There are a number of Senate bills that would ensure that the United States government represents American voters and not unelected bureaucrats at international organizations. There is “HR 419: No Taxpayer Funding for the WHO Act” by Texas congressman Chip Roy. There is “HR 79: WHO Withdrawal Act” by Arizona congressman Andy Biggs. And there is “S 4343, No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty without Senate Approval Act” by Senator Ron Johnson.
(Voters who would like to call their House members can find their numbers here, while those would would like to call their Senators can find those numbers here.)
Even After WSJ’s ‘Lab Leak’ Report, White House Sticks to Covid Narrative Pushed by China
“*” indicates required fields
OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.