New York State Assembly Bill 99

May 8, 2020

A proposed NYS law, currently in committee would allow the state to detain people deemed to have a commutable disease and are thus a danger to public health.

As of the day of this post, May 7, 2020 the bill is available to read here on the New York State senate website.

In this post I will review and comment on each section of the bill

Section 1: Removal and Detention

This bills allows the state to remove and detain people who “are or may be a danger to public health.” This provision can only be enforced if the governor declares a state of emergency.

Comments

I see no difference between the words “Remove,” “Detain,” and arrest. Using the states monopoly on violence to lock people up in cages against their will is arresting them.

Furthermore, there are no limits on the states power given. All the governor has to do is declare a “State of Emergency.” Nothing more is said. Is a season flu a state of emergency? A cold? A strep infection?

Section 2: Detention of Individuals and Groups

This section repeats much of the first, but with more detail of who may order the medical arrest (my phrase) of people. A single sentence in this section dramatically changes how this law may be used. This is not just about individuals.

Comments

The bill states: “individuals or group being detained.” So what is a group? A group of sick people? A group of people who due to religious, scientific or moral objections have not undergone a vaccination? The bill does not given any elaboration. All the state has to say is that people in a group may be a danger due to a communicable disease, and the can all be detained by the state.

Section 3: Length and Manner of Detention

The governor can decide how long and in what manner detainment can be for.

Comments

Detainment can last indefinitely. Conditions of detainment can be whatever the governor chooses. So, what if someone is detained because they do not wish to have a vaccine? Can the state detain them for life or until vaccine is given. What if the state claims someone has an infection and since it can not be cured, they must be locked up. Imagine what the state could have done with bill during the HIV/Aids crisis of the 1980s!

Section 4: When will a person be released

This section sets guidelines for when detainees shall be released. Conditions include:

State determines someone is no longer contagious
State determines that a person has not been exposed to such disease, or if infected, will no longer be contagious.
Person what detained only as a contact with an infected person, and is found to not be infected.

Comments

Lets take for example the recent measles scare in New York. Ignoring the argument over how valid the measles vaccine is, governor Cuomo has police roaming the streets of certain neighborhoods, issuing fines for people found to be vaccinated. Now the state can come in and detain people.

Any infection in a community or group, and the governor can have detained anyone in it. All the state has to do is declare a state of emergence. The criteria for what is a state of emergency is also up to the whim of the state. There are no checks on state power.

Section 5: Treatment of those detained

Anyone medically detained shall have his medical needs addressed. Isolation and infection control principles will be implemented.

Comments

So who shall determine how his/her medical needs are addressed. The individual with a self chosen health care team or the state.

What is just as concerning is the power of state to hold detainees in essentially solitary confinement, for as long as deemed medically necessary. What if family, lawyers are a private physician who wish to challenge the state’s detainment wishes to see them. Can the state say it is not safe and bar visitors?

This spring in response to Covid-19, hospitals have not allowed family to visit their relatives. This leaves patients without advocates.

Section 6 and 7: Court hearings

After 3 business days, detainees have a right to be heard. Detention can not last more than 5 days without a court order. For each 90 day interval after, the state needs to go back to the courts to continue the detention.

Comments

While it is good to see some limits placed on state power, these provisions are weak. If the state claims someone in a public danger, then they can be essentially be held indefinitely. All the state needs to do is renew the detention every 90 days with a judge

Sections 8 – 11

This sections deal with what information is to be given to detainees, translators and right to notify people on the outside about their detention.

Section 12: additional state powers

This section give the governor and state even more broad powers to do the following:

“the governor 11 or his or her delegate may, in his or her discretion, issue and seek enforcement of any other orders that he or she determines are necessary or appropriate to prevent dissemination or transmission of contagious diseases or other illnesses that may pose a threat to the public health”.
Power to quarantine people in locations outside of state detention.
State has the power to require medical testing on individuals.
Individuals may be required to be vaccinated.

Comments:

Up to this point the bill was limited to only contagious disease. Once sentence at the end extends power to any other illness, for which the state wishes to detain people over.

House arrest and group quarantines. If it’s is not practical for the state to detain you in a facility, they can simply tell you to stay home.

This is a mandatory vaccination bill. All the state needs to do is claim it’s not safe for you to skip a vaccine. At this point they can hold you indefinitely, as long as the courts agree to extend detention every 90 days.

Section 13: Final limit on state power

“The provisions of this section shall not be construed to require the forcible administration of any medication without a prior court order.”

Comments

This is not a check on state power. The governor and state will clearly be able to get the courts to comply with any powers used in this bill.

Final comments on the dangers of excessive state power

Nuremberg Codes

After world war two, in response to Nazi atrocities the Nuremberg Codes where produced as ethical guidelines for research and medical experimentation. We currently have numerous examples of the state forcing medical experimentation on the public. Vaccines do not undergo testing against inert placebo. Nor long term trials. Instead of long, rigorous safety trials that are unleashed onto the public, and then screened for adverse effects. All vaccines are thus medical experiments on the public. The current coronavirus lockdown, with all it’s economic destruction does not constitute prove public health measures. It is thus another medical experiment; what will take more lives, the virus or economic destruction?

With this in mind I think it is very reasonable to judge New York State Assembly Bill 99 against the Nuremberg Codes. We see many violations

Voluntary consent is essential. The whole purpose of this bill is to allow the state to force medical procedures on people and whole groups without consent.
The results of any experiment must be for the greater good of society. By putting such power in hands of the state, there is no guarantee if medical procedures are to benefit society, the state, or corporations who may benefit.
We can see in the current rush to created a coronavirus vaccines, typical guidelines of first experimenting on animals is being bypassed. (3) This bill will give the state power to force medical procedures on people according to it’s standards. What checks are there on improper testing when individuals can not opt out.
Risks should never exceed the benefits. As of writing this we are in the middle of the coronavirus lockdown. Since none of the public health benefits (socials distancing, mask wearing, home quarantine, closing business’s, canceling “non-essential” medical procedures) have been proven to be of benefit in current context, this is a giant medical experiment. The actual public health cost will be huge.There is no way to know exactly how many people will die from the lockdown. But it undeniable that the poverty inflicted on the people from the state (not the virus) will kill many. The following comes from the April 28th edition of Trends Journal:

2011 study by Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health concluded that poverty, combined with other associated categories, such as income inequality and low levels of education, caused 874,000 U.S. deaths in the year 2000.Since 33.3 million Americans lived in poverty in that year, those 874,000 deaths amounted to a 2.62 percent mortality rate among the impoverished.

If we apply this 2.62 percent mortality rate to the 21 million Americans soon to be impoverished as a result of the shutdowns, that comes to 550,200 who are likely to die in just the first year alone!

So we can see in the case of coronavirus lockdown, the state conducting a massive medical experiment on the population that will almost surely kill many more people than it saves. How much power should be state be given to force medical experiments on the population?
Experiments should be conducted only by qualified scientists. The governor, nor state health officials are not qualified to order detention of people and force medical procedures on them. This bill takes such decisions away from individuals and their own health care team and hands it over to the state. Court procedure are weak protection against state abuse compared to not giving the state such power to begin with.

State power and government trust

Giving the state having this power to protect citizens may sound reassuring. However, it comes with a problem. Do you trust the state with this power?

Even if you think the current governor should be able to do this, what about the next, or the one after that? Even if you are for mandatory vaccinations, what if a new treatment comes out with potential dangers? Should the state automatically have the power for force it on people?

New York State Assembly Bill 99 may potentially protect the public against a disease. But it is also a blueprint for medical tyranny. What worries you more, the fear of contagious or unchecked state power?