|
"Does FDA Have (Lawful) Jurisdiction Over Intrastate Commerce?"
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 (HR 2749)
Date: 7/22/2009 6:04:16 PM ( 15 y ) ... viewed 4073 times Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 (HR 2749)
From:
http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/news/news-HR2749-FAQ.htm
Note: Answers are based on the June 17 Waxman version voted out of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Q1: Does FDA have jurisdiction over intrastate commerce?
A1: As a federal agency, the FDA has jurisdiction over interstate commerce. For example, the prohibited acts regarding adulteration and misbranding in the current Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) all refer to interstate commerce. However, the existing law states that “in any action to enforce the requirements of [FFDCA] . . . the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction in such action shall be presumed to exist.” [1a] Combined with court decisions addressing the connection between intrastate and interstate commerce, it is unclear what kind of showing defendants would have to make to rebut the presumption and avoid federal regulation. The agency’s regulatory power is limited to commerce, however, so non-commercial activities (such as growing your own vegetables for personal consumption) are not regulated.
Under current law, a business qualifying as a “food facility” must register with FDA, even if that business only engages in intrastate commerce. [1b] In addition, the agency can inspect the records of a business that engages solely in intrastate commerce if there is a “reasonable belief that an article of food is adulterated and presents a threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals.” [1c]
* [1a] 21 USC 379(a)
* [1b] 21 USC 350(d)
* [1c] 21 USC 350(c)
End of quote ---------------------------
This is the critical point: "the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction in such action shall be presumed to exist". The easiest remedy is to remove this provision from the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The alternative is to fully inform every American adult so that when they are jurors (in cases against the farmers who are only involved in intrastate commerce) they can properly judge the law as fundamentally offensive to the Constitutional limits of federal jurisdiction and find the farmers not guilty!
November 19, 2014 -
"Interstate commerce means trade, traffic, or transportation in the United States":
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/390.5
There is a penetraing truth here that is actually hidden in plain sight.
This is a perfect example of why it is crucial to clear all the terms in governmental regulations and any other legal verbage! Jurisdiction is defined with the written word and encoded in terms and phrases. The term/phrase: "United States" is one of these terms/phrases with defined jurisdictional limits encoded in it. In fact it may be considered the mother of all the "codes" as they exist throughout the United States of Amercia (another phrase that is distinctly different from that of "the United States". For more information see my other "Truth" blogs regarding federal jurisdiction.
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites! Print this page
Email this page
 Alert Webmaster
|
