12 votes

Maine Superior Court Justice Rules Against Blue Hill Self-Governance Ordinance & Raw Milk Farmer

“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.” -Thomas Jefferson

Hancock Superior Court Justice Ann Murray and the Maine Department of Agriculture executed a serious blow to a Maine raw milk farmer, Dan Brown, and the Blue Hill Local Community and Self-governance Ordinance.

The superior court ruling convicted Maine farmer Dan Brown of:

Selling food without a license
Selling food without a distributors licence
Selling unpasteurized milk without proper labeling
This ruling effectively vetoed the Blue Hill Town Ordinance, a declaration of food sovereignty which has also been passed by 7 other local Maine towns. The self-governance ordinance begins:

“We the People of the Town of Blue Hill, Hancock County, Maine have the right to produce, process, sell, purchase and consume local foods thus promoting self-reliance, the preservation of family farms, and local food traditions”

This food freedom ordinance is one that issues that respective towns in Maine and their farmers have the Right to be exempt from licensing and inspections as long as they are selling directly to consumers for home consumption.

The impression I get is that these towns and their people, which have passed the ordinance, are effectively declaring the Right to choose what goes in their bodies, and what doesn’t. These people are declaring that their health is their health, and that the right to dictate what food and substances someone puts in their body was not one expressly given to the Federal Government under the Constitution.

But why allow the public to choose a product based on its efficiency for them? It’s much easier to pass laws based on safety or something similar and illegalize the products deemed harmful by the Government.


LINK: http://livingnotsurviving.com/2013/05/11/superior-court-just...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Who does the executive branch

Who does the executive branch of govt side with on this issue?

Basically, have you brought this up to the mayor? Town Councilmen? Blue Hill Township's Police chief? And county sheriff?

If they're all with you then there's no one to enforce the unconstitutional court ruling. If that's the case, then I wonder if you can just ignore the court ruling.

Didn't LaPage back Ron Paul?

And yet he appointed Walter Whitcomb who is the Commissioner of the Dept who went after Dan Brown.
So either LaPage has no idea what Whitcomb is up to, or he agrees with what Whitcomb has done - and neither of those options make him look like the kind of governor anyone would want for their state.
Maybe he's the person who needs to be contacted.
I have really, really had it with these injustice cabals. The judge should have thrown the case out as it is direct violation of Maine's Constitution.
Article I.
Declaration of Rights.
Section 1. Natural rights. All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.
Section 2. Power inherent in people. All power is inherent in the people; all free governments are founded in their authority and instituted for their benefit; they have therefore an unalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and to alter, reform, or totally change the same, when their safety and happiness require it.

Time to get rid of the black robes who support out-of-control bureaucratic depts which usurp the liberties of the people by deciding for us what we must do and how we must behave. Know your state constitutions.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison


he did way back during his campaign. And I once thought he did too BUT I have not thought so for a long time. Apparently it was a rumor.

His actions say otherwise. I have not supported him for a long time and will not.

His position on the 2nd amendment in Maine was commendable but that is all that I can see
that I can stand behind.

Ron Paul is My President

Re Maine/raw milk+ there is also the issue of contracts

between two adults. I recall that being raised in one of the previous articles on this issue. It would be not unlike in divorce. Once there is a divorce/settlement agreement in effect, e.g., re child support or custody/visitation, both parties must abide by the terms of the agreement EXCEPT BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT.

So let's say the parents decide that things would be better in reverse: instead of mom having custody (children live with her) and dad has visitation rights, they decide that the children will live with the dad, and mom will have visitation rights. They *have* the right to do that PROVIDED they are in mutual agreement. [I'm not talking about some extenuating circumstance with court-ordered supervised visitation, but just a standard case where parenting capability is not at issue, merely acknowledging that children can't be in two places at once!] The parents can make their own agreement about how it would work; but should there then be some problem, they wouldn't have the right to go to Family Court to have "their" arrangement enforced. BUT, if there *was* no longer mutual agreement, then (from there) terms automatically revert back to the court-sanctioned original.

It's not exactly the same, and a lawyer can weigh in, but it's my understanding that similarly, BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT, with some signed contract waiving certain responsibilities or expectations, you and I agree that I will buy raw milk from you. If everything goes well, that's great. But (not that I'm aware this has ever happened), IF I got sick drinking your milk, I couldn't then go to court and sue you on the grounds that, for instance, there was a law that all milk needed to be pasteurized. Unless you had broken the terms of our contract, I'd have no legal grievance.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Paraphrase not direct quote

Actual quote from his book Notes on the State of Virginia:

Had not free enquiry been indulged, at the aera of the reformation, the corruptions of Christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged. Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potatoe as an article of food.

emedic = medicine to cause vomiting.

Since at least 1997 the statement "Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now" has been misquoted in paraphrased form as "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny".

Thanks for posting

I live in Maine and this is an outrage.

A lot of people have been involved in this issue to help Dan Brown. This is just SO wrong.

Ron Paul is My President

A tragedy to any Rights-aware

A tragedy to any Rights-aware person, please leave a link for any direct assistance sources if you have any, difficult to find.

Living Not Surviving