January 19, 2022 a lawyer spoke to the Bonsall School Board trying to put fear into the parents and board with threats that they were violating the law and the Constitution. Tonight, I will be addressing the board.

The Bonsall School Board Meeting will be at

31505 Old River Road, Bonsall, 6:00 pm

Video https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCw_gWspYYa9yWubVTmnQpCQ

Text of my planned speech below:

I am Douglas V. Gibbs, known online as Mr. Constitution. I have been a constitutional instructor since 2008. January 19th an attorney visited this board to explain his interpretation of your legal obligations regarding the mask and vaccine mandates. I have listened to his presentation, and I have found that it is riddled with legal errors.

As citizens, rather than subjects, the government is to serve us, not the other way around.

Amendments 5 and 14 of the U.S. Constitution states, “no person may be deprived of their life, liberty or property without due process.” 

Merriam-Webster defines liberty as

1.    The state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely 

2.    The power to do or choose what you want to

The 1828 Webster’s Dictionary defines liberty as

1.    Freedom from restraint, in a general sense, and applicable to the body, or to the will or mind…A man enjoys liberty when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions.

2.    Natural Liberty consists in the power acting as one thinks fit, without any restraint or control, except from the laws of nature. It is a state of exemption from the control of others.

Liberty is the freedom to say NO. Individual liberties may not be overridden by government dictate without the proper elements of due process present. 

The lawyer on January 19 said the situation at hand is about jurisdiction. He was correct. There is no federal jurisdiction due to a lack of authority expressly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.

Louis Dembitz Brandeis [Brand-ice] (1856-1941), was appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1916. In 1890, Brandeis argued in his Harvard Law review article that a right to privacy was inherent in American law. “… To protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations [the makers of the Constitution] … conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.” Early in his career Brandeis also wrote, “The most important political office is that of the private citizen,”

The Constitution does not begin We the Lawyers, We the Judges, nor We the Politicians. The iconic words are We the People.

Ultimate jurisdiction belongs to those who voted you into office.

A governor’s executive order and the Health and Safety Code of California do not supersede any and all individual liberties at any time. Mandates are connected to no legislative process. The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 1 and the State Constitution of California, Article IV., Section 1, both state that legislative powers, which are the power to make law, modify law, and repeal law, only belong to the legislative departments of government, and that those powers are “vested” in those bodies. 

“Vested” means the powers are irrevocable and cannot be given away or transferred for any reason. Sir William Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws, explains that when “vest” is used as a legal governmental term the possession of such a legal authority is “unalienably vested.”

Therefore, mandates have no power of law because it is illegal for the legislature to give the governor or Health agencies the power to legislate.

The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God as presented by the Declaration of Independence, the Rule of Law, is connected to our God-given rights, and is self-evident. In short, just because a politician says something is lawful does not mean it is, especially when it was tyrannically put into place without proper authority in the first place and violates the rule of law.

Since mandates are not law, and since they violate the rule of law, not abiding by mandates is not a violation of the law, nor a violation of the Constitution. Adhering to unlawful mandates may place you at risk of being prosecuted for enforcing illegal mandates on the children of your school district.

Governor Newsom himself realizes mandates are not law, which is why he used the word “heed” in his speeches. To heed is “to take into consideration”, according to the dictionary.

We must also consider Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 9, § 784.29 – Informed Consent to Medical Treatment:

(c) No medical treatment may be administered to a client without informed consent except in an emergency situation as defined by Section 853 or circumstances otherwise authorized by law.

(d) The client has the right to accept or refuse the proposed treatment, and if he or she consents, has the right to revoke his or her consent for any reason at any time.

Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 9, § 853

Nothing in this article is intended to prohibit the physician from taking appropriate action in an emergency. An emergency exists when there is a sudden marked change in the patient’s condition so that action is immediately necessary for the preservation of the life or the prevention of serious bodily harm to the patient or others, and it is impracticable to first obtain consent.

Our children are not in an emergency situation as defined by Section 853. The wearing of medical devices on their faces or the proposed medical procedures that include vaccinations may be denied by their guardians, and/or parents.

As for the 1905 Jacobson v. Masschusetts case brought up by the lawyer on January 19 his information regarding the ruling was a misleading. Chief Justice John Marshall Harlan, in his majority opinion, explains that the judicial opinion provided only concerned the Massachusetts’ state constitution, not for countrywide application. 

The erroneous opinion must be reversed anyway, for it violates the Constitution. In the 2019 Gamble v. United States case in his judicial opinion Justice Clarence Thomas stated, “According to Blackstone, judges should disregard precedent that articulates a rule incorrectly when necessary “to vindicate the old [rule] from misrepresentation…a decision that is demonstrably erroneous…the Court should correct the error, regardless of whether other factors support overruling the precedent.”



Besides, what a judge provides is not law. As Justice Thomas in Gamble v. United States also indicated, “the Judiciary lacks “force” (the power to execute the law) and “will” (the power to legislate). Those powers are vested in the President and Congress, respectively.”

Daniel Webster, born January 18, 1782, died October 24, 1852) was an American lawyer and statesman who served in Congres and was U.S. Secretary of State under four Presidents. He said, “The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions”. 

He was correct.