Written by Austin Scott Davies

Article II Section 1 of the Illinois Constitution provides that “[t]he legislative, executive and judicial branches are separate. No branch shall exercise powers properly belonging to another. Article VI Section 1 provides that “[t]he judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court, an Appellate Court and Circuit Courts.”

With the passage of Senate Bill 1169 (SB 1169), Governor JB Pritzker and his cronies have attempted to usurp the exclusive power of the judicial branch of government.

To fully appreciate what Illinois Democrats have done here, let’s first examine the Health Care Right of Conscience Act. The legislators who passed The Health Care Right of Conscience Act (“HCRCA”) included within it a policy statement so that it would be abundantly clear to all Illinoisans what their intent was. The pertinent part reads,

The General Assembly finds and declares that people and organizations hold different beliefs about whether certain health care services are morally acceptable. It is the public policy of the State of Illinois to respect and protect the right of conscience of all persons who refuse to obtain, receive or accept, or who are engaged in, the delivery of, arrangement for, or payment of health care services and medical care whether acting individually, corporately, or in association with other persons; and to prohibit all forms of discrimination.

The HCRCA prohibits any discrimination against those refusing to receive health care services that are contrary to his or her conscience. It states as follows:

It shall be unlawful for any person, public or private institution, or public official to discriminate against any person in any manner, including but not limited to, licensing, hiring, promotion, transfer, staff appointment, hospital, managed care entity, or any other privileges, because of such person’s conscientious refusal to receive, obtain, accept, perform, assist, counsel, suggest, recommend, refer or participate in any way in any particular form of health care services contrary to his or her conscience.

Discrimination by employers or institutions is specifically prohibited again in another part of the act:

It shall be unlawful for any public or private employer, entity, agency, institution, official or person, including but not limited to, a medical, nursing or other medical training institution, to deny admission because of, to place any reference in its application form concerning, to orally question about, to impose any burdens in terms or conditions of employment on, or to otherwise discriminate against, any applicant, in terms of employment, admission to or participation in any programs for which the applicant is eligible, or to discriminate in relation thereto, in any other manner, on account of the applicant’s refusal to receive, obtain, accept, perform, counsel, suggest, recommend, refer, assist or participate in any way in any forms of health care services contrary to his or her conscience.

Now, let’s turn to why the HCRCA has been put in the spotlight. Governor Pritzker, who has been attempting to rule the State of Illinois by executive fiat since the spring of 2020 under the guise of COVID-19 mitigation measures, has been recently losing in court.

The governor’s “mandate” that employers require vaccination or testing of all employees has been enforced voluntarily by many public and private employers, despite there being nothing in Illinois law to provide for enforcement of these executive orders. As a result, the HCRCA has been successfully used to obtain restraining orders against those mandating COVID-19 related mRNA injections and testing for COVID-19, without exemption for those who object to receiving that health care based on their moral beliefs.

All Illinois laws that require other vaccines provide for exemptions based either on religion or on proving that you have natural immunity from already contracting whatever disease the inoculation is intended to prevent. Pritzker’s “mandates” are different, because there are no exemptions provided for in state law when an employer requires you to receive a COVID-19 shot, and never has there been a requirement that otherwise healthy people receive a test for a disease that they have no suspicion of having in order to coerce someone to receive an unwanted vaccine. For those reasons, the HCRCA’s protections have been the last line of defense against these tyrannical mandates.

That’s why the governor, through his cronies in the legislature, tried to rush through SB 1169 during the fall veto session. In less than 24 hours, from October 25-26, the first (HFA 2) amendment to the original shell bill, which is similar to what was ultimately passed, received over 50,000 witness slips in opposition.

On October 27, the bill was amended again by Illinois House Floor Amendment 3 with no substantive changes, likely so that it could be sent to the Illinois Senate to concur without having all those opposing witness slips attached. Constituents took notice of this maneuver, and within only a couple of hours filed tens of thousands of witness slips in opposition to SB 1129 as amended by HFA 3.

The full text of SB 1169 reads:

It is not a violation of this Act for any person or public official, or for any public or private association, agency, corporation, entity, institution, or employer, to take any measures or impose any requirements, including, but not limited to, any measures or requirements that involve provision of services by a physician or health care personnel, intended to prevent contraction or transmission of COVID-19 or any pathogens that result in COVID-19 or any of its subsequent iterations. It is not a violation of this Act to enforce such measures or requirements. This Section is a declaration of existing law and shall not be construed as a new enactment. Accordingly, this Section shall apply to all actions commenced or pending on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 102nd General Assembly. Nothing in this Section is intended to affect any right or remedy under federal law.

It may not be readily apparent what the governor is trying to do here. It might appear that through this bill, the legislature was amending the HCRCA to carve out an exception that would remove its protection of people’s right to object based on their conscience to unwanted health care related to COVID-19.

However, that’s not what the legislature did here. By including in the bill the sentence, “This Section is a declaration of existing law and shall not be construed as a new enactment,” this renders what would otherwise be an exception for COVID-19 nothing more than a resolution and statement from this general assembly of what they believe was the intent of the previous legislature that enacted the Health Care Right of Conscience Act and its other amendments. Resolutions are merely statements of opinion. They aren’t amendments, and they certainly don’t change the law.

The absurdity of this is astounding. The legislature here has said that they believe that the HCRCA, which states that “[i]t is the public policy of the State of Illinois to respect and protect the right of conscience of all persons who refuse to obtain, receive or accept … health care services and medical care … and to prohibit all forms of discrimination,” meant to say something like “except if it relates in any way to COVID-19.” Not only is this absurd and contrary to the plain language and ordinary meaning of the HCRCA, but also this is an unconstitutional attempt of the legislature to take on the role of the judiciary by interpreting what the intent of the HCRCA is.

In Illinois House and Illinois Senate debates when Republicans argued for the preservation of Illinoisans’ rights and of the HCRCS, Democrats and the Office of the Attorney General admitted that this bill came from the Governor. They admitted that the Attorney General needed his legislation to pass to help him in his fight against the people of Illinois using the HCRCA to protect their natural, God-given right to refuse health care based on their conscience.

What they didn’t admit, is that Senate Bill 1169 was meant to confuse the people of Illinois and coerce them into complying with mandates that they have no legal obligation to follow. The Illinois constitution prevents the Illinois legislature from interpreting the intent of the HCRCA. Only the courts have the power to interpret statutes and Illinois courts have given every indication that they believe the intent of the HCRCA was to protect all people in Illinois from receiving health care in violation of their conscience.

The Health Care Right of Conscience Act still protects your right to refuse COVID-19 related health care based on your conscience.

Austin Scott Davies is an attorney and founder of Midwest Legal Care , former prosecutor, and an active member of the Winnebago County Republican Party. He is also a board member for Concerned Citizens for America, a local chapter of Illinois Family Institute.

The information contained in this article is not legal advice and is for general information purposes only. Do not act or refrain from acting on the basis of this information. Readers should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any legal matter.

The judicial branch at both the state and federal level continues to overstep their authority by meddling in the affairs of the legislative and executive branches. And the audacity of judges appears to be increasing.

Just two weeks ago the Chicago Tribune reported this:

A judge has ordered Illinois officials to add intractable pain as a qualifying condition for medical marijuana, a ruling that could greatly expand access to the drug.

The Illinois Department of Public Health had rejected intractable pain — defined as pain that’s resistant to treatment — but Cook County Judge Raymond Mitchell ordered the agency to add the condition.

A health department spokeswoman said Tuesday the agency will appeal the ruling. The change is expected to be put on hold while the appeal is pursued.

If Cook County Judge Raymond Mitchell wants to set policy, he should run for governor or for a seat in the General Assembly.

At the federal level, several judges seem to have joined the #Resistance movement to block President Donald Trump’s Constitutionally lawful actions.

Whether it is concerning sanctuary cities and states, Trump’s actions on limiting immigration, DACA, or transgenders in the military, courts are getting into the act by pretending to hold executive or legislative power.

Those federal judges who choose to ignore the U.S. Constitution and statutes should be impeached. Those aren’t my words, but Tom Trinko’s over at American Thinker:

[J]udges who issue insane edicts must be impeached. It’s time for the people to voice the truth that judges are not some “super” agents who override the authority of the people’s representatives.

Trinko blasts the courts’ “Judicial Rebellion”:

We are witnessing a treasonous rebellion by leftist judges who are declaring the last election null and void.

At the core of these traitors’ arguments is the belief that the people do not have the right to express their views through the electoral process.

Essentially, these courts are declaring that President Trump doesn’t have the same authority as his predecessor and that the powers of the executive branch are constrained by what the judiciary thinks is good policy.

As hot as that rhetoric might sound, what Trinko writes next shows that it isn’t:

These judges assert that President Trump can’t overrule the executive orders of his predecessor with his own executive orders. If that were the case, elections would be meaningless, since one president could effectively prevent the people from rejecting his position by voting for a candidate who disagreed with him.

Writing at National Review, Josh Blackman penned a piece titled, “A Ludicrous Ruling That Trump Can’t End DACA.” In it he sarcastically writes:

On January 20, 2017, the executive power peacefully transitioned from President Obama to President Trump. At least one judge in San Francisco didn’t get the memo.

Later in the article, Blackman writes:

I am unable to think of any decision where a court has ordered a president to exercise discretionary authority he has deemed unconstitutional.

Concerning one court’s excursion into military policy, American Thinker’s Joe Herring wrote:

A federal judge has ventured far beyond mere judicial activism in declaring that the president cannot alter the policy of his predecessor regarding men who consider themselves women, and vice versa, serving in the military.

In effect, this judge has deemed President Trump to no longer be commander-in-chief.

. . .

This is a gross usurpation of power that, if permitted, establishes a precedent for any federal judge to stay the hand of the president in the conduct of war. This egregious overreach must be resisted and punished.

Resistance and punishment, however, require courage on the part of the other two branches. Congress can strip jurisdiction from the courts, and the President can ignore court “orders” that are clearly out of bounds.

Short of that, Herring writes, “one federal judge can illegally stop the president from exercising his constitutional power for months or years.”

The medical and recreational marijuana debate is not an issue for the courts, but for the people through their elected representatives in the legislative and executive branches. Courts that seek to amend legislation or limit or direct constitutionally or legislatively granted executive powers should be, at a minimum, ignored.

If the citizens of the United States are to have a constitutional government, the legislative and executive branches must push back at the judicial branch’s overreach. Not only would that action begin to deter bad behavior by judges, it would be a learning moment for the part of the country that never received a proper education concerning our state and federal Constitutions.

Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!

As Illinois continues to lose population (we are now the sixth largest state, not the fifth), our politicians in both parties continue to run up debt and unfunded liabilities.

Here is Meaghan Kilroy writing at Pensions & Investments (www.pionline.com):

Illinois has the highest pension burden among all 50 states, said Fitch Ratings’ 2017 state pension report released Tuesday.

According to the report, Illinois’ unfunded pension liabilities amounted to 22.8% of residents’ personal income at the end of fiscal year 2016, compared to a median 3.1% for all states and 1% for Florida, the least burdened state.

Since it is the Christmas season, I chose not to title this article “The Dumbest People in America.” But how else do you describe a state that has 25 percent of its budget going to pay government employee pensions and its voters who continue electing the same people who won’t do a thing about it? And “[u]nder Fitch’s calculations, Illinois’ net pension liabilities totaled $151.5 billion at the end of fiscal year 2016.” Please know that other sources calculate that number as substantially higher.

The Wall Street Journal recently featured a related article titled “Illinois Drives People Away: The taxpayer migration continues from the Land of Ever Higher Taxes.”

Makes you proud, doesn’t it?

From the Journal article:

The Prairie State lost a record $4.75 billion in adjusted gross income to other states in the 2015 tax year, according to recently IRS released data. That’s up from $3.4 billion in the prior year. Many of the migrants were retirees who often flock to balmier climes. But millennials accounted for more than a third of the net outflow in tax returns.

. . .

Too much for us to distill in one editorial, but suffice to say that exorbitant property and business taxes have retarded economic growth. Illinois’s corporate tax rate is 9.5%, and pass-through business owners pay 6.45%. Though Illinois’s flat 4.95% income tax rate is relatively low compared to its neighbors, Democrats have found other ways to clobber their citizens.

You can let your eyes glaze over at these numbers if you want, but understand that you will be paying more every year if you do.

To paraphrase one radio talk show philosopher — we should all be able to tie half of our brain behind our back and still realize something is amiss.

This helps explain why Illinois’s economy has been stagnant, growing a meager 0.9% on an inflation-adjusted annual basis since 2012—the slowest in the Great Lakes and half as fast as the U.S. overall. This year nearly 100,000 individuals have left the Illinois labor force. The University of Illinois Flash Economic Index, which measures corporate earnings and investment as well as personal income, hit a five-year low in October.

Merry Christmas! Feeling poor yet? Well, at least we know our retired government employees will be enjoying the holidays.

In a recent op ed, Illinois policy experts Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner put it rather simply when referring to what Illinois politicians are increasingly good at: “they offer government worker retirement benefits that are no longer affordable to the residents that pay for them.”

Illinois News Network recently quoted State Sen. Dan McConchie, R-Hawthorn Woods:

Whether it’s through their property taxes or because of the recent income tax increase, they just can’t afford to [stay here].… This day of reckoning is fast approaching us. I don’t think we want to wait until the absolute last minute to try and do everything we can to really right the ship.

Allow me to define reckoning: It is time to stop talking about “reforming” the government employee pension systems in Illinois. You cannot reform what is purposefully corrupt and completely insolvent.

The Illinois Constitution’s line prohibiting the lowering of government employee benefits should be ignored if it’s not repealed. No clause in a constitution can make this math work. The systems should be cut off from the taxpayers and sent into bankruptcy.

Any candidate suggesting that the pension systems can be reformed is not telling you the truth.

Happy New Year!

End-of-Year Challenge

As you may know, IFI has a year-end matching challenge to raise $160,000. That’s right, a great group of IFI supporters are colluding with us to provide an $80,000 matching challenge to help support IFI’s ongoing work to educate, motivate and activate Illinois’ Christian community.

Please consider helping us reach this goal!  Your donation will help us stand strong in 2018!  To make a credit card donation over the phone, please call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.  You can also send a gift to:

Illinois Family Institute
P.O. Box 876
Tinley Park, Illinois 60477