To the following trustees, agents, and servants, in their personal and professional capacity:

Representative Dan Bronoske, Email: Dan.Bronoske@leg.wa.gov

Representative Liz Berry, Email: Liz.Berry@leg.wa.gov

Representative Alex Ramel, Email: alex.ramel@leg.wa.gov

Representative Davina Duerr, Email: davina.duerr@leg.wa.gov

Representative Shelley Kloba, Email: shelley.kloba@leg.wa.gov

Representative Nicole Macri, Email: nicole.macri@leg.wa.gov

Representative Lisa Parshley, Email: Lisa.Parshley@leg.wa.gov

Representative Strom Peterson, Email: strom.peterson@leg.wa.gov

Representative Timm Ormsby, Email: timm.ormsby@leg.wa.gov

Representative Gerry Pollet, Email: gerry.pollet@leg.wa.gov

Representative Shaun Scott, Email: Shaun.Scott@leg.wa.gov

Representative Beth Doglio, Email: beth.doglio@leg.wa.gov

Representative Natasha Hill, Email: Natasha.Hill@leg.wa.gov

Representative Tarra Simmons,Email: Tarra.Simmons@leg.wa.gov

Representative Julie Reed, Email: Julia.Reed@leg.wa.gov

I, _____________________________________, one of the People, (as seen in the 50 State Constitutions), Republican in Form, Sui Juris, do present you with this notice that you and your agents may provide due care.

Please take notice that the People, in the exercise of our sovereign authority, have conducted thorough study and preparation, and we are now uniting in a peaceful and orderly manner to instruct government officials, trustees, and servants to strictly adhere to fundamental principles to preserve liberty to prevent maladministration and to maintain a free government. This notice is issued to provide all public officials an opportunity to respond appropriately.

The proposed legislation, "AN ACT Relating to preserving the ability of public officials to address communicable diseases using scientifically proven measures," is hereby challenged as unlawful, repugnant to the immutable law of God, and in direct conflict with fundamental law and constitutional principles.

You are required to show by what express authority, since the foundation of creation, you were delegated the power to override natural rights, impose mandates without consent, and subvert the foundational principles of governance. Failure to do so confirms the overreach and invalidity of such an act. (The authorities cited below are fundamental principles of law, universally recognized and accepted by all, requiring no proof, argument, or discourse. Id. 67a)

• Maxim of Law llu: Reason and authority, the two brightest lights of the world. 4 Inst. 320.
  Maxim of Law 64ff. A court can only declare what the law is, and whether consistent with the law of God, and the fundamental or constitutional law of society. The State v. Post, 20 N.J.L. 368, 370 (1845). 
• Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 180 (1803) “Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”  
• Political Power: "All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights." (Washington Const. Art. 1, § 1)​.
• Fundamental Principles: "A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual right and the perpetuity of free government" (Washington Const. Art. 1, § 32)​.

Grounds of Repugnance to Natural Law

Please take notice that natural law, which underpins the very fabric of just governance, recognizes that individuals are endowed by their Creator with inherent, unalienable rights, including the right to bodily integrity, personal sovereignty, and freedom of conscience. This bill violates these principles by compelling the implementation and promotion of specific measures—namely immunizations and vaccines—regardless of individual consent, reasoned conscience, or natural rights.

As Frédéric Bastiat asserted in The Law, the purpose of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, and not to impose measures that infringe upon the rights of individuals under the guise of a collective good. Bastiat warned that when government uses force or coercion to pursue even well-intentioned objectives, it becomes an instrument of "legal plunder," stripping individuals of their natural freedoms​. (See authorities below.)

Authorities:

• Maxim of Law 21. A repugnant act cannot be brought into being, i.e., cannot be made effectual. Plowd. 355.
•  Natural Rights Are Immutable:"The Law of Nature is unchanging. All are equal under Almighty God. All are equal under the Law. It is self-evident that all men have equal absolute unalienable Rights endowed by the Creator"​​.
• "We hold from God the gift that contains all others: Life—physical, intellectual, and moral life. Existence, faculties, assimilation—in other words, personality, liberty, property—this is man. These are anterior and superior to all human legislation" (The Law, Bastiat)​​.
• Maxim: "The Law of God and the natural Law of the Land and the Common Law are one and the same." This maxim emphasizes that true law must align with divine and natural laws, and any statute or man-made enactment that contradicts these principles is inherently illegitimate.
• Maxim: "The Law of God cannot be affected [degraded, amended, or voided: Deuteronomy 12:32 'Whatever I command thee, ye shall not add to nor take away from it.'] " This highlights the immutability of divine law as the standard against which all man-made laws must be measured.
• Maxim: "An unjust law is no law at all" (Lex iniusta non est lex) This principle, articulated by St. Augustine and later reaffirmed by Thomas Aquinas, emphasizes that laws contrary to natural justice are invalid.

Violation of Constitutional Protections

The Right to Informed Consent and Bodily Integrity:
The imposition of evidence-based measures, such as vaccines, without allowing exemptions for religious conviction, moral conscience, or personal health considerations flagrantly undermines an individual's constitutionally protected autonomy over their own body. Bodily integrity is a fundamental principle of natural law and constitutional governance. As Thomas Jefferson declared, "The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God." Any attempt to compel individuals to act against their moral convictions is a violation of this sacred trust.

Every individual possesses the natural right to determine what is done to their own body. This principle of informed consent ensures that individuals retain control over their bodily autonomy, free from coercion, force, or undue influence. Such measures that impose mandates without consent directly contravene foundational constitutional protections, including:

• "No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law" (Washington Constitution Art. 1, § 7). This provision safeguards individual privacy and bodily autonomy from government overreach.
• Massachusetts Constitution: "No subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained in his person, liberty, or estate for worshipping God in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience" (Part I, Art. II). This ensures that religious freedom and conscience are protected from interference.
• Purpose of Government: "The sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression" (Alabama Const. Art. I, § 35)​.
• Maxim of Law 51a:  The government cannot load a citizen with imposition against his will or consent. 2 Coke, 61.
• Maxim of Law: "The law is not to be violated by those in government" (Maxim 51k). It is a fundamental principle that the government cannot exceed its lawful authority or impose measures without legitimate consent.
• "Every violation of a person's bodily integrity is an invasion of his or her liberty. The invasion is particularly intrusive if it creates a substantial risk of permanent injury and premature death" (Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210)​​.
• To compel individuals to accept medical procedures without their informed consent violates both moral law and the Constitution, eroding the very principles upon which a free society is built. These violations are not merely acts of maladministration but constitute an existential threat to liberty itself.

Any act that seeks to override these inherent rights, particularly through the guise of public health, is null, void, and without lawful authority. It is the duty of the People to resist such usurpation and demand strict adherence to constitutional boundaries and the unalienable rights bestowed by our Creator.

Violation of Separation of Powers and Local Autonomy:
By declaring null and void any local statute, ordinance, or policy inconsistent with the state-mandated measures, this bill centralizes power in the state and subjugates local governments to a singular authority, in contradiction to federalist principles.

Authorities:

• Federalism ensures checks and balances not only at the federal level but also within states. When state governments unilaterally strip local authorities of decision-making power, they undermine this mechanism.
• In The Federalist Papers, James Madison warned against the excessive centralization of power. Federalism was designed to diffuse authority so that no one entity—whether federal, state, or local—could dominate.
• If a state government consolidates all legislative authority, it moves away from the decentralized model envisioned in the U.S. Constitution.

Unlawful Delegation of Power:

As Thomas Paine observed in Common Sense, "Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Government exists to protect individuals from harm and secure their rights, yet its power must remain limited and defined. When government overreaches or acts arbitrarily, it ceases to serve its legitimate purpose and instead becomes oppressive.

Paine also stated in The Rights of Man that "all power exercised over a nation must have some beginning. It must be either delegated or assumed. All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation." The bill asserts that "the best available science" must guide policy, yet it fails to define what constitutes such science, leaving determinations to unelected officials. This vague delegation of authority violates the principle that power must be clearly delegated and held accountable. When power is assumed without clear delegation, it transforms into usurpation, undermining the sovereignty of the people and the purpose of a just government.

Authorities:

• Thomas Paine, Rights of Man: All power exercised over a nation must have some beginning. It must be either delegated or assumed. All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation.​ 
• Tucker Blackstone Vol. 1 Appendix Note B [Section 3] 1803: “If in a limited government, the public functionaries exceed the limits which the constitution prescribes to their powers, every act is an act of usurpation in the government and, as such, treason against the sovereignty of the people.”
• Maxim of Law lla: A delegated power cannot be again delegated. 2 Inst. 597; Black's, 2d. 347; 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 1300. A deputy cannot have (or appoint) a deputy. Story, Ag. s. 13; 9 Coke, 77; 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 1936.
• Maxim of Law llb: The derivative power cannot be greater than the original from which it is derived. Noy, Max.; Wing. Max. 66; Finch, Law, b. 1, c. 3.
• Maxim of Law 11i: Where there is no authority for establishing a rule, there is no necessity of obeying it. Black's, 2d. 1181; Dav. Ir. KB. 69. Useless power is to no purpose. Branch, Prine.
• Rights Precede Government: "Rights come from God; privileges come from man [government]... Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable Rights of man"​.
• Supreme Law: The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land. State legislation cannot override or contradict its protections (Washington Const. Art. 1, § 2)​.

Use of Fear to Justify Overreach

Please take notice that the declaration of an emergency and the framing of the act as a response to public health concerns reflect a dangerous precedent: utilizing fear to justify the infringement of individual liberties. Thomas Paine warned in Common Sense that governments often exploit crises to expand power unjustly, at the expense of the people's rights​​.

Furthermore, this legislation reflects a trend of using public health crises to enforce measures without public input, debate, or due process. The Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776) specifically asserts that any government action not instituted for the common benefit or which leads to maladministration may be lawfully resisted by the people as a breach of the social compact​.

• Due Process and Private Affairs: "No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law" (Washington Const. Art. 1, § 7). This affirms that individual rights to privacy and autonomy cannot be violated arbitrarily, even under the guise of public health​.
• Fundamental Principles: "A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual rights and the perpetuity of free government" (Washington Const. Art. 1, § 32). This establishes that adherence to principles of liberty and justice is paramount, even during crises​.
• Maxim of Law 51k. The law is not to be violated by those in government. Jenk. Cent. 7.
  "The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind" (Maryland Const. Art. I, § 6)​.
• “Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty, and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.” (Kentucky Const. art. I, § 2.) 

Conclusion and Demand for Justification
Given the clear violation of natural law, constitutional protections, and principles of governance, I demand:

• Justification: Provide a legal and constitutional basis for the centralization of power and the overriding of local autonomy as outlined in this bill.
• Clarification: Explain how this act reconciles with the individual's right to religious freedom, conscience, and bodily integrity.
• Revocation: Halt the advancement of this bill on the grounds that it represents an unconstitutional overreach of state authority.
  

Failure to respond within ten (10) business days through a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury will constitute tacit admission of the objections stated above.

This notice is sent to you in peace and with the love of Christ, so that you may provide immediate due care to those in whom all political power is inherent, the People.