Why States Can Assert that the WHO Has No Authority Over Them: Summary of the Evidence

This is a compilation of the important info I have been dropping as individual tidbits over the past few days regarding states power over health regulation.

•      The Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution’s Bill of Rights states, “The
  powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
  prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively,
  or to the people.” This means that the regulation of
  healthcare falls to the states.  For example, doctors, pharmacies and
  hospitals are administered by the state, not by the federal government.
•       This is why Louisiana’s Senate unanimously passed a bill
  37 to zero telling the world that neither the WHO, the UN nor the WEF
  could assert any jurisdiction over health or any other matter in the
  state of Louisiana.
•      This is why the Florida legislature passed a bill last year allowing the WHO no authority over the state of Florida.
•     
  On the last full day of the Obama administration, the Department of
  Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease Control issued a Final Rule that changed the definition of a Public Health Emergency of international Concern.  It was to be defined 5 ways, but 3 of those ways relied on a WHO decision.
•      This rule was challenged in a petition
  to DHHS by 15 state Attorneys General in 2023.  They pointed out that,
  “The rule exceeds the agency’s authority and infringes on US and state
  sovereignty by unlawfully delegating to the World Health Organization
  the authority to invoke health emergency powers solely based on
  decisions of the WHO.”
•      The AGs further noted
  that Congress’ assent would be needed to delegate such authority via
  treaty ratification to the WHO.  They assert that executive agreements,
  which “rely solely on the President’s authority in foreign relations…
  lack any domestic effect without an act of Congress,” and that the
  unratified WHO Constitution is not a binding treaty.
•      
  Furthermore, according to the AGs, Congress approved participation with
  the WHO “with the understanding that nothing in the Constitution of the
  World Health Organization in any manner commits the United States to
  enact any specific legislative program regarding any matters referred to
  in said constitution,” referencing 22 U.S.C. 290d, while noting that 42 U.S.C. 264 (e) warns the federal government not to preempt state powers regarding control of infectious diseases.
•      Finally, when the US federal government signed the WHO’s amended International Health Regulations in 2006, it filed a reservation
  acknowledging the states’ rights authority over some health matters. 
  The reservation said, in part, “… these regulations to be implemented
  by the Federal Government or the state governments, as appropriate and
  in accordance with our Constitution, to the extent that the
  implementation of these obligations comes under the legal jurisdiction
  of the Federal Government. To the extent that such
  obligations come under the legal jurisdiction of the state governments,
  the Federal Government shall bring such obligations with a favorable
  recommendation to the notice of the appropriate state authorities.“

Therefore,
there is a strong legal basis to assert that the states not only have
authority over their citizens’ healthcare regulation, but that the
federal government lacks the authority to delegate any such power to the
WHO.