What Next, Mass Depraved-Heart Murder? - 2

Some Background

This series is following a lawsuit filed in a California federal court against various government officials (What Next, Mass Depraved-Heart Murder?).

Those officials are state government officials (ibid).

In a post on this blog yesterday, I posted about the dangerous and deadly ideology that is firmly implanted within the halls of government (The Authoritarianism of Climate Change).

This case we are following is a perfect example of the hubris, psychopathy, and murderous heart of the authoritarian leaders and their followers (ibid).

Let's first review the first sentence of the complaint, Oil-Qaeda's response, and the plaintiff's reply.

First, the complaint:

"Every month, Occidental and Chevron directly pump 2.63 times more toxic waste water into the San Joaquin Aquifer than oil released into the Gulf during the entire BP spill. The California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) plans to allow them to continue for another 21 months. This lawsuit brought to stop the poisoning of the San Joaquin aquifer and to remediate the damage already done to the farmland of Kern County."

(What Next, Mass Depraved-Heart Murder?). The defendant authoritarian leader Oil-Qaeda, and its followers, response was in effect "the king can do no wrong," as pointed out in the plaintiff's reply document:

"The State Defendants (Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources, Timothy Kustic, Mark Nechodom and Edmund G. Brown, Jr.) assert that they are immune from liability because the alleged acts “involve discretionary policy-making decisions.” (ECF 64-1 at 21:5.) The State Defendants cannot cite to any authority for discretionary decisions when it comes to protecting our water. Congress alone has the power to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act (“the Act”. Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 118 F.3d 1467, 1478 (11th Cir. 1997) (“LEAF”). DOGGR received authority from the EPA to enforce the Act and must “prevent underground injection which endangers drinking water sources.” 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(1). Even now, Occidental, California Resources, and Chevron (“Oil Companies”) inject billions of gallons of toxic waste water directly into California’s fresh aquifers. The Oil Companies proudly defend the contamination of this water – they claim they had a right and successfully lobbied for these permits. All of the Defendants forget that there is no right to lobby any California employee or elected official to violate a federal law. The only lawful lobbying would have been for the Oil Companies to lobby Congress. Contributing money to campaigns and then being allowed to violate federal law is the essence of racketeering. The Court should deny the motion to dismiss this RICO lawsuit. Indeed, RICO makes clear that no one should corrupt the government process, and water safety should never be tainted with the evidence of bribery, fraud, and extortion. This case is exactly the type of case envisioned when Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) in 1970. Congress observed that “money and power are increasingly used to infiltrate and corrupt legitimate business and labor unions and to subvert and corrupt our democratic processes.” United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 593, 101 S. Ct. 2524, 2533 (1981)(emphasis added). The United States Supreme Court reversed a dismissal of a RICO case allowing a civil lawsuit involving government corruption that bears striking similarities to this action. H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Tel. Co., 492 U.S. 229, 109 S.Ct. 2893 (1989). The only significant difference, the corruption in HJ impacted the rates charged telephone customers, not corruption that led to water contamination."

(PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO STATE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT, p. 11-12, emphasis added). This blog has pointed out that the doctrine "the king can do no wrong" is now called "sovereign immunity."

Sovereign immunity is hypothesized to be a toxins-of-power generated doctrine (Sovereign Immunity Source: Toxins of Power?, cf. Sovereign Impunity: A Child of the Supreme People).

Sovereign Immunity / Impunity Is An Authoritarian Concept

The concept "the king can do no wrong" is an ancient concept of Yin/Yang Chinese philosophy in the Daoist/Taoist tradition based on the authoritarian leader created deceit that "shame and guilt" are illusions (The Authoritarianism of Climate Change).

In modern day America it is the philosophy of authoritarian leaders and authoritarian followers, and perhaps Stockholm Syndrome sufferers, who state in one psychological test after another that "there is no right or wrong" when it involves climbing their way "to the top" (ibid).

In other words, they want to hurt anyone anytime and completely get away with it, and they very often do under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Thus, they declare unabashedly in official court papers that they can poison the drinking water of millions of Californians without any recriminations.

Or, kill and damage millions of people annually via global warming induced climate change without any shame or guilt (The Private Empire's Social Media Hit Squads, 2).

So, their expectation is that the victims must pick up the tab (You Are Here - 5).

The previous post in this series is here, the next post in this series is here.