BENTON – Chemist, trucker, and Wal-Mart shopper Huguette Nicole Young of Oregon seeks to end the ban on faces in public places in Illinois.
Young challenged Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s mask order in U.S. district court on Oct. 5, on grounds of free speech and better health.
She says she would take lower paying jobs to avoid driving through Illinois.
Her lawsuit claims Wal-Mart employees “touch their masks and then proceed to touch almost everything in the store.”
Young asks for the release of death and infection records county by county.
She is suing without counsel and has moved to proceed without paying fees.
Her suit begins by saying Pritzker violated her speech rights “by literally blocking plaintiff’s ability to speak audibly and clearly.”
She wrote that Pritzker might violate free speech rights if he showed a compelling interest and addressed it in the most specific and effective way possible.
She argues that that a court must apply that standard to any law, order, or rule that infringes on the most fundamental human right.
Next she alleges that masks cause more harm than they prevent.
She alleges that federal experts and scientists skew data to make it appear that requiring masks is the best way to address a disaster.
As of June, she claims that no state, county, or city showed the virus qualified as a disaster or even an imminent disaster.
She argues that scientific data shows prolonged mask use cuts down on oxygen and might cause long term problems.
She wrote that we learned more than enough to allow experts “to hoodwink us into a second round of unjustified rights violations.”
She accuses experts of misleading the public with false or misleading numbers of deaths and infections, and says that the national mortality rate is about equal to seasonal flu.
She claims evaluation of New York City data might show that inaccurate or fraudulent data determined consideration of an emergency across the country.
“For this reason, plaintiff asserts all public health emergency declarations must be done on a county by county level,” she wrote.
She wrote that it’s highly unlikely that a single Illinois county can show the virus constitutes an emergency.
She wrote that officials and scientists focus on the small effect masks might have on airborne spread of the virus while ignoring their large effect on surface spread.
She asserts standing to sue so she can work in Illinois without germs bombarding her on every surface and without the governor muzzling her when she shops.
She identifies herself as a resident of Junction City, Oregon, whose research has been featured in textbooks.
She wrote that she graduated from law school specializing in the U.S. Constitution.
“A virus that is highly contagious but is not very deadly, such as the flu, will not qualify as a public health disaster,” she wrote.
“A virus that is very deadly but is not very contagious, such as HIV-1, will not qualify as a public health disaster.”
She wrote that it’s rare for a virus to be both deadly and contagious.
She further argues that a court basing a decision on facts and reason would determine that the virus is very similar to coronaviruses that have been around for centuries.
She wrote that it’s nearly impossible to judge the accuracy of models and predictions of the Centers for Disease Control.
She wrote that no studies showed any virus could travel long distances in the form of dried out particles and yet remain capable of causing disease.
She quoted a study finding masks useless for those breathing or talking, and only possibly useful when a person coughs.
She claims coughing into an elbow slows the spread better than a mask.
She wrote that people with cancer who are forced to wear masks are at risk as cancer grows best in an environment that is low in oxygen.
“The ability to make correct decisions may be hampered too,” she wrote.