The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation, a 501c3 nonprofit organization staffed primarily by volunteers affected by medical treatment protocols and MRNA vaccines, announced today its appreciation to Thomas Renz, Esq. Renz Law, LLC Post Office Box 201 St. Louis, Missouri 63025 Telephone: 419-351-4248 (renzlawllc@gmail.com) who filed today an amicus curiae brief in the case of Petitioner Principal Edward Lang and his co-petitioners Joseph W. Fischer and Garrett Miller. These individuals are facing charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) in a case that has garnered significant attention for its potential impact on the interpretation of this federal statute.
In an unusual legal posture, the United States filed an interlocutory appeal from the District Court’s dismissal of charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), prompting Lang, Fischer, and Miller to gain standing even before their trial begins. The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation has chosen to support these petitioners by filing an amicus curiae brief, which has not been opposed by the principal parties in the case.
The key issue at stake in this case is the interpretation of the term “corruptly” as used in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation Files Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Petitioners Lang, Fischer, and Miller in Landmark 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) Case [St. Louis, Missouri, September 29, 2023] 2). This statute encompasses actions that allegedly obstruct, influence, or impede official proceedings, and yet it lacks a statutory definition for the crucial term “corruptly.” The amicus curiae brief argues that the failure to define “corruptly” leaves individuals unsure about what conduct may provoke the U.S. Department of Justice’s ire, potentially chilling the exercise of free speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation contends that the lack of clarity in the statute and the potential broad application of “corruptly” raises significant First Amendment concerns. The amicus curiae brief highlights the need for the Supreme Court to address the meaning of “corruptly” to ensure that individuals engaging in free expression and peaceful civil disobedience are not unjustly prosecuted. The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation’s amicus curiae brief provides valuable insights into the legal and constitutional questions surrounding 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). By filing this brief, the Foundation aims to assist the Court in its analysis of this important case and the proper interpretation of the statute.
Thomas Renz, Esq., of Renz Law, LLC, has consistently demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the principles of justice, transparency, and the protection of civil liberties. His dedication to pursuing truth and advocating for those who may feel voiceless in the legal system is commendable. In this case, as with many others, Mr. Renz’s meticulous attention to detail, deep understanding of legal intricacies, and impassioned representation highlight his esteemed position in the legal community. The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation is profoundly grateful for his invaluable contributions and tireless efforts, reflecting his reputation as a beacon of integrity and legal excellence.
As Mr. Renz states:
Amici are baffled by when, how, and for what they might be prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The only guiding principle appears to be whether a protestor agrees with government messages. The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation is an IRS Code Section 501(c)(3) organization that is staffed primarily by hundreds of volunteer widows and relatives of victims of hospital treatment protocols and MRNA vaccines for COVID-19 that in many instances were coerced or administered without “informed consent.” The Foundation and members intend to influence official proceedings and may engage in actions that some could twist into obstructing or impeding, in order to stop falsehoods that they are convinced led to the death of their loved ones. There are thousands of organizations — including Amici here — who “influence” official proceedings. Some are paid lobbyists, others motivated by a cause.
The Foundation’s brief also underscores the inconsistency in the application of the statute, noting that while individuals engaged in peaceful protests and activism may face charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), other instances of obstruction during events such as the 2020 White House siege have not led to similar prosecutions. For more information about the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation and its involvement in this case, please contact Carolyn Blakeman at Carolyn.Blakeman@FormerFedsGroup.Org or visit chbmp.org.
Anyone wishing to support the Foundation’s continuing work can make donations at FormerFeds.Org.
The FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation is an IRS Code Section 501(c)(3) organization staffed primarily by volunteers affected by medical treatment protocols and MRNA vaccines. Committed to advocating for justice and the protection of civil liberties, the Foundation aims to influence official proceedings and engage in actions aimed at addressing concerns that have led to the loss of loved ones. Learn more about the Foundation at FormerFedsGroup.Org.