Donald Trump may face a lawsuit over his day-one decision to withdraw from the World Health Organisation (WHO) because he didn’t get the approval of Congress. Health Policy Watch has the story.
“Trump made a unilateral decision to pull out of WHO. But we joined WHO in 1948 by an Act of Congress. Trump needs Congress’s approval to withdraw,” said Professor Lawrence Gostin, who directs the O’Neill Institute and is the Chair of Global Health Law at Georgetown University in Washington DC.
“His decision is too catastrophic to be made without Congress and the courts. As Director of a WHO Centre, I am considering a lawsuit,” added Gostin, who also heads the WHO Centre on Global Health Law.
Meanwhile, German Health Minister Karl Lautenbach wants to persuade Trump to change his mind, describing the decision as “a catastrophe for the poorest people on the planet” who need WHO support, such as those in Gaza.
The US is obliged to give a year’s notice of its intention to withdraw from the WHO, yet Trump’s Executive Order directs state officials to “take appropriate measures, with all practicable speed” to “pause the future transfer” of US of Government “funds, support or resources to the WHO”.
The order also recalls all US “personnel or contractors working in any capacity with the WHO”.
A senior WHO official told Health Policy Watch that “it has been a long night”, but that the UN health agency will survive if all its members stick together in the coming days.
The tiny European monarchy of Liechtenstein is the only other country that is not part of the 196-member strong WHO.
Trump’s rationale for withdrawing from the WHO is the same as he advanced during his first Presidency: WHO’s “mishandling” of the COVID-19 pandemic, its “failure to adopt urgently needed reforms” and its “inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states” – primarily China.
Trump also noted that the WHO “continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries’ assessed payments”, such as that of China.
China, the second-largest contributor in terms of assessed contributions, is only due to pay $181 million for the period. As China is still classified as a “developing country”, it benefits from lower rates.
When signing the executive order, Trump referred to the cost of membership and said “they wanted us back so badly, so we’ll see what happens”. Is it a negotiating tactic to get a better deal?
You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.
No doubt the same will happen with the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord Disaster, someone somewhere will find a loophole to exploit, and cause delay and tremendous taxpayer cost.
Same playbook every time!
It’s almost like these things are written in such a way as to make them difficult or nigh on impossible to reverse.
So a WHO stooge thinks leaving the WHO would be catastrophic. The words ‘dog’ and ‘fight’ come to mind. But there might be more grounds for the legal challenge. However, although the Paris Agreement has a 1 year notice period it is not a Treaty so more shaky. Remember it is not a treaty as Big Ears Obummer did not want to go before Congress.
Ah, the courts. The threat of lawfare against is not going to stop. Gotta keep this gravy train chuffing along.
MajorMajor
2 months ago
OK, how about this: “we won’t withdraw from WHO, but we will reduce our contributions to $1 per year and will reserve the right to ignore its decrees”?
Nice thought but I don’t think it’ll make any difference – they’ll still consider it a breach of an agreement. The real kicker will be, ‘so what’ – if you want to take legal action, feel free, fill your boots… US can drag these things out for years just like any other bureaucracy – I still think it’s a typical Trump opening extreme negotiation tactic around the overall cost distribution vs the overall strategy aims of the WHO
I very much doubt Trump will regard the odd quarter Billion as the main problem.
Do you not realise the main problem is the Ethopian Tigre terrorist NON Doctor Tedros, the CCP stooge?
Together with his chosen chums like “Stalin’s Nannie” Susan Mitchie, the British Communist who headed up Boris’s “Nudge Unit”; Jeremy Farrar, ex head honcho of the Welcome Trust and a gang of others, all of whom have put through the new WHO treaty that will impose another “Pandemic” and lockdown and mandatory gene therapy jabs, whenever they want?
If even commenters on here have forgotten all this, it will be fantastic to open this massive can of worms and show what Gates, Soros, Fauci, Collins, Bird and all the rest have been up to with Big Pharma.
Order a ton of popcorn!
MadWolf303
2 months ago
The problem these clowns have is that the US is still a Sovereign nation and under President Trump, it is about to remind the entire world and in particular the Davos crowd and their mates in the likes of the WHO and the UN, that their game of a surreptitious takeover, via their regulations, has been rumbled.
Pissing off yr largest contributor, was always dumb…and MAGA is pissed off.
Thanks – his speech is a long list of accomplishments and plans. There is this paragraph;
“A nation’s highest duty is to its own citizens. Honoring this truth is the only way to build faith and confidence in the market system. Only when governments put their own citizens first will people be fully invested in their national futures. In the United States, we are building an economy that works for everyone, restoring the bonds of love and loyalty that unite citizens and powers nations.”
I know tks….as you say it will tell a great deal…..though I don’t think the Davos crew will enjoy it one bit…..judging by the way he has started…..it could be epic.
He should, and probably will (tell him to do one), but at some point, you just feel this will somehow become a “Human Rights” issue.
It will be a Human Right for people to be injected with a toxic substance that might kill them, against their will, and to be forced to deny real Science, because Human Rights supports “The Science” and as we are told the UN own The Science, and Fauci IS (or was) The Science.
It’s a little insight into the hidden factory of many, many layers of government bureaucracy probably linked to WHO membership, and the cost of this is in addition to the fees paid, it probably dwarfs it. I’d guess a ‘WHO Centre’ is likely a US based functional part of the WHO – I’m sure they have regular competitions to see which countries get the kudos of hosting the various centres etc… We have the same here with so many NGOs and QUANGOS and their fingers in so many pies, spending taxpayers money
So this wonk is threatening to sue, presumably funding them law suit from money that the USA has provided.
He is not clear which court he intends to use. Presumably that same one the he will use to sue the US Government for non-payment of dues.
“ “a catastrophe for the poorest people on the planet” who need WHO support, such as those in Gaza.”
What does that have to do with the US when most of the WHO funding comes from Bill Gates & Germany? Don’t forget the IHR that often gets overlooked when discussing health fascism.
EppingBlogger
2 months ago
I am pretty sure the Democrats and UN agencies resorting to lawfare against Trump will severely damage THEM both Trump or MAGA. The public are fed up with it.
Yes I’d guess it’s a typical Trump negotiation tactic – go in with super aggressive opening stance, then fall back to something they’d never have even considered later and everyone can leave with some face intact. It’s kind of his MO really – quite smart as these smooth bureaucrats don’t expect that level of directness because they don’t operate like that
Last edited 2 months ago by Purpleone
Ron Smith
2 months ago
When Biden was handing out Pardons to the likes of Fauci, I wounder did Deborah Birx get one because she was part of the initial Lockdown cabal that hoodwinked Trump.
If my gym membership is too high and I can’t justify the monthly payments any more, I will cancel my membership. Why should it be any different with the WHO? It’s original purpose was ostensibly as global health advisory body, and member states would pay an (inordinately high) proportion of their national budget per year to be member of the club.
Why should it be so difficult just to walk away?
Furthermore, if my gym was dictating to me legally-binding rules about exactly how I must exercise, which machines to use and for how long, I would also leave. Now the Pandemic Treaty plus the amendments to the IHR are on the horizon, it looks concerningly as if it has moved away from it’s advisory role to one which will spurn forth a litany of legally-binding recommendations (a contradiction in terms, of course), in the case of any future concocted “health emergencies”. Or even potential “health emergencies”!
Never mind congressional approval… Trump’s already got the approval of the majority of the voting public.
I’d assume previous US government officials signed up to long term direction and strategy, tied to financial agreements etc. It’s likely a chunk of the money spent comes back onshore in various forms, rather like the EU rebate setup. Given they fund such a large proportion this will be skewed no doubt, so US is losing out ultimately, to Trumps point
Every sovereign member state of the WHO can just state that it doesn’t want to be a member anymore and that’s that. As the WHO doesn’t haven an army (one hopes), it cannot wage war on dissident states to force them back into the fold.
But that’s not the issue here. Gostin claims that Trump doesn’t have the legal authority to decree a withdrawal. This is not influenced by people having him voted into the office of the president of the USA, because this vote was about who should become president and not about what the president should be legally allowed to do.
The WHO today is likely very different to the one joined in 1948, the mission has doubtless crept from helping the health of poor nations on a voluntary basis, to being an arm of a Global Govt, on a compulsory basis.
That mission creep may justify an immediate exit, but if not it indicates how membership of these bodies should go: sign up and remain forever an associate member, then pick and choose what actions you want to accept and fund.
soundofreason
2 months ago
Lawfare. Typical.
Hester
2 months ago
Oh dear is the gravy train drying up? should have thought of that before you did what you did to help Pharma and its Big investors during the Plandemic.
I am sure Bill Gates will stump up some more cash
JXB
2 months ago
Is it a negotiating tactic to make a better deal – asked about the man who authored The Art of The Deal?
Just about everything Trump says/does is about establishing a negotiating position. It’s time people realised that.
Executive Orders – can be challenged (Trump knows that and said as much) – and can become a matter for Congress, now republican controlled.
Statistically, each inhabitant of USA pays $0.78 to the WHO per year, each inhabitant of the UK $0.76 and each inhabitant of Japan $0.77. The rates are probably the same and the differences due to rounding.
Statistically, each inhabitant of China pays $0.13 to the WHO per year.
Statistically, each inhabitant of Israel pays $0.68 per year, probably a discount for God’s chosen people.
Statistically (I’ve checked this twice), each inhabitant of Germany pays $0.86 per year.
[Calculation based on population numbers found via Google and gross assessments from the table linked to in the text.]
Last edited 2 months ago by RW
Jabby Mcstiff
2 months ago
The Yanks have a younger consciousness. It is only really in early adulthood. Hope that their exuberance will be enough to lift the veil. It is being lifted anyway everyday. You can feel it the nature of consciousness itself is shifting rapidly. The subjects of consciousness will seem rather quaint when we have gone through this transformation. A mind can become so different from before.
Jabby Mcstiff
2 months ago
There are updates pending. You need to download them, install them and then reboot.
The WHO may have been a hopeful concept when initiated but, like the UN itself, has been corrupted beyond its legitimate useful value. But the USA withdrawing from it does not of necessity eliminate it (unfortunately) : just let the remaining members cover its costs. If they can’t or won’t, let it go.
Covid-1984
2 months ago
I read, ” I’m a director of WHO and am considering a lawsuit “…I lost interest after that
NubOfTheMatter
2 months ago
An Advisory WHO is one thing. A Dictatorial WHO (viz. its desired One Health treaty) is quite another and, for most people with even a modicum of critical thought capacity, completely and utterly unacceptable.
The fact that it got its ‘COVID response’ totally wrong and was pushing the bio-weapon approach favoured by its then largest funder, Gates and his associated organisations, is beside the point.
Last edited 2 months ago by NubOfTheMatter
RTSC
2 months ago
I hope the USA pulls out of the WHO but even if it isn’t just a negotiating tactic, the fact that the Republicans control Congress is a good thing. If nothing else, it will give him negotiating leverage.
Kornea112
2 months ago
The WHO organization leadership during Covid demonstrated the politicization of what should be a scientific organization. It became a self-serving institution peddling politics for funding and the benefit of oligarchs and big pharma. It’s recent requests for expansion to a supra-national all powerful that would increase It’s funding from 3 billion to 33 billion is frightening if achieved and a threat to humanity. The UN has become a hotbed of evil self-serving globalist elites living in an unaccountable bubble of free money. It would benefit humanity if it all went away.
Last edited 2 months ago by Kornea112
SomersetHoops
2 months ago
Trump may be right about the WHO, which was quite a shambles over Covid. The WHO has too many sources of influence, which makes its decisions unbalanced and unfair. After the Covid shambles, the WHO wants countries to sign up to its forced pandemic edicts, anti democratically. The UK and America should not accept this and if the only way to avoid it is to leave the WHO both the UK and America should leave. For another reason, there has been much consideration about claimed corruption from the major pharmaceutical companies, who contribute largely. I think when the WHO was set up it was intended to be solely funded by its member countries, but now it is open to so much influence and cash coming from other sources it cannot be certain what interest it serves. If a country outside the WHO wants to support other countries with health problems, it could easily set up a government department to deal with it and guarantee the funds are used for the intended reason and reduce the enormous amount of corruption in some receiving governments.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“His decision is too catastrophic to be made without Congress and the courts.”
staying in would be the catastrophe!
No doubt the same will happen with the withdrawal from the Paris Climate
AccordDisaster, someone somewhere will find a loophole to exploit, and cause delay and tremendous taxpayer cost.Same playbook every time!
It’s almost like these things are written in such a way as to make them difficult or nigh on impossible to reverse.
But these lawsuits cost money, they’re spending their Soros money in Lawsuits so hopefully they’ll have less by the time the next election comes.
So a WHO stooge thinks leaving the WHO would be catastrophic. The words ‘dog’ and ‘fight’ come to mind. But there might be more grounds for the legal challenge. However, although the Paris Agreement has a 1 year notice period it is not a Treaty so more shaky. Remember it is not a treaty as Big Ears Obummer did not want to go before Congress.
It’s not just about money. It’s also about sovereignty. The WHO is working hard to dictate what member countries can do in terms of health policy.
Ah, the courts. The threat of lawfare against is not going to stop. Gotta keep this gravy train chuffing along.
OK, how about this: “we won’t withdraw from WHO, but we will reduce our contributions to $1 per year and will reserve the right to ignore its decrees”?
Sorted!
Are you very busy? We need a new Prime Minister who can present simple effective solutions to actual problems. Apply to 10 Downing Street, London
Nice thought but I don’t think it’ll make any difference – they’ll still consider it a breach of an agreement. The real kicker will be, ‘so what’ – if you want to take legal action, feel free, fill your boots… US can drag these things out for years just like any other bureaucracy – I still think it’s a typical Trump opening extreme negotiation tactic around the overall cost distribution vs the overall strategy aims of the WHO
Brilliant
I very much doubt Trump will regard the odd quarter Billion as the main problem.
Do you not realise the main problem is the Ethopian Tigre terrorist NON Doctor Tedros, the CCP stooge?
Together with his chosen chums like “Stalin’s Nannie” Susan Mitchie, the British Communist who headed up Boris’s “Nudge Unit”; Jeremy Farrar, ex head honcho of the Welcome Trust and a gang of others, all of whom have put through the new WHO treaty that will impose another “Pandemic” and lockdown and mandatory gene therapy jabs, whenever they want?
If even commenters on here have forgotten all this, it will be fantastic to open this massive can of worms and show what Gates, Soros, Fauci, Collins, Bird and all the rest have been up to with Big Pharma.
Order a ton of popcorn!
The problem these clowns have is that the US is still a Sovereign nation and under President Trump, it is about to remind the entire world and in particular the Davos crowd and their mates in the likes of the WHO and the UN, that their game of a surreptitious takeover, via their regulations, has been rumbled.
Pissing off yr largest contributor, was always dumb…and MAGA is pissed off.
Apparently though, Trump is due to address the Davos crowd via video link, either today or tomorrow!
It will be interesting to see exactly what he has to say! It could be Presidency defining!
Yes that will be interesting. Here’s a link to a transcript of his address to the WEF back in 2020. Definitely worth a read for comparison.
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland/
Thanks – his speech is a long list of accomplishments and plans. There is this paragraph;
“A nation’s highest duty is to its own citizens. Honoring this truth is the only way to build faith and confidence in the market system. Only when governments put their own citizens first will people be fully invested in their national futures. In the United States, we are building an economy that works for everyone, restoring the bonds of love and loyalty that unite citizens and powers nations.”
I know tks….as you say it will tell a great deal…..though I don’t think the Davos crew will enjoy it one bit…..judging by the way he has started…..it could be epic.
“Professor Lawrence Gistin who directs the O’Neill Institute and is the Chair of Global Health Law at Georgetown University in Washington DC.”
Just WTF is Global Health Law? Presumably a branch of that other fiction International Law. Trump should tell Gistin to do one.
He should, and probably will (tell him to do one), but at some point, you just feel this will somehow become a “Human Rights” issue.
It will be a Human Right for people to be injected with a toxic substance that might kill them, against their will, and to be forced to deny real Science, because Human Rights supports “The Science” and as we are told the UN own The Science, and Fauci IS (or was) The Science.
It’s a little insight into the hidden factory of many, many layers of government bureaucracy probably linked to WHO membership, and the cost of this is in addition to the fees paid, it probably dwarfs it. I’d guess a ‘WHO Centre’ is likely a US based functional part of the WHO – I’m sure they have regular competitions to see which countries get the kudos of hosting the various centres etc… We have the same here with so many NGOs and QUANGOS and their fingers in so many pies, spending taxpayers money
So this wonk is threatening to sue, presumably funding them law suit from money that the USA has provided.
He is not clear which court he intends to use. Presumably that same one the he will use to sue the US Government for non-payment of dues.
World Homicide Organisation
“ “a catastrophe for the poorest people on the planet” who need WHO support, such as those in Gaza.”
What does that have to do with the US when most of the WHO funding comes from Bill Gates & Germany? Don’t forget the IHR that often gets overlooked when discussing health fascism.
I am pretty sure the Democrats and UN agencies resorting to lawfare against Trump will severely damage THEM both Trump or MAGA. The public are fed up with it.
Yes I’d guess it’s a typical Trump negotiation tactic – go in with super aggressive opening stance, then fall back to something they’d never have even considered later and everyone can leave with some face intact. It’s kind of his MO really – quite smart as these smooth bureaucrats don’t expect that level of directness because they don’t operate like that
When Biden was handing out Pardons to the likes of Fauci, I wounder did Deborah Birx get one because she was part of the initial Lockdown cabal that hoodwinked Trump.
If my gym membership is too high and I can’t justify the monthly payments any more, I will cancel my membership. Why should it be any different with the WHO? It’s original purpose was ostensibly as global health advisory body, and member states would pay an (inordinately high) proportion of their national budget per year to be member of the club.
Why should it be so difficult just to walk away?
Furthermore, if my gym was dictating to me legally-binding rules about exactly how I must exercise, which machines to use and for how long, I would also leave. Now the Pandemic Treaty plus the amendments to the IHR are on the horizon, it looks concerningly as if it has moved away from it’s advisory role to one which will spurn forth a litany of legally-binding recommendations (a contradiction in terms, of course), in the case of any future concocted “health emergencies”. Or even potential “health emergencies”!
Never mind congressional approval… Trump’s already got the approval of the majority of the voting public.
I’d assume previous US government officials signed up to long term direction and strategy, tied to financial agreements etc. It’s likely a chunk of the money spent comes back onshore in various forms, rather like the EU rebate setup. Given they fund such a large proportion this will be skewed no doubt, so US is losing out ultimately, to Trumps point
Every sovereign member state of the WHO can just state that it doesn’t want to be a member anymore and that’s that. As the WHO doesn’t haven an army (one hopes), it cannot wage war on dissident states to force them back into the fold.
But that’s not the issue here. Gostin claims that Trump doesn’t have the legal authority to decree a withdrawal. This is not influenced by people having him voted into the office of the president of the USA, because this vote was about who should become president and not about what the president should be legally allowed to do.
Jesus it will be very disheartening if this just turns out to be a negotiating ploy to lower the rates.
A fiver says it is, sadly
Where is RFK!
The WHO today is likely very different to the one joined in 1948, the mission has doubtless crept from helping the health of poor nations on a voluntary basis, to being an arm of a Global Govt, on a compulsory basis.
That mission creep may justify an immediate exit, but if not it indicates how membership of these bodies should go: sign up and remain forever an associate member, then pick and choose what actions you want to accept and fund.
Lawfare. Typical.
Oh dear is the gravy train drying up? should have thought of that before you did what you did to help Pharma and its Big investors during the Plandemic.
I am sure Bill Gates will stump up some more cash
Is it a negotiating tactic to make a better deal – asked about the man who authored The Art of The Deal?
Just about everything Trump says/does is about establishing a negotiating position. It’s time people realised that.
Executive Orders – can be challenged (Trump knows that and said as much) – and can become a matter for Congress, now republican controlled.
Calculation I just made:
Statistically, each inhabitant of USA pays $0.78 to the WHO per year, each inhabitant of the UK $0.76 and each inhabitant of Japan $0.77. The rates are probably the same and the differences due to rounding.
Statistically, each inhabitant of China pays $0.13 to the WHO per year.
Statistically, each inhabitant of Israel pays $0.68 per year, probably a discount for God’s chosen people.
Statistically (I’ve checked this twice), each inhabitant of Germany pays $0.86 per year.
[Calculation based on population numbers found via Google and gross assessments from the table linked to in the text.]
The Yanks have a younger consciousness. It is only really in early adulthood. Hope that their exuberance will be enough to lift the veil. It is being lifted anyway everyday. You can feel it the nature of consciousness itself is shifting rapidly. The subjects of consciousness will seem rather quaint when we have gone through this transformation. A mind can become so different from before.
There are updates pending. You need to download them, install them and then reboot.
F the WHO !!!…..
The WHO may have been a hopeful concept when initiated but, like the UN itself, has been corrupted beyond its legitimate useful value. But the USA withdrawing from it does not of necessity eliminate it (unfortunately) : just let the remaining members cover its costs. If they can’t or won’t, let it go.
I read, ” I’m a director of WHO and am considering a lawsuit “…I lost interest after that
An Advisory WHO is one thing. A Dictatorial WHO (viz. its desired One Health treaty) is quite another and, for most people with even a modicum of critical thought capacity, completely and utterly unacceptable.
The fact that it got its ‘COVID response’ totally wrong and was pushing the bio-weapon approach favoured by its then largest funder, Gates and his associated organisations, is beside the point.
I hope the USA pulls out of the WHO but even if it isn’t just a negotiating tactic, the fact that the Republicans control Congress is a good thing. If nothing else, it will give him negotiating leverage.
The WHO organization leadership during Covid demonstrated the politicization of what should be a scientific organization. It became a self-serving institution peddling politics for funding and the benefit of oligarchs and big pharma. It’s recent requests for expansion to a supra-national all powerful that would increase It’s funding from 3 billion to 33 billion is frightening if achieved and a threat to humanity. The UN has become a hotbed of evil self-serving globalist elites living in an unaccountable bubble of free money. It would benefit humanity if it all went away.
Trump may be right about the WHO, which was quite a shambles over Covid. The WHO has too many sources of influence, which makes its decisions unbalanced and unfair. After the Covid shambles, the WHO wants countries to sign up to its forced pandemic edicts, anti democratically. The UK and America should not accept this and if the only way to avoid it is to leave the WHO both the UK and America should leave. For another reason, there has been much consideration about claimed corruption from the major pharmaceutical companies, who contribute largely. I think when the WHO was set up it was intended to be solely funded by its member countries, but now it is open to so much influence and cash coming from other sources it cannot be certain what interest it serves. If a country outside the WHO wants to support other countries with health problems, it could easily set up a government department to deal with it and guarantee the funds are used for the intended reason and reduce the enormous amount of corruption in some receiving governments.