German Public Law Professor, High Court Judge: Climate Crisis “Requires Freedom-Limiting Measures”

Dictatorship for a good cause…the march to tyranny: The public can be convinced “to accept even the most serious encroachments on fundamental rights,” writes a German public law professor, state high court judge at his blog.

Like the corona crisis, in the face of the climate crisis it’s time to seriously encroach on fundamental rights, says a German public law professor. Image: Leuphana University of Lüneburg

Germany, true to its DNA, is once again gravitating towards dictatorial rule. A number of leading figures are praising the corona restrictions as an example of what needs to be done to fight the climate crisis.

One example figure is German public law professor Thomas Schomerus, who writes at his blog that “lessons for the climate crisis can be drawn from the corona crisis.”

Make people fear for their lives, the German federal judge and law professor implies.

“Make public accept “even the most serious encroachments”

The only thing that is needed for the public acceptance of “stringent measures”, says Schomerus is communication made “in a transparent, comprehensible, science-based and multimedia-based manner”.

If this is done, he writes, “the population will be prepared to accept even the most serious encroachments on fundamental rights.”

Just as convincing as the fear of death

He writes that the concern about the future of children and grandchildren “can be just as convincing” as the fear of death by the Corona virus.

Schmoerus at his blog expresses that the current collapse of global air travel and massive economic slowdown – which involves millions of unemployed – as a positive thing for the environment and thus similar restrictions should be kept in place even after the corona crisis subsides.

“The fight against the virus can set an example in the fight against global warming,” he claims.

Climate crisis requires “freedom-limiting measures”

Schomerus, a specialist for public law for energy and environmental law, asks at his blog why the government doesn’t take the same strict action against climate that it is now taking against the Corona virus. He adds:

Both the corona crisis and the climate crisis require freedom-limiting measures. The earlier and more vigorously these are defined and implemented, the sooner the success that is vital for survival can be expected. In this respect, corona and climate protection measures do not differ in principle, but only on the time axis. The following also applies to climate protection: the earlier and the more far-reaching they are taken, the lower the ecological, economic and social follow-up costs.”

According to his blog, Thomas Schomerus is Professor of Public Law for Energy and Environmental Law at the Faculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lueneburg and Judge at the Higher Public Administration Court for Lower Saxony.

36 responses to “German Public Law Professor, High Court Judge: Climate Crisis “Requires Freedom-Limiting Measures””

  1. German Public Law Professor, High Court Judge: Climate Crisis “Requires Freedom-Limiting Measures” — NoTricksZone - Climate-

    […] […]

  2. Steve

    He looks rather smug and he is exactly the type of person I would call
    ” a very dangerous moron”

  3. bonbon

    “DNA” ? Historically that is rubbish.
    Carl Schmitt, 1930’s Crown Jurist, a model for many US Judges, argued for a Reichstagsbrand, known today as Crisis Management. What was 9/11, other than a failed Reichstagsbrand to usher in total surveillance, a police state? Snowden warns that when excess powers are handed to government, they get comfortable, unlikely to hand them back. Look at the UK’s emergency powers, almost all sunset clauses have exceptions.

    So DNA certainly not.

    The current German measures are based on the Infection Protection Law, not martial law.

    That Law does not apply to CO2, so the Prof. has a Schmitt Problem.

    1. Josh

      Germany has been heavily targeted by the imperial apparatus since the late 19th century. It has suffered tremendously for this culturally, morally and intellectually.


    This guy would be a model Nazi.

    1. John B()

      Wasn’t ‘dolf an environmentalist?

      1. Warren Zoell

        And a vegan.

    2. Climate Heretic

      “I wouldn’t go that far”, Ok fair enough. Hopefully better would be. This guy would be a competent dictator.

      Climate Heretic

  5. Curious George

    Climate crisis requires “freedom-limiting measures”.
    Does Professor Thomas Schomerus represent Climate crisis?
    What is the mandate of the Faculty of Sustainability?

  6. Stephen Brown

    There is one major difference between the Corvid-19 crisis and the Climate Change crisis and that is the Corvid-19 crisis is real and the Climate Change crisis is completely imaginary. The grim statistics from around the world are ample testimony to the reality of this novel corona virus. There are no statistics, other than those generated by flawed computer models, which support the hypothesis that mankind is having a catastrophic effect on the many varied global climatic zones.
    The climate catastrophe believers are loathe to admit that the very small increase in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is actually benefiting the planet; there is a visible increase in the GREENING of the planet.

    1. Peter

      It doesn’t make any difference whether climate change is real or not.

      For too many years the USA economy has been at the mercy of oil price rises dictated by OPEC, and has been forced into unnecessary recession by multiple oil shocks, plus economic disruption every time the price changes. Now the energy self sufficiency of the USA is threatened by Saudi Arabia and Putin, the latter intent on destroying US shale oil, to allow greater market control. And it is not the first time this has happened. US shale oil will always be vulnerable to attacks, as the cost of production is $50/barrel while Saudi Arabia’s is $20/barrel.

      The obvious solution is to remove dependency on imported oil by speeding up the shift to electric vehicles. That also avoids any possible repetition of the cost of $6tr (including war veteran benefits and interest) from the last oil war.

      1. John Brown


        where will the power for the electric vehicles come from?

        1. Peter

          Power to charge electric vehicles can come mainly from new wind and solar. Because electric vehicles include their own battery, they are very flexible loads. For instance, a Tesla with a 300 mile range may be driven, on average, only 30-35 miles per week. That means most of the time there are at least 5 days of flexibility in when it can be charged.

          The back up for when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing for 5 days or more is natural gas generation. A lot of this is already installed, and some completely written off. Further, compared to the capital cost of wind or solar, it is cheap to install. Likely it will be needed less than 10% of the time.

          Even with a gap in wind and solar shorter than 5 days, some vehicles won’t be able to wait until the renewable generation is available, for instance for those intending to take a long journeys the following day, or those recharging in the middle of a long journey. Possibly a higher proportion of cars than normal will go on long journeys around public holidays. The existing natural gas generation plants may have to be operated to meet this demand, but it won’t be much of the time compared with the normal daily commutes.

    2. David Appell

      Climate change is certainly not imaginary — the signs are all over the place: melting sea ice, land ice, plants flowering earlier, animals moving poleward.

      Learn something.

      1. Josh


        These things are not unprecedented in the Earth’s history. They’re not even unusual. It’s highly likely that all of these things are natural or are driven by natural causes. Further research into cosmic influences on our climate is warranted, given the minimal role so-called greenhouse gases are likely to have.

      2. Maurizio

        All I’m learning from your comments is that you don’t seem to understand (or care) what grave danger these eco-fascists pose to our freedom and democracy.

      3. Kurt in Switzerland


        As evidenced from Glacial fluctuations and sediment analyses, the climate in the temperate zones of Europe was as warm or warmer than it is today about 2/3 of the time (of the entire Holocene). You can cross check this with the tree line (elevation above sea level in the Alps and/or latitude growth extent in Scandinavia, Siberia or Canada). Due to glaciers receding, entire tree trunks appear amongst the moraine detritus, evidence of former thriving forests at elevations where today one only sees rocks.

        Thus climate is changing, always had and always will. Then as now, it didn’t result in any tipping points (the same as with all prior interglacial periods for the past few million years).

        I trust you are still capable of learning something yourself.

        1. Georg Thomas

          Dear Kurt in Switzerland, well said.

  7. pochas94

    And if you don’t have the science, you know, just make stuff up. They’ll never know.

  8. pochas94

    Is he related to Vladimir Lenin?

  9. Josh

    Germany is unfortunately full of people like that idiot professor. Arrogant, cocksure and ‘all-knowing’ and not considering for a moment that they might be mistaken. It’s disturbing and yet further proof that Germany has increasingly distanced itself from being the land of poets and thinkers.

  10. Jim

    I have read of this type of ” leader” before. I have heard both the left and right versions and neither leads to future freedom of the people. Why do they think freedom should disappear? That the rich are the savior’s of the world, that they are more valuable of leading, when, they are following the same path as other demigods. Bootlickers are not leaders, people die following bootlickers. And they are stealing from all, from your freedoms to your education, limiting everyone’s ideas, to get past this troubling time.

  11. mikewaite

    He is calling for an “enabling act” . History should give every German (and non -German) reason to question, indeed fear, the proposal:
    (from Wiki)
    “The Enabling Act (German: Ermächtigungsgesetz) of 1933, formally titled Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich (“Law to Remedy the Distress of People and Reich”),[1] was an amendment to the Weimar Constitution[citation needed] that gave the German Cabinet—in effect, the Chancellor—the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. The Enabling Act gave Hitler plenary powers and followed on the heels of the Reichstag Fire Decree, which had abolished most civil liberties and transferred state powers to the Reich government. The combined effect of the two laws was to transform Hitler’s government into a legal dictatorship.”
    I thought that it was a legal requirement in the modern democratic Germany to discourage anything that threatened a repeat of the political and social policies of the period 1933-45?

  12. Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup – 800th Edition, 15 Years » Pirate's Cove

    […] No Tricks Zone notes a German law professor and high court judge saying freedom should be limited for ‘climate change’ […]

  13. David Appell

    Did catalytic converters reduce personal freedom?

    1. Maurizio

      No, but given the chance, this eco-fascist professor will. Are you so blind that you can’t see this?

      1. John Brown

        Yes he is!

  14. richard

    and the fight back starts-

    “Several German law firms are preparing lawsuits against the measures and regulations that have been issued. A specialist in medical law writes in a press release: „The measures taken by the federal and state governments are blatantly unconstitutional and violate a multitude of basic rights of citizens in Germany to an unprecedented extent. This applies to all corona regulations of the 16 federal states. In particular, these measures are not justified by the Infection Protection Act, which was revised in no time at all just a few days ago. ( Because the available figures and statistics show that corona infection is harmless in more than 95% of the population and therefore does not represent a serious danger to the general public.“

  15. Josh

    No-one here is suggesting that catalytic converters threaten our freedom. What people on this site argue (correctly) is that the recommendations of the climate doomsayers, if acted upon, would lead to impoverishment and deindustrialisation. Unless you have lived on Mars for the last few decades, you’d know that leading green figures have explicitly called for this and worse. No sane person wants this.

  16. Kurt in Switzerland

    But Herr Schomerus would look good in a brown suit, with a few chevrons on his shoulders, n’est-ce pas?

  17. Jamesxx

    Somehow there must be a climate emergency out there because i hear do much about it. So without knowing what the hell it is supposed to be , being a lawyer, Ill propose to take away rights to implement thie thing out there that I hear about

  18. John Kerrigan

    Now, let me get this straight. A German proscribing the limits on individual liberties…. Am I the only one who sees an issue with this? To quote Lewis Black, “You can always count on the Germans to do the right thing!”

  19. Kip Pullman

    Arrogant Communist Putz!

  20. oozlefinch

    a law Professor? he looks like a total Moron and he is a Moron coming up with this proves he has all the aintteigence and memory of a Flea in fact the Flea is probibly more intelligent then this Nit-Wit who middle name should be Stupid

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy