Senator Chuck Schumer has recently introduced legislation that would create a task force to ultimately declassify an extensive cache of UAP documents. One interesting part of the legislation notes that ownership of UFOs would be automatically given to the federal government through eminent domain, along with any biological evidence of aliens.
The news comes after UFO whistleblower David Grusch alleged that the United States government has a secret UAP retrieval program that reverse engineers UFO technology. Rep. Tim Burchett has proposed a different declassification amendment on the House side in light of this news.
To review a comprehensive, in-depth breakdown of all of Grusch’s claims, with citations, see our story here. To read Chuck Schumer’s full 64-page amendment, see our story here. For more updates, join us in our UFO Discord channel or subscribe to our emails.
The Federal Government Would Use Eminent Domain to Obtain Ownership of UFOs & Alien ‘Biological Evidence’
Schumer’s 64-page UAP bill has a lot of hidden gems and fascinating details. A press statement noted that the bill is “modeled after JFK Assassination Records Collection Act” and is being presented as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA.)
The press statement notes:
“Additionally, the federal government shall have eminent domain over any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin (TUO) and biological evidence of non-human intelligence (NHI) that may be controlled by private persons or entities in the interests of the public good.”
So not only would recovered UFO technology (referred to here as “technologies of unknown origin”) be automatically vested to the government, but so would “biological evidence” of aliens, aka non-human intelligence. (During Grusch’s interview with NewsNation, he was careful to refer to aliens as “non-human intelligence” and not extraterrestrials, citing that they might be interdimensional rather than extraterrestrial.)
Here’s what the bill itself says about eminent domain, starting in Section 10(a), called “Disclosure of Recovered Technologies of Unknown Origin and Biological Evidence of Non-Human Intelligence.”
The bill reads: “The Federal Government shall exercise eminent domain over any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence that may be controlled by private persons or entities in the interests of the public good.”
It’s interesting that out of a 64-page extensive proposal, the writer of the short press statement decided that the eminent domain provision was important enough to distinctly call out.
The bill goes on:
“(b) AVAILABILITY TO REVIEW BOARD.—Any and all such material, should it exist, shall be made available to the Review Board for personal examination and subsequent disclosure determination at a location suitable to the controlling authority of said material and in a timely manner conducive to the objectives of the Review Board in accordance with the requirements of this title.”
It appears that the eminent domain provision is in place to make it easier (and necessary) to disclose the UAP technology to the government. Private corporations can’t claim trade secrets to keep the technology or biological evidence from the transparency review board.
Under this same section that contains the eminent domain provision, the bill goes on to note that it will be up to the review board to decide “beyond a reasonable doubt” if the material is “biological evidence of non-human intelligence” or “technologies of unknown origin.” Then they will need to decide if said items qualify for “postponement of disclosure” and “what changes, if any, to the current disposition of said material should the Federal Government make to facilitate full disclosure.”
Now that’s interesting. What possible changes to alien biological evidence or technology would the government need to make in order to allow the public to know about it? And is this another reason why the government wants ownership: so they can make changes without getting a corporation’s permission first?
This same section on disclosure then goes on to talk about how the review board will have access to all testimony and witnesses “within the Federal Government’s possession as of and after the date of the enactment of this Act…” It also notes they can solicit additional witnesess.
The Definition of ‘Technologies of Unknown Origin’ Includes Aerospace & Undersea Vehicles
Also fascinating is how the bill spells out what “technologies of unknown origin” include.
It notes on page 8 that this includes: “any materials or meta-materials, ejecta, crash debris, mechanisms, machinery, equipment, assemblies or sub-assemblies, engineering models or processes, damaged or intact aerospace vehicles, and damaged or intact ocean-surface and undersea craft associated with unidentified anomalous phenomena or incorporating science and technology that lacks prosaic attribution or known means of human manufacture.”
Eminent Domain Might Affect an Aerospace Company Trying to Sell a UFO
Post Apocalyptic Media previously reported that journalist Ross Coulthart, who interviewed David Grusch for NewsNation, said sources told him that an aerospace company was trying to “divest itself” of a UFO. If true then this new amendment, if passed, could affect the ownership of that UFO and might explain why a company was trying to profit off of it as quickly as possible.
Coulthart made the statement during an interview with the Good Trouble Show on June 29. At the time, he noted that an aerospace company that owned a UFO might not be legally obligated to the government in any way.
Coulthart said: “Think about the legal implications… If you’re an aerospace company and you’ve divested yourself of an object that you’ve had possession of for 60 or 70 years, are you then legally obliged to reveal that all this time, you’ve secretly been holding it?”
He added: “…Let’s just say these allegations are correct and a private aerospace company was gifted technology 50, 60, 70 years ago — and that technology is still in their possession and they’ve been spending billions of dollars trying to develop it. On what basis can the government assert any kind of property right? … Frankly if you’re an aerospace company and you were given this, there was no commercial contract signed between you and the government at the time — and I’m told there wasn’t — and if essentially all you’re doing is quietly accounting every now and then to some faceless general for what you’re up to and showing them the latest tests of the technology, on what legal basis can the state assert any kind of property right over that technology?”
Interestingly, this amendment — if passed — would bring clarity to that question, qualifying all of that technology for governmental eminent domain.
This work by Stephanie Dwilson is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0
. Please note that this license does not include photos or videos that may be in the story.
