There is no well-documented evidence that unregulated massage therapists, are incompetent.

There is no well-documented evidence that allegedly incompetent massage therapists have caused enough harm and sufficiently serious harm in Pennsylvania to justify the need for Senate Bill 1220 to protect the public from that harm.

There is no well-documented evidence that prostitution has significantly decreased in  any state which regulates massage therapists.

16A C. J. S. Constitutional law.

"Section 498. - Arbitrary Governmental Interference. The right to engage in a lawful business or occupation is protected against arbitrary or unreasonable governmental interference under the federal and state constitutions.

"The legislature may not, under the guise of protecting the public interest, arbitrarily interfere with private business, prohibit lawful occupations, or impose unreasonable and unnecessary restrictions on them.

"For one who is qualified, the pursuit of a business or occupation is a right, and not a matter of the state's grace or favor, or a privilege subject to withdrawal or denial at the whim of the state.

(Author's comment: There is no well-documented evidence that unregulated massage therapists in Pennsylvania are unqualified to do massage.)

 "Thus, the right may not be taken away or impaired unless there is a paramount and compelling public interest. The state may not, through regulation, deprive or infringe upon the right to pursue a lawful business or occupation, unless the regulation is reasonable, or reasonably necessary to promote the public order, safety, health, morals, and welfare.

"The regulation must have a definite, rational, reasonable relationship to the legitimate state interest sought to be protected, and the right remains except as limited by provisions of the regulating statute. Furthermore, the limitation must bear a relation to the calling or profession, and compliance must be reasonably attainable.

"An individual's right to engage in a lawful business may not be arbitrarily denied to him and granted to another under the guise of regulations. There is no arbitrary deprivation of the constitutional right where its exercise is not permitted because of failure to comply with conditions imposed for the protection of society."

(Author's comment: This last sentence is the core issue in the alleged need for Senate Bill 1220. The public does not need to be protected from unregulated massage therapists, regardless of their training, they have not harmed anybody.)

"2. A city's ordinance cannot be exempt from antitrust scrutiny unless it constitutes the action of the state itself in its sovereign capacity, or unless it constitutes municipal action in furtherance or implementation of clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy."

"Constitutional Law Section 47 - sovereign authority - cities, counties, and other bodies.

"3. All sovereign authority within the geo- graphical limits of the United States resides either with the government of the United States, or with the states of the union; there may be cities, counties, and other organized bodies with limited legislative functions, but they are all derived from, or exist in subordination to, one or the other of these."

Restraints of Trade, Monopolies,

"Section 9 - federal antitrust laws - state action exempt

"When there is a pattern of activity indicating a combination or conspiracy resulting in monopolization, price fixing, or which deters actual or potential competition or which otherwise results in restraint of competition, the means used to achieve this result may be legal and yet if the result is in violation of the antitrust laws of the United States the means are also illegal, and treble damages may be available for those found to be liable. 

"Combinations which use governmental powers, administrative positions, or misuse of legal procedures have been found by the U.S. Supreme Court to be subject to liability.

"If the end result of the activities of a combination of entrepreneurs is unlawful as violative of the antitrust laws, it matters not that the means used in violation may be lawful."

 "The Supreme Court's decision in the City of Lafayette v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. case erased all doubt as to the status of cities under the federal antitrust laws.

"The Court held that cities were within the definition of "persons" under the antitrust laws and not only could sue, but could be sued as parties defendant for violations of the antitrust provisions.

"The court's decision came as a shock to cities who had been functioning under the mistaken notion that their status as political subdivisions of the state insulated them from antitrust liability."  

2. The International  Covenant on Eco-nomic,  Social and Cultural Rights recognizes that "these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person." Part 3, Article 6 states, "The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunities to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right."

The Preamble to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states; "In acc- ordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom ... can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights.

According to Article 5, No "State, group or persons" have "any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitations to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant."