US SUPREME COURT
OF THIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
James Frank Osterbur
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
and these defendants:
the president Barack Obama
US attorney general Eric H. Holder jr.
US solicitor general Neal K. Katyal
the internal revenue service
Federal Bureau of Investigation
On petition for a writ of Certiorari to this United States court of appeals, 7th circuit Chicago, IL
dated July 18, 2011
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
petitioner files pro se, as a citizen of this USA. James Frank Osterbur, 2191 county road 2500 E. St. Joseph, IL 61873
established by this case, for the purposes called democracy: as WE THE PEOPLE!
The plain and simple question presented to this court is: WILL THE EMPLOYEES OF THIS USA, Obey/ protect/ defend/ and provide the constitutional legal right called: 1st amendment, redress of grievances.
Which means:“We, the people, ARE the owners here, we are the authority under the constitution. This is a legal demand: the employees shall give true account of our nation directly to us. let the law rule us all; as equals”/ but let none misunderstand this is our democracy, we rule ourselves by law/ our employees do not rule us. The law rules them, just like us.”
The order appealed:
- IS constitutional law, the right to govern/ the right to establish the law: by consent of the people under their constitution/ OR as the appeals & district court claims, strictly by consent of the judiciary? Without their consent, there is no constitutional authority or law. THIS IS “democracy undone”. This is, REBELLION in the court against WE THE PEOPLE. 229 A 2d. 388, 394
- IS JURISDICTION, over this case in constitutional guaranteed right: “a first amendment law”. Guaranteed, and without the foundation or merit to dismiss by any court. OUR LAW/ OUR CONSTITUTION; the establishment of, your oath as an employee to obey. OR, an interpretation of the judiciary; without foundation in the constitution. A guarantee is a guarantee? 208 U.S. 412, 420.
- Is FRAUD, the denial of legal filings/ the alteration and intentional malfeasance dedicated to MISINTERPRETATION of the documents in question: a criminal act by the judiciary. 310 F. 2d, 262, 267
- CAN THE EMPLOYEES of this our government called the United States of America: choose NOT to obey the law, or their oath? Choose not to defend democracy? 389 U.S. 258.
- WHAT are the permissible terms and conditions which apply to a “report recommendations”: 255 NYS 2d. 608, 610. when the question is, THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEED RIGHT, WHICH YOU THE EMPLOYEES MUST OBEY. Does not an oath describe the job/ the contract signed and accepted: to get the job. For these defendants and the court? Does not the oath state: protect/ defend/ and obey the constitution of this USA? 282 P.2d. 1084, 1088.
- IS IT: conspiracy and corruption: the joined efforts of two separate and distinct judicial entities/ TO DENY constitutional rights and filings: by misinterpretation and malfeasance. 38 Cal. Rptr 148, 157 The trial is clear, the filings distinct: THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEED RIGHT CASE. Is it not collusion among these defendants, whose job it is to balance the power of the judiciary: and DEMAND constitutional adherence, for we the people?468 S.W. 2d. 160,163.
- IS LYING; 174 N.E. 2d. 304, 308. as is consistent within the courtrooms of this USA and this state of IL by the judiciary and its lawyers representing cases: as is their claim “rambling and mostly unintelligible filings with the court”..234 F Supp. 201, 203. …pro se complaint demonstrates no coherent claim or request for relief and that the complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted.” [order 2257 judge Michael P. McCuskey]. 237 U.S. 309 The proof being before your eyes. Proven by the filings already in existence as the cases being appealed. THEY ARE, coherent and clear! 425 P. 2d, 974, 978.
- The constitution HAS NO “unspecified demands (as is the term guaranteed) for redress or for compliance with the constitution”; 140 F. Supp. 925. THEY ARE, THE PREAMBLE OF THE US CONSTITUTION establishing the clear intent of the people/ limits for the employees.. THEY ARE, THE BILL OF RIGHTS, establishing the clear purpose of the people. THEY ARE, THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, establishing proof, “we hold these truths to be self-evident, ……that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed;…..” REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IS, THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED: that they will allow their employees to continue doing; or seek change through accountability, establishing TRUTH; and therefrom change, by their vote and authority as owners of this state and nation. According to the rights called DEMOCRACY! “Therefore, this is the trial of us, as a nation/ and cannot be dismissed regardless of whether I live or die. Should that be so, the organization MOST defined, by “we work for LIFE FIRST”. Shall be given the right to proceed. Let the people decide.
- REDRESS of GRIEVANCES, 341 U.S. 123, 162-163 by its method is: that a legal question demanding accountability in government by the people. Shall be presented in a courtroom, to a jury of the people. That by these people, they will establish for themselves a demand upon our government employees that must be honored. If yes/ redress must go forward: then according to the government entity being challenged: it is a demand: to provide the truth of what have you done. To accomplish majority rule: THERE SHALL BE repetitive trials in this redress case across the nation. As no courtroom or insignificant number of people, or plaintiff; may demand from an entire government; for proof. Rather consecutive trials, established by the people themselves, fundamentally created as a “legal majority”/ established by legal parameters and judged in jury trial by the people themselves: for the whole people.. Constitutes a legal demand upon government employees. There shall be a legal consequences for lying or failure: we demand the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The legal question established: IF WE THE PEOPLE SHALL OR SHALL NOT demand this accountability from our employees, by a legal majority ruling over our government. 286 N.W. 844, 846. AS A LEGAL DEMAND created by the owners of this government: over these employees to tell us the truth or be punished. Therefrom the right of ownership which is to change whatever we deem necessary as a people by our vote, comes true. Democracy enforced. We the people DO rule here, by our law.
- Conspiracy is validated by US supreme court trial 08-1339/ and thereby constituted the demand to determine the truth regarding redress of grievances according to article 3, section 3: should the court continue to rule against the constitution itself. Which is an act of treason/ a rebellion against this democracy called WE THE PEOPLE. 397 U.S. 254 262-264. Wherein ONLY THE CONGRESS OF THIS USA shall have the last say over the court. Article 3 section 3 US CONSTITUTION. 72 F. 2d. 560, 564. These two trials, current and past ARE: “the two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court” the same as required by the constitution itself. Should this court deny our democracy: that we the people rule ourselves, by constitutional law. Not you, the employee. WE, the people!
- THE CLEAR imbalance in power between the judiciary and the citizen; 220 U.S. 61, 78. relies upon an assumption of immunity by the judiciary. The balance of law assigns: bad behaviors SHALL be punished/ therefore outside the law, and its intent for truth and JUSTICE: 410 U.S. 113 there is no immunity. As a distinction intended: within the constitution/ bill of rights/ and declaration of independence.
- DUE PROCESS DENIED, is any part or process which actively operates within a courtroom to refuse the law or its foundation in democracy: as superior to all other constraints or purposes of power and right. Let JUSTICE be served, let the truth decide, by its evidence/ not the whim or opinion of a judge. But the law served by democracy instead. 302 U.S. 319 Not the “issuance or directive of rules”/ but the truth that serves democracy the best. That which is as section 2 of the bill of rights describes it: “that all power is vested in, and consequently derived from the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.”
Amplification of the reasons
This supreme court case is necessary, by establishment of the following. A writ is; a legal structure assigned by “the sovereign” for the purpose of compelling a person to do something mentioned therein. The constitution compels the “american government employee” to obey the constitution. Simple and plain.
The sovereign mentioned therein is the nation called; this United States of America. The legal structure identified as sovereign, is the US constitution. The purpose of compelling a judge to obey the constitution constitutes a true and legitimate “rule 10 reason”: “the US court of appeals has entered a decision ……..so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of this courts supervisory power.” Or more simply: the judiciary is compelled to obey constitutional law, it is not allowed to “pick and choose”/ it must obey constitutional law. Your courtrooms failed, the demand for first amendment redress of grievances as is the law, exists as a constitutional citizens guaranteed right.. It is the supervisory role of the US supreme court to command and insist, that its inferior courts MUST OBEY THE CONSTITUTION, including a guaranteed right as is redress of grievances.
This then conceives of, a writ of right by its association with the constitutional guarantee to me, a citizen of this USA. A contractual obligation to do what you have sworn to do, for me. That is grant to me, and every citizen our guaranteed right, called first amendment redress of grievances.
In response to this demand for constitutional law by the plaintiff, as is redress: the US court of appeals replies.
Case no: 2:10-cv-02257, Order 4/12/2011
Quote: “Litigants may permit magistrate judges to decide civil cases……but unless ALL PARTIES to the litigation consent on the record, the magistrate judge may do no more than make a recommendation……”
“In the present case, the parties have not consented in writing to proceed before a magistrate judge. Therefore this court lacks jurisdiction to proceed in a review of the magistrate judges “report and recommendation”, of March 15, 2011.
Judges William J Bauer/ Terence T. Evans/ Ann Claire Williams
THE LIE, being that this is a civil case/ it is a constitutional case, and the litigants; as well as both courts (district and appellate) know it!
That constitutes a breach of DUE PROCESS according to the fourteenth amendment. The direct denial of first amendment constitutional citizen right. And the corruption of each judicial oath of office taken by the judiciary involved. It is contempt against WE THE PEOPLE, and OUR democracy.
There is no right of consent; as to whether an employee of this USA is entitled to discard and disobey constitutional law! IT IS THE LAW, AND THEY ARE SWORN TO OBEY IT! It is our government of the people, by the law it imposes on each and every employee; as well as this people. No interpretation is allowed, to interfere with guaranteed rights.
That fact, and this evidence of contempt against the constitution and its guarantees to we the people of this USA. DEMANDS: the US supreme court shall intervene.
Or be found in open rebellion against the constitution/ thereby, people of this nation.
THE QUESTION PRESENTED FIRST: for the plaintiff.
In the correspondence of the US supreme court dated: April 27, 2011
from Ruth Jones.
You state: that certiorari must be reviewed by a United States Court of Appeals, or the highest state court in which a decision could be had. A DECISION has now been made.
This case previously tested at the appellate level was refused due to the lack of an order of the district court, determining judgment as of that time. Based upon the district courts fraudulent conveyance of a report and recommendation/ instead of an order of the court. The appellate court refused to adhere to the rules of a courtroom: “that I am entitled to a judgment, on the law presented/ NOT a mock trial, constructed by the judiciary in contempt of the law, the nation, and this people.” Again and again, as the lawsuits on redress in my name declare is: collusion/ conspiracy/ corruption/ and the criminal organized denial of constitutional law and the people of this democracy; prove true.
1 Williston contracts 1 (4th ed. 1990, 1995) a promise breached, requires the law to give a remedy.
That refusal of duty is now dismissed with the order of the district court received on this day June 7, 2011. Chief US district judge; Michael P. McCuskey. The district court thereby resurrects itself from complete failure.
The order and judgment of the district court is now in my hand.“I include that order: WITH THIS NOTICE TO THE COURT.” along with, its initiating claim for review prior to printing/ and trial at the US supreme court level.
The appellate court has also sent notice they will destroy the record in ten days. Sent June 6, 2011. Having failed the test of
THE QUESTION ESTABLISHED, IN 1 Williston contracts 1 (4th ed. 1990, 1995) a promise breached, requires the law to give a remedy.
THIS initial case first sent to the us supreme court April 20, 2011; as a test to determine:
Do you as the overseers of the judicial system of this USA, demand justice shall be done? Do you demand that the process of law, due a citizen in this USA in any lower court: BE GIVEN proper and real authority to accomplish the task of law and justice for the people under constitutional rule? Do you recognize failure and foolishness in the court over which you supervise, and correct that failed behavior; as is clearly defined previously in cases 10-2257 & appellate 11-1639? Do you establish the contractual demand that is a promise breached, requires the law to give a remedy: as is a constitutional guarantee?
Because my rights were not only breached: my demand for constitutional law, as is guaranteed to each and every citizen was ridiculed, discarded in the trash, and otherwise disrespected. Not only, did I paid money for people dressed in robes to laugh at my request for constitutional law, must be obeyed. I paid money for people whose authority comes only, from constitutional law to discard/ demean/ disgrace/ and disrespect that very law; thereby this nation. I paid money for a fair and legitimate hearing on the issues that are the law of this land, a reality that must be obeyed not only by the people, but by every single judicial/ governmental employee in this nation. Because it is the law, and you are not rulers: but employees.
There is no substance to the previous ruling applied by the appellate court: they refused judgment based upon the fact the district court did not give its judgment but relied upon “report and recommendation” which is nothing more than a fraud used to conspire, in the court: to withhold from me my constitutional guarantee. The failure to pass judgment, then a purpose clearly used entirely: simply to remove me from judicial process, as is appeal to the supreme court. This supreme court is then required: either to accept this case, OR to instruct the appellate court, now has a chance to redeem itself and renew the case called 11-1639/ voiding its issuance of mandate. So that it may choose to obey constitutional law instead.
By sending the appellate court this same document or filing of a supreme court case: to you. I do expect a supreme court case. But, In the alternative I do expect the US supreme court to instill a proper and fundamental obedience to the law and due process in the appellate court, 7th district, so that they reopen the case, and do their sworn duty. They are hereby instructed to stop the process of destruction as they have ordered, and prepare for trial; as is the law. Dependent upon your decision.
In summation: the moral turpitude 44 So 2d 802 of a judiciary conspiring to withhold a constitutionally guaranteed right from me/ both in the US district and appellate courts. Guarantees to me that a failed judgment is moot/ a mandate to dismiss not based upon law, is in error/ and a supreme court unwilling to defend the constitution of this USA with or without the support of “tiny and insignificant rules” PROVES CORRUPTION.
YOUR covenant with this people is to obey the constitutional law, and guarantee its authority, and our nation shall be ruled as WE THE PEOPLE. There is NO allowance for discarding democracy, or interpreting a bias crime; holding that this people, or me, should not be given our guaranteed constitutional rights.
Further having failed in the duties of your job, overseeing the lower courts for the purpose of justice, and the upholding and honor of democracy as is constitutional law/ places this US supreme court in disrepute. It was your job, to insure that every citizen shall find their legal solution in the court. By law. You failed, and proved disrespect for the nation/ for due process/ and a complete disregard for justice. And it establishes the base used to demand: is there a conspiracy within the judiciary of this United States of America. To deny, discard, and destroy a foundation guarantee that the American people gave to themselves: as is redress of grievances, through their constitution. According to the declaration of independence: “governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers through the consent of the governed”. Because that would be “treason”.
Proof, an enemy has taken over our government. Thereby we would expect to see, that enemy take over communications/ as in media control, by a tiny few.
A tax revolt: As is the words of the bill or rights: section 3“when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and infeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal”. Is not only our legal right/ it is our undeniable duty according to the revolutionaries who built the nation.
DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND ME, “I dare you, to prove your oaths”.
THE QUESTION PRESENTED 1: FOR THE PEOPLE
“I am simply one citizen out of an estimated 311 million people”. Just one of the masses, simple and plain.
HOWEVER THAT IS NOT at issue here in this furtherance of trial 11-1639 appealed from the 7th circuit in Chicago IL.
THIS IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; THE OATHS TAKEN TO OBEY, PROTECT, AND SERVE we the people in this democratic form of government. Nothing more or less: than the law rules/ than do we the people rule this nation/ than the authority of the constitution over law, the judiciary, and all employees; every citizen the same/ than justice for this people, as promised to each one. Simple and plain.
This is, A constitutional question before the court which affects us all/ the nation is then included. Because it is a foundation of our government: called WE THE PEOPLE! The question presented to you: “will you obey the law?” Because it is not only my right to demand first amendment guarantees; as is redress of grievances/ it is ours, as a people! IT THEN IS, your duty to enforce that right.
QUESTION PRESENTED 2: for the people
Having established that it is the judiciary itself that is on trial here/ the legal leadership of our nation called the USA. IT IS fundamentally true, that a judge cannot judge him or herself. Thereby the inclusion of the congress is justified in this case/ should the supreme court fail to properly and respectfully identify and correct the appellate judges that so arrogantly state: neither we, nor these defendants; did not consent to obey the constitution or its guarantees to this nation and its people. That is not their right under the law. Rather their sworn duty is to do exactly what this trial demands: and produce redress as defined and written within the constitution for this people and me, the plaintiff James F. Osterbur.
Should that be necessary, the congress take over trial and putting the supreme court itself on trial. They will need the investigation abilities of the federal bureau of investigation. And are thereby properly informed to pay careful attention to this trial/ and BE RESPONSIBLE TO THIS PEOPLE, for its outcome. For our constitution and democracy, as is their job. It is their duty!
THE PARTIES TO THIS PROCEEDING ARE THESE:
the US supreme court
(you must answer the question: will you obey constitutional redress of grievances law; past failure puts you on trial too)/ this has become more than a legal question: it is now a question against the judiciary: are you AT WAR against the constitution of this USA.
defendants are as listed:
United States of America
Internal Revenue Service/ dept of the Treasury; 1500 Pennsylvania ave NW DC 20220
the Solicitor General ROOM 5614, Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania ave, NW Washington DC 20530-0001
the Attorney General US dept of Justice 10th and Constitution avenues NW Washington DC 20530
the President Barrack Obama; 1600 Pennsylvania ave NW , DC 20500
Added to this list, under article 3, section 3 is now: THE US CONGRESS, for the US SENATE, JOE BIDEN officer pro tem, Washington DC 20510. For the US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JOHN BOEHNER office of the speaker, H232 the capitol, Washington DC 20515 and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. ROBERT S. MUELLER 935 Pennsylvania ave NW Washington DC 20535‑0001
Because issues have arisen with treason; against the USA. Signs of corruption/ conspiracy/ and collusion in the courtroom of this United States, against the constitution of this USA; and this people.
It is the congress with the power to decide; such questions as these. It is the federal bureau of investigation that provides the service called “knowledge and understanding, as applied under the evidence as must be submitted to trial under law.”
These, the FBI; are charged with: the intent, that a full and complete accounting of these proceedings, these decisions shall be made before this entire US population/ called WE THE PEOPLE. It is our nation, this is our democracy, those who defile or disrespect us are enemies to be held to account, by their own truth, actions, and decisions.
TABLE OF CONTENTS: PAGES
THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS;
FOR THE NATION…………………………………2-7.
Amplification of the reasons ………………… ….. 7-9
THE QUESTION PRESENTED FIRST;
FOR THE PLAINTIFF …………………………. 9-13
QUESTION PRESENTED 1; for the people…………………………………:……………………13
QUESTION PRESENTED 2:for the people……………………………………………………….14
PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING………….14-15
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………..16
THE AUTHORITY; Our DEMOCRACY……17-19
DECISIONS BELOW/ OPINIONS REVIEWED.
(you are neither rulers or gods)………………..19-23
STATE OF JURISDICTION/ CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION……………………………………………….23-24
STATEMENT OF THE CASE…………………..24-26
GRANTING THE WRIT/ REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES………………………………………..26-28
DEMOCRACY IN ACTION……………………..28-30
THE AUTHORITY: OUR DEMOCRACY
It is our original jurisdiction as a people united under the auspices and laws of constitutional authority called WE THE PEOPLE. That establishes our right to proceed in demanding that the employees of our nation SHALL do their jobs. Shall be responsible for the oaths they took, to the people of this United States of America. Because the agreement under which this nation stands is the constitution and its two founding documents in support thereof; the bill of rights & the declaration of independence. These are sovereign and immune from attack. Therein we do understand as is consistent with our agreements as a democracy; which govern the possibilities and duties of us all. Redress is our right.
According to that declaration of independence, the following is found:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted, among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it; and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness”.
According to the bill of rights; section 2; that all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them. Section 3; that government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-administration ; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purpose, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and infeasible right to REFORM, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal. And section 4; that no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community, …..”.
According to the constitution itself, its preamble: “WE the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.”
In other words, OUR GOVERNMENT as is depicted in part by these primary words of understanding and agreement DOES ESTABLISH: that the law of this land, the supreme and sovereign right of this people. Shall be, to do whatever they believe is BEST for their society, for this nation, by the conference of value, called redress of grievances. Wherein as it shall be clearly proven necessary: we shall find, the truth/ the whole truth/ and nothing but the truth! “So help us GOD”.
Because whether you believe or not isn’t an issue, LIFE GIVES US THE RIGHT, to not only demand equality, but guarantee justice. Because no one, “creates themselves”. Or more simply; We the people, are immune, from your suggestions of superiority: that we cannot be a democracy unto ourselves. Rather I tell you true: OUR CONSTITUTION IS SOVEREIGN, not you. Our right to decide, the fundamental truth that is democracy itself, by law and through redress: belongs to no one else, but we the people.
By the essence of life itself; the evidence that proves WE are special/ NOT just you. OUR government was formed. Today: Our reality has already established, THE absolute NEED FOR CHANGE IS GREAT! And we must protect ourselves, for life, nature, world, and even planet. Because those who represent us have failed: REQUIRES IMMEDIATE we the people intervention/ through legal redress, and a tax revolt to prove we are the authority, and the constitution/ bill of rights/ and declaration of independence: is our government: NOT the employees. Let the people decide.
GIVE THEM their democracy/ GIVE THEM THEIR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, to become again united as one people called this United States of America. For the purpose of protecting, demanding, and preforming the duties of citizenship: to keep the truth alive as our nation is intended to be. Establish this courtroom called redress, for the people. IT’S THE LAW. It is not “your choice”/ it’s the law. IT IS OUR CHOICE, as a people to decide.
THE DECISIONS/ opinions, reviewed:
In this trial appealed from 11-1639; 7th circuit, Chicago IL. It is blatantly clear, that the purposes of these judges William J. Bauer/ Terence T. Evans/ and Ann Claire Williams. Discarded constitutional authority as had been granted to them over this case for the purposes of WE THE PEOPLE, as the constitution prescribes.
No delusion/ no interpretation/ no authority to refuse, disguise, disrespect, or disgrace this action demanding redress of grievances exists. Because the constitution is clear: redress of grievances is a legal citizens guaranteed right. That law being one, of the original and fundamental principles of this system of government. Created in accordance with and accepted by this people as their form of government, their decision to be “the democracy called; this United States of America”. 229 A. 2d 388, 394. To discard constitutional authority is open rebellion against this democracy and all it stands for. An act of treason, by degrees
These judges dismiss the case, which clearly and deliberately seeks redress of grievances: for lack of jurisdiction; order filed 4/ 12/ 11. Thereby choosing to perjure themselves in court. Fully knowing that this is a constitutional law case, distinctly demanding the guaranteed rights to each and every citizen by OUR CONSTITUTION. That being distinguished from a law, which is a rule of conduct prescribed by the legislature onto the people/ the constitution is instead the rule of this democracy prescribed by the people unto the legislature and this judiciary. Therefrom balanced in its concept of rule over power and right within this society.
These judges contend, “unless all parties to the litigation consent on the record, ……the parties have not consented in writing to proceed before a magistrate judge. Therefore this court lacks jurisdiction to proceed…” There is no authority over the constitution by the judiciary or any other employee of this people. That means there is no discretion as to whether our employees must obey the constitution and provide the guarantees of constitutional LAW, to this citizen or not. They must, it is not a matter of consent, discretion, interpretation, recommendation, or other. It’s the law, as applied to each and every defendant/ because these are the representatives of government most directly responsible for INSURING THAT THE CONSTITUTION SHALL BE HONORED, RESPECTED, AND OBEYED BY EVERY EMPLOYEE, including them. In other words, the judges LIE in open court/ preferring treason the direct and deliberate intent, decision, and actions as are consistent with tearing down our democracy; and destroying the guarantees of our people. That is the act of a traitor/ that is the act of someone bribed or protecting another, because insufficient evidence exists to believe they are so insolent and subversive as to do it simply for the sake of ridicule. Something else exists, or they are three distinctly stupid fools. A matter to be investigated, for the nation regardless of this trial.
These three judges by their order agree: to steal from me DUE PROCESS of LAW/ as is guaranteed to each and every citizen. By lies they suggest this matter is still in the hands of the district court/ Urbana IL; from which it arose as 10-2257. But it is not, by their decision or the decision of the defendants lawyer, they call and describe and set into the files; this replacement: a DE NOVO trial in this appellate court on 4/11/11. Or more simply the appeals court took ownership of the trial; and created a “new trial” on their own. That means they may no longer rely upon the district “report and recommendation” of March 15, 2011. But must give to me the opportunity to respond PRIOR to the decision that shall be made. They refuse. The mail was not received by me until 4/ 13/ 11, reply was sent 4/ 14/ 11/ their order of 4/ 12/ 11 came in the mail on 4/ 15/ 11. Or more simply, due process was clearly and deliberately denied, with the certain intent NOT to accept, or allow; any filing I might send. And act in a way that could defy my right to have my own statement registered as a part of this trial. That is against the law: I deserve my day in court, my chance to defend myself and establish the guarantees promised to me by this nation. This nation, deserves that right as well: it is our duty as a citizen to provide the work necessary to defend our democracy. The constitution is my power here to demand: due process shall be provided to me. Thereby this US supreme court case/ this case before the leadership and the people of this USA is a test: establishing with certainty WHO does rule this nation. Our employees, or OUR CONSTITUTION. Or more simply: did this people/ does this people surrender their democracy to the invaders that have so clearly taken over? The fact, this question exists: ESTABLISHES ANARCHY, the deliberate violence that asserts, “law does not matter here/ because we are now, our own law”. A reality of traitors in our midst in our employ as government officials and the judiciary/ the consequence, a nation in crisis. A constitution under attack! Literally warred against/ by those who want power over us, instead of our authority over them. That is open rebellion/ an act of treason. The constitution is a restriction upon the powers of our employees, a grant of recognizable authority given to the people, through their redress of grievances, and due process. Both being denied to me. The defendants job as leaders, protectors, defenders and servants of the constitution for this nation/ the courts job to obey the constitution without prejudice, establishing justice for all. Comes with the demand: to preserve our rights as individuals through democracy. So do you swear. An oath denied.
The constitution is the law of this land 140 F. Supp. 925. And it cannot be abrogated, even in part; by the actions or decisions of ANY employee. It is the supreme or sovereign law of America, and IMMUNE from all threats; particularly in a courtroom of this USA. That agreement is “OUR GOVERNMENT”. To find it threatened with such contempt as these three judges have applied; is treason. To recognize those in the primary role of legal leadership as are the defendants suggests collusion in and of itself. Because the oath of office says: TO DEFEND, PROTECT, AND OBEY THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS UNITED STATES. That makes it a duty, as a defendant here; fully informed of the rights and realities being established: to intervene. Its your sworn job, under penalty with consequences. There is no exception/ there is no immunity/ there is no delusion as to what was demanded. That leaves no illusion about whose side is defended: the people or the judiciary. It is your duty at this moment prior to court: to establish constitutional law, regardless of who fails to uphold it.
STATE OF JURISDICTION/ CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION
THE DEMAND OF THIS PLAINTIFF REMAINS THE SAME: Establish for me, and the citizens of this nation our guaranteed right of redress of grievances according to the first amendment of the Constitution of this United States of America. So that we shall decide for ourselves, the future of our nation, the reality of what shall or shall not threaten us, and the foundations of democracy that must be changed. So as to provide and preserve for ourselves, the protections and freedoms we require for a future to survive.
Simple as that; OBEY THE LAW. Or more cleanly: obey our law, BY ESTABLISHING OUR RIGHT TO REDRESS. As owners of this democracy called the USA, or more distinctly established: this is called : WE THE PEOPLE.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is now a choice presented to the president of this USA Barack Obama. To preform the oath of office he has taken and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. For the people, and this, their democracy: Their right, to choose for themselves as a people united for life.
This is now a choice presented to the US attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. To preform the oath of office he has taken and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. For the people, and this, their democracy: Their right, to choose for themselves, as a people united for life.
This is now a choice presented to the US solicitor general Neal K. Katyal. To preform the oath of office he has taken and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. For the people, and this, their democracy: Their right, to choose for themselves, as a people united for life.
This is now a choice presented to the US internal revenue service (no name given). To preform the oath of office he or she has taken and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. For the people, and this, their democracy: Their right, to choose for themselves. Their right to establish a tax revolt, as their means of establishing authority over our employees: with a clear and certain objectives to defend this constitution and this democracy. By stating, with fair and clear assertions “the expected penalties or consequences shall be these”; as would be consistent with the 2005 tax filing of the plaintiff. A reality required for court. So that none are surprised, should they join this revolt/ this demand to stand up for the democracy called WE THE PEOPLE, and be counted.
This is now a choice presented to the US CONGRESS, to declare before the people/ what is acceptable, in terms of the performance of an oath, a right of the people guaranteed by the constitution of this USA; and incumbent upon the judiciary to deliver. Thereby a decision: To preform the oath of office he or she has taken and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. By balancing the power of the judiciary, with the truth: YOU CANNOT rebel against our democracy. IT IS OURS/ NOT yours; you, are an employee for us, and not immune from bad behavior. Choosing, only the constitution and founding documents are sovereign/ NO employee. That, is a decision; For the people, and this, their democracy. Their right, to choose for themselves, as a people united for life.
This is now a choice presented to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. To establish, by the investigation of facts: whether or not a conspiracy, collusion, or corruption exists against the US CONSTITUTION by the judiciary. In terms of this redress of grievances, or any other: and the actions taken by the judiciary which are NOT by any construction a method or manner of justice or right; neither the law nor due process as is promised to each and every citizen here. You shall begin with this trial and its predecessors, including US supreme court docketed case 08-1339. James F. Osterbur vs USA and state of IL.
To preform the oath of office you have taken: and defend, protect, and obey the constitution of this USA. You must be “blind to the assumptions of immunity for the judiciary”; it is not so. You work For the people, and this, their democracy. Their right, to choose for themselves. Their right as WE THE PEOPLE to demand: you shall do your job for us/ NOT simply “for them”.
GRANTING THE WRIT:
REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES:
Contrary to the assertion that I “believe myself to be important enough to question these people in relation to their job/ their oath/ and their leadership of this nation. Is the clear and complete acceptance of our reality: that we are in trouble as a nation, at the edge of crisis and turmoil worse than the first civil war, and in need of the knowledge required to make true and accurate decisions for ourselves as we the people. Even so, I do not stand as “power over them”/ I stand as a citizen equal to them, under constitutional law. That is the authority of democracy, or “we rule ourselves through law”. Instead of we the ruled, by whatever our employees decide.
THAT democracy/ that right of citizenship; establishes simply, although I am distinctly aligned with the legal aspects of trial, by being the plaintiff. There is absolutely no denying this is a constitutional trial, and a matter of guaranteed right; as is consistent with the constitution. The law of this USA; 389 U.S. 258. Meaning this trial is about our nation, as each individual citizen requires it to be, according to the guarantees promised to us all. That requires an understanding as is consistent with the purposes of redress of grievances, a first amendment constitutional legal law/ A DUE PROCESS RIGHT, as granted by the fourteenth amendment 391 U.S. 145. Granting to we the people a true and accurate accounting from our right to be owners, our leadership, employed: for the people. That purpose being, so that we may see inside the truth of our nation/ our existence as ourselves: that WE ARE A DEMOCRACY. Which means WE ARE, “THE OWNERS HERE”, with distinct rights under redress. The issues of substance in this day, require of us all: to decide if we shall let this nation fail? As the reality of evidence regarding our reality explains. Accepting our leaders have failed us all. OR STAND for ourselves, and make the future what we shall choose, by vote on the most important issues of our time; for ourselves. Not voting for someone to vote for me/ but voting on the truth of what we demand this democracy shall be, this future for our lives. We are able.
What the employees have demanded instead, or have changed this “government to be” is not democracy: but just another form of communism. Because the current expenditure is $3.8 trillion dollars; OR $38,000.00 per each one of one hundred million people. This fact: Establishes they rule over our lives by stealing our own money. Did we say to our employees take everything and you decide? Not me! To understand, that control over this amount of money; means we are NOT allowed to choose our destiny or our ways, methods, or means to live within this society. Instead our rulers do, with the money stolen from us all; whatever they want. That is, Redistributing our wealth to themselves, or their benefactors who provide an election bought instead of earned. “Because they say; WE are superior to you”. That is an act of rebellion achieved. This lie, they know better; changing the very framework of our society, has been proven a disaster for us, by them. They were wrong. This lie, that is functioning as the same methods called communism; whereby a tiny few make all the decisions for the whole/ has proven to be not only an open rebellion against democracy, but a theft of the nation itself. Literally from our hands to theirs. Because even though these leaders do not say, “they rule over us as kings or queens”/ the actual facts describing their own possession and dominion over our lives, controlling the very foundations of what we require to live, the nature we are dependent upon to survive, the threats to our very world and all life on earth. Are found in their possession, and under their control/ proving it is indeed so. Describing a nation captured, a humanity enslaved for their purposes, by decisions that we are not allowed to make for ourselves. That is anarchy.
DEMOCRACY IN ACTION:
You are not allowed to refuse; each one. So says the oath sworn to us/ so says the constitution of this USA/ so say the people, let them prove it is not so.
Even to fight against constitutional law is an act of open rebellion against our very society, against us all, because that is the law. There is no issue of consent: It is not an option/ there is no other interpretation/ no discretion allowed: it is the law. And you must obey too! That is the foundation of this society called:
WE THE PEOPLE!
If you refuse/ shall there not be consequences! “Is treason NOT, what you believe you are”/ BUT, the truth of what you actually did do?
LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE. Not me.
In summary, this case exists only because a letter was sent to the pro se clerk of the US supreme court/ which resulted in an order from the district court finally being sent to me. Otherwise like other cases; “it just disappears”. Proving a conspiracy to deny what is constitutional law called redress of grievances. As is provided in #47 of the appendix; a short list of the many delusional rants and ravings of the courts involved; all claiming frivolous/ incomprehensible/ etc; to my claim of both state and nation, that OUR EMPLOYEES must do their job as the constitution demands rather than whatever they choose; as is consistent with the claim of a ruler/ rather than an employee. Their claims are proven untrue again/ as this case is not frivolous, nor incomprehensible, etc. Investigate for yourselves.
Then establish: if I a pro se litigant who has successfully defended against all the legal claims/ only to be driven from the law by what is nothing more than delusional “ranting and ravings” from the court: or more specifically lies. What chance for justice does any other pro se litigant have? The answer is absolutely none; proven again it is not the law that rules, but the whim and opinion of a judge. That is not democracy/ that is treason. The balance of power is missing; buried under the weight and burden of a claim by the judiciary for immunity: it “patently and without merit”: does not deserve.
REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IS; our right as owners of this nation established by our vote/ our democracy established by our laws/ and the distinction called we the people in full view for the world to see.
The judiciary having declared themselves immune from the people, the law, and the constitution in terms of redress of grievances either state or nation/ have effectively declared war against the people; by removing the balance of power, which makes them responsible for what they do. The failure to obey the law/ your oath/ our constitution is treason.
The clear demand: that no true access to the court exists without paying the lawyer exists as extortion.
The foundation, purpose and passion of this work is NOT legal, but the reality: this world, is in grave danger/ and we only die once. We cannot be wrong. See appendix #45 THE SIGNS OF A true CONSPIRACY, “NOTHING is more important than controlling the people”. And #46, “extreme issues; we must address as a nation and world. www.justtalking3.info”
The trial in US DISTRICT COURT 10-2277 as identified in appendix #45 is conspiracy without doubt: to rule our lives/ rather than serve; to destroy our lives/ rather than protect; to claim superiority “they know”/ rather than to accept equality with the people; and does establish that not only does the federal system of courts deny first amendment redress of grievances. This 10-2277 is a demand to make the state judiciary of IL provide its own guaranteed redress of grievances to the IL people. David G. Bernthal judge.
This US SUPREME court case is about redress/ this case is about guaranteed rights state and nation. This trial by the list of defendants proves every single defendant does have the ability to make the case happen. And today we see: “is this democracy, WE THE PEOPLE”/ or is it treason: “ruled not served”.
petitioner files pro se, as a citizen of this USA. James Frank Osterbur, 2191 county road 2500 E. St. Joseph, IL 61873
OF THE UNITED STATES
James Frank Osterbur ,
The United States of America &
The State of Illinois
On petition for a writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th circuit, Chicago IL
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
petitioner files pro se, as a citizen both of IL and this USA
James Frank Osterbur
2191 county road 2500 E
St. Joseph, IL 6187
The first amendment to the US constitution states and gives the following legal right: “….or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. ”
As there can be NO DOUBT, or legal argument as to the condition of this USA in terms of “grievances” as to how our employees both of state and nation have failed to protect our lives, failed to protect our money, have created numerous threats that could lead to our extinction as a nation, world, or all life on earth. The critical question examined within the various courts of law that have preceded this case are all focused on the vary same issue. WE THE PEOPLE, MUST HAVE THE NECESSARY INFORMATION ABOUT OUR SITUATION IN BOTH STATE AND NATION, that we may truly know what is important for us to address, what is necessary for us to protect for ourselves, and our future, and our children’s future. And our world. Because it is clear, the leaders of this nation, OUR EMPLOYEES of government, who are assigned to do, “according to the intent and mandate of this US and state constitution” have failed. They lack clarity, they discard honor, they despise honesty, and they cannot be trusted. Therefore we this nation and this state, MUST have a redress of grievances to protect ourselves from further damage by people who do not know what they are doing/ don’t care about what they are doing/ or are so corrupt in what they are doing, that criminal charges must occur.Therefore the question to the court is:WILL YOU HONOR, THE FIRST AMENDMENT: REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION?
PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING
Petitioner: James Frank Osterbur
2191 county road 2500 E
ST. Joseph IL, 61873
Respondent: those authorities that do represent the vested interests of the state of Illinois as their respective leaders. Currently that leader for IL is Governor Patrick Quinn.
Respondent: those authorities that do represent the vested interests of the United States of America according to their job.
The president of the United States: Mr. Barack Obama as head of the executive branch of government
The US attorney general Mr. Eric Holder, as head of legal representation for the congress and legislative bodies.
The US SUPREME COURT JUDGES, as head of the judicial services for this USA.
And initially/ but certainly not last: as the single largest and most immediate threat of the moment, as we know it to be: the national ignition facility, chief scientist: Dr. John Lindl , at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, Livermore CA.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING….ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS………………..iii
DECISIONS BELOW…………….. ….6-7
REDRESS GRIEVANCES…………… .7-25
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES……………. 25
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS—— 28
STATEMENT OF THE CASE………. …29
APPELLATE DECISION CONFLICTS———30-32
APPELLATE DECISION IS WRONG———–32-34
I. The decision of the appellate court is in denial of the purpose, intent, confines, and merit established FOR THE PEOPLE, with regards to the fist amendment redress of grievances. An amendment for the people, NOT for the discretion of any judge/ NOT by the judgment of any “lawyer rhetoric”. Rather it is the law, that every judge must follow. The promise to the people, that they shall indeed own their government as WE THE PEOPLE. Consequently the assumptions of ANY other claim are null and void. The rights of WE THE PEOPLE shall be protected. The decision of the appellate court pleads “he cannot be allowed a constitutional guaranteed right/ by lying about the document presented, me, the law, and their oath to protect the constitution, not the status quo.
II. THE DECISION of the appellate court (appendix) BELOW, IS WRONG in these further respects.
A. THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE cannot be tampered with by a judge / the constitution guarantees a legal redress of grievances: the people’s right/ not a judge’s discretion.
B. The development of a legal right to petition the government as WE THE PEOPLE, of whom I am the petitioner. IS A LEGAL RIGHT GRANTED TO THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES, not to lawyers/ not to legal jargon or failures or consequences of irrelevant law; wherein only the constitution does in fact rule. The constitution is thereby judge, as to whether this petition is warranted. And the reality is that those parameters set forth in the preamble as to the purposes and practice of our employees who we do grant to call “our government”/ HAVE NOT been met with duty, honor, honesty, responsibility to the people, or legal respect for the people. Our very lives, and our very nation are threatened by the employees who have failed.
C. This foundation of failure by our employees. This understanding and value and contractual declaration by the constitution/ as to WHAT our employees of government are intended to do for WE TH E PEOPLE is then expanded within the forty questions BASED UPON that preamble, and our situation as created by these employees: for questioning them, for defining and investigating the damage they have done, and for setting the values and liberties and honor of this nation aright; as WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS IS set forth before the court below.
1. Based upon law, what is the constitutional mandate of the court? This case called incoherent and frivolous/ deals directly with the health, economy, future, and honor of this nation, AND the protection of its people, even its land and water: according to the US constitution. It does NOT seek rebellion/ BUT IT DOES DEMAND AN ACCOUNTING TO PROVE WHAT IS REAL, TRUE, AND FUNDAMENTALLY ACCURATE SO THAT ALL FRAUD AND DELUSION SHALL STOP. Prove it is not so.
2. Based upon law, what is the foundation and merit of aligning frivolous and incoherent against the clear possibilities of mass murder and terrorist actions: WHEN IN FACT, the experiments about to be undergone, CANNOT BE called benign/ NOR can they be stated as known conclusions, for they are experiments. In contrast: When the law of physical action and energy requires a reaction that will be equal; and the stated facts by the experimental staff in question dictate as much energy will be released as a multi-megaton bomb, in a suburb of San Francisco. What then is unclear, about risk/ and protection of the people, nation, and world?
3. Based upon law and constitutional mandate, when shall the employees of government stop: upon what terms exactly, is the risk too high; and therefrom THIS COURT, must intervene to protect the people and the nation/ so that the gamblers do not destroy us all? SO THAT OUR WORLD, and our nation is in fact protected above those who do play “satan” (the intent to destroy, even a world). What cannot be undone, what is fundamentally a threat or potential threat to life, environment, nature, or ecology: ALL REPRESENT an end to life! Where does the boundary called LIFE FIRST demand this will not be so?
4. Based upon law and constitutional guarantees: exactly when does the legal guarantees of a first amendment redress of grievances become an action of the people/ whereby the employees shall give account for what they have done? IF NOT TODAY, WHEN THE TRAGEDY OF ERROR, BAD JUDGMENT, AND THREATS THAT EXTEND TO A WORLD, is not enough: then prove the right to interpret differently. Explain this in detail.
5. Based upon law and constitutional guarantees to protect this nation and its people, and its children, and their futures: WHEN is the stealing, the lying, the mutilating, the threats, the foundation of failure, the disease of arrogance so blatant, and the desertion of duty with regard to this nation, its children, or this world: To much? We are threatened on every side, investigation and prosecution of the facts will prove that: WE CAN BE EXTERMINATED by men. When does the court get to make a decision/WHEN DO THE PEOPLE GET TO MAKE THIS DECISION: that literally subjects this nation to life or death: without even an investigation? When does the judge or group of judges, become an executioner for us all, should they be wrong? The answer is: when they assume, the risk/ and tell the people they have no say, a judge or an official has gone too far. That is not democracy/ it is tyranny, and you have no right. PROVE this is not so.
6. Based upon law and constitutional guarantees: when is due process so pitifully small and insignificant, that liars may use fraud to misdirect the court, and turn away the needs, the life, the future, and the guarantees of a citizen of this United States of America: with frivolous and incoherent stupidity. Grossly misrepresenting justice, and protecting only the powerful? With such pitiful disgrace as rules, or the outright fraud of judges who proclaim “can’t understand/ what a grade school child can”. When are lies, such as trillions of dollars added to a debt we cannot already pay: anything but fraud/ theft/ and blatant power over the people? What is your merit, where is your honor, what is honest about FRAUD.
7. Based upon law, when do trivial rules supersede the sanctity and honor of the people: their right to justice, the protection of the people, THE DUTY and responsibility to aid and abet happiness, hope, peace and the honor of this nation and this world? There is no excuse for not understanding these words; judges who pretend to be children are not welcomed. Broken oaths, are fundamentally possessions of the people, and subject to their decision/ not yours.
8. Based upon law: the constitution, article three section 1 states: “The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme court…..” Prove what you cannot hear as, or under original jurisdiction, anything you choose. Section two: “the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, …….” Prove this case is anything, but that/ for it is only that and nothing more. And again: “To controversies…… between a state, or the citizens thereof, ….” For I bring to trial the state of IL, for absolute fiscal failure, in bringing this state to bankruptcy, and taking away the financial realities of our lives/ my life, as I am now expected and must endure the consequences of that failure. The demand for a complete accounting is absolute/ the reality of fiscal failure is solidified by the state officials, own words. I have a right to know: what these employees of state, and the employees of this nation have done to me, to our nation, and the clear accounting of what is real: NO MORE LIES, the truth. IT IS OUR MONEY/ AND OUR LIVES: NOT YOURS! WE ARE THE OWNERS! Is this not a first amendment redress of grievances case/ is not the first amendment a critical legal right/ guaranteed to the people; by which the judge, the congress, and the president must abide? Prove it is not so.
9. Prove due process is functionally NOT the duty of this court to protect according to the fourteenth amendment: granting immunities from frivolous, incoherent, or dishonorable actions by any judge, any representative of a judge, or in fact any employee of government or state. An amendment demanding: NO UNDUE restrictions shall be applied to the citizen, JUSTICE, and LAW shall come first. Prove you have done your duty/ prove those under your direct command as a district and appellate court, have done theirs.
10. Based upon the law: establish the facts regarding the rights of a citizen of this United States, when entering a courtroom and demanding justice, fair play, and with sufficient evidence to assert: A first amendment redress of grievances is required of you. Prove the need for rules, that do not refine justice and protect life and society for the masses. Prove that words, and evidence, and rights are not more important than a diploma. Prove it is not your job: to serve this nation first, to protect all the people first, to give this people DEMOCRACY as intended by the constitution. And as applied under the direction of WE THE PEOPLE.
11. Based upon the law and the constitution: establish who owns this nation. AND CREATE THEIR AUTHORITY UNDER THE LAW, over the employees of government.
12. Based upon the law, and the constitution: ESTABLISH THE DUTY owed to the owners of this nation by its employees. Explain the facts regarding: WHAT IS FAIR, WHAT IS HONORABLE, & WHAT IS TRUE. Which means NO MORE delusions and grandeur, no more lies or infatuation with pride, no more fantasies about being “a super power”/ and a return to life first.
13. Based upon the law, and the constitution: explain the levels of ownership, and the rights of that owner, and the obligations of that owner to this nation. Explain, “if the employees, servants, or slaves of this nation: have a duty, an obligation, or a right to refuse. Explain as an owner, WHAT IS YOUR DUTY AS WELL. Explain as a temporary citizen/ owner (meaning you too will die)/ WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE FUTURE.
14. Based upon the law, and the constitution: explain the meaning of interpretation (what is your responsibility as a court, to the integrity and purpose of the document upon which OUR LAW, AND OUR NATION rests), and define the responsibilities of the interpreters, in protecting the sanctity and truth for a nation of people? For you/they are hired employees, and hold no position as god, or ruler, and ARE NOT immune to the law itself. Therefore these are not free, but assigned with duty, and a demand for discipline.
15. Based upon the law, and the constitution: establish the responsibility of the employees to the people, with regard to protecting the equity; “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…” as interpreted within the fourth amendment. WHERE DOES THE GAMBLING STOP/ WHEN HAS TRUTH BEEN DISOBEYED, and the LIARS taken control? Absolute truth and clarity in the accounting and creation of control by the law; is our right.
16. Based upon the law, and the constitution, according to the seventh amendment, describing “in suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved …” Or more simply: this case represents MORE than a small amount of money: liars and thieves are in plain sight, and they are many. A case involving the realities of costs burdening an entire state & nation; even affecting this world. A case denied, by perjury within the appellate court, 7th circuit: “they did understand/ and, these words are not incoherent or frivolous”. There is no doubt, they understood perfectly.
17. Based upon the law, and the constitution: the thirteenth amendment guarantees “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude…..shall exist within the United States…” Yet the balance of power applied by the numbers generated by our employees of the federal government prove: that the majority are indeed slaves or involuntary servants, because the numbers, the methods, and the actions held by a few people, have made it impossible for the vast majority to know: True freedom or liberty, as money proves to be a barrier and a weapon to deny their own rights, lives, and hopes. Prove this is constitutionally acceptable. Prove: for a few people, to have the lives of so many people “held by ransom, in their numbers”; is not criminal and in contempt for the purposes and desires, called democracy. The foundation intent, for this nation is DEMOCRACY FOR ALL THE PEOPLE. Our Reality then, does not allow slavery, not by any method or means.
18. Prove based upon the law, under the purposes and desire for justice to all the people: what is fair about numbers that can be used against, all/ the vast majority of, the people. What is unfair for the majority, is for a few, to have immense power over them. Prove this is not tyranny. Prove freedom does not have a price/ and that price is honesty in the assertion of power, the means called pride. Or more simply: THERE SHALL BE LIMITS/ so that all may join in prosperity, and not become slaves to the few.
19. Prove based upon the constitution as the foundation of ALL law in this nation: that it, the constitution, does not have jurisdiction above the courts, legislatures, or president. THAT THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT THE FOUNDATION OF ALL LAW. And If, the constitution does have jurisdiction/ then the preamble to that constitution dictates the direction, the desire, and the purpose of the nation itself. It defines the limits of every law/ and assigns every action or reaction by an employee of government called WE THE PEOPLE: to its purposes and desires for this nation. Therefore our employees are granted knowledge, and they Must, carry themselves and their work, through to this end, to this purpose and abide within this law. Regardless of what ” citizen authorities might say”.
20. Based upon the law; The constitutional demand to preserve this nation, and protect its people and its children: is fundamental to this nation. THEN, ESTABLISH how the ransacking, rape, destruction of everything necessary for life, the gambling with nature itself by purposely mutilating it, the weapons of mass destruction, and the failures in countless arena’s of hope and happiness can exist? Prove the law and the constitution do not demand you shall obey, and choose LIFE FIRST. PROVE the employees of government have not so badly stripped honor, respect, dignity, and duty from this nation, that it no longer bares any resemblance to constitutional intent/ AND THEN EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS SO, as the protectors and defenders of the constitution itself: The us supreme court.
21. Based upon the law, PROVE THAT DEBTS DO NOT HAVE TO BE PAID/ THAT ACCOUNTING DOES NOT NEED TO BE REAL/ AND THAT WHERE BANKRUPTCY IS EVIDENT AND TRUE: there will not be a remedy within the law. Prove the people must work for lies, liars, and fraud; because if they don’t, then they die. Prove truth in the money/ or stop the descent into absolute economic chaos and civil war.
22. Based upon the law: PROVE THAT FRAUD, the intentional presentation of false & misleading information, for the purpose of controlling the decision of others: wherein we the people must rely upon that information/ and base our own decision: FOR OUR FUTURE, OUR CHILDREN, OUR LIVES; therefrom is NOT an injury to the people. We have indeed been injured, because LIARS control the information we receive. PROPAGANDA is everywhere. There can be no trust in government, there can be no trust in financial institutions, there can be no trust in the money supply, there can be no trust in suggestions that to multiply the numbers called money by trillions of dollars is not inflation. There can be no trust in “letting the wealthy grow their numbers by trillions”/ while letting the poor and majority simply have enough to survive, if they can: is anything but slavery. It surely is. There can be no trust in dollars, when the numbers represented by each 1 trillion dollars is equal to 50 million workers, at $20,000.00 dollars each. It is fraud. Change this, or be charged with criminal contempt, intent, theft, and corruption.
23. Based upon the numbers called money, WHEN does theft become apparent and real/ when is fraud too much to endure? When it is said that social security for the masses is indebted by 52 trillion dollars= $1.05 million per worker in unpaid debts. Is that enough to declare fraud? Is that enough to understand theft has occurred and investigate before all the people to determine WHERE DID THIS MONEY GO? Because the people paid/ so where did the money go? Is this not their right to know, who stole their future. PROVE REALITY/ NOT DELUSION or subjected to lies. Prove what is true today/ NO predictions for the future, WHAT IS SIMPLY TRUE IN THIS MOMENT OF TIME. We will decide, who is thief.
24. Based upon the law, establish the penalties for those directly responsible for attacking the people, by adhering to the enemy and subverting the guaranteed rights of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Are these guaranteed rights, such as is represented by this case: immune from attack by our employees, or not. IS THE RIGHT TO MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION AS A CITIZEN OF THIS USA, in matters that are fundamentally presented, with legitimate evidence, predicting life or death for the nation, the children, or the world: not a guarantee: WE THE PEOPLE need to know/ so that WE THE PEOPLE shall then decide? If not, then who has the right to decide, A RISK: that includes, the fate of every life on this planet? Because fools are risking this very thing/ and because the experiment has not been carried out/ nor can it be carried out without treason to the people: NO prediction apart from “this is possible” can be made. WE THE PEOPLE DO, HAVE THE RIGHT TO DECIDE FOR OURSELVES/ if this risk is too high. My life/ our lives; Our decision under the law, by investigation of the evidence/ OR JUST PLAIN REFUSAL to accept any such risk at all. Thereby demanding the end of ALL, “big science” forever.
25. Based upon the law, WHO HAS THE RIGHT to mutilate nature itself? Who has the right to gamble with every food we eat? Who has the right to ransack and remove every resource? Who has the right to waste the water, or use it unwisely? Who has the right to threaten a world, or even a single child without protection from the law? Answer the question. IS IT NOT YOUR JOB, AS THE US SUPREME COURT TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE, INCLUDING THE FUTURE? Prove what is required of you.
26. Based upon the law: ESTABLISH the parameters through investigation, that determine criminal corruption in government. The list, of what you an employee of the people SHALL NOT DO/ and the punishment that WILL be applied if you fail to abide in that demand.
And then create the foundation upon which WE THE PEOPLE, shall NOT pay any more tax, until this corruption is ended, the criminal is brought to justice/ or the nation is returned to life first, and not the fraud of money.
27. Based upon the law: establish the penalty for those who have taken the property and equity of WE THE PEOPLE, and spent it carelessly and without any sense of truth, or duty, or responsibility, or honor, or honesty, ETC. Creating for the people instead: the beginning of a terrible crisis of economy/ a tragedy for this world. Explain how fantasy, delusion, and just plain lies and stealing SHALL HAVE A COST. As it is done to the majority, when they do the same. PROVE there is no immunity in government, for employees engaged in criminal pursuit/ or simple fantasy, from which true and real injury to the people does occur.
28. Based upon the law, and its interpretation of justice: DEFINE the meaning of WE THE PEOPLE. Explain our authority over government, and examine OUR RIGHT to control change within that government by and within, constitutional intent.
29. Based upon the law: PROVE, you the US supreme court have not in fact, given this nation over to fraud and manipulation by allowing all media to be controlled by a tiny few people. Taking the voice of the people from them, and contributing to the destruction of Democracy, and this nation called the United States of America.
30. Based upon law and equity: PROVE the employees of this USA have not counterfeited money, by fraudulent representation of the facts. Article 1 of the constitution allows for the power to borrow money on the credit of the USA/ but it does not give power over to anyone to RUIN THE CREDIT, or HONOR OF THIS USA. Prove it is not so. Prove the continuation of lies, the fraud of numbers, the theft of inflation whether admitted to or not, the disruption of money by ruining its value for the people, the failure to regulate and protect the foundations and general welfare of the people of this nation/ or this state, is in any way “constitutional”. Prove the employees of every branch of government both state and nation, HAVE NOT FAILED. ARE NOT FAILING. And will not destroy the foundations upon which this nation depends. Their methods have proven otherwise/ with clarity, certainty, and absolute disregard for truth. WANT, is NOT ENOUGH. Fantasy and delusion are merely descriptions for fraud, failure, corruption; and describe only LIARS. It is not “government”/ it is “organized crime”.
31. Based upon law and equity: PROVE, if this nation must go to war/ that we shall all not go to war in every sense with these soldiers, by draft, by constriction of business and industry for the purposes of war, and by the taxation necessary to wage war: AS THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES DECIDE BY VOTE. It is our lives/ therefore it is our decision to go to war, or not. NO MORE GOVERNMENT: It is OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE, IT IS OUR DUTY, to provide true and real support, where war is concerned: until those soldiers come home, or treaties are signed to relieve the danger. And find their “common lives” back.
32. Based upon constitutional intent for a true democracy as WE THE PEOPLE: PROVE it is not time and truth, that we as a nation do not have the power to communicate directly with the people, be informed as an educated populace, and make the decisions that we choose to make: for governing ourselves. Prove voting for me, for the laws and important decisions as is necessary and real/ INSTEAD of voting for someone to vote for me, is not DEMOCRACY AS WE THE PEOPLE, in more perfect truth. Prove the constitution does not allow “for forming a more perfect union”.
33. Based upon the critical realities of life as a nation, PROVE there should not be limits to immigration: DEMANDING of those who desire to live here, that after a period of NOT MORE than 7 years, “good behavior: a case in point the James F. Osterbur Versus Alit Selimi trial; found in case abstract www.trialforlife.info “/ they shall have indeed accepted the duties and applied, and become citizens of this USA. Or shall be considered potential enemies, as they have no allegiance with this nation/ and shall be deported. Either you will walk with us, or somewhere else.
34. Based upon critical facts and foundations upon which our very survival depends: PROVE WE SHALL SURVIVE the future these complete failures, “called leaders/ called university graduates” have caused for us to be threatened with; as clearly outlined in www.justtalking.info . It is not an idol threat, to face starvation, because there is no fertilizer (we know it will end, with a population currently growing at 2 million people over deaths, per week) / no water for irrigation or drinking (at one inch of aquifer regeneration per 50 inches of rainfall, WE KNOW, these will end) , or a dead ocean (WE KNOW, how much sea life is sold), or a world devastated by pollution ( WE KNOW, how many trillions of gallons are “dispensed into this world”), weapons of mass destruction (leave no room for doubt/ terrorists, hate, pride, and a thirst for power will prove they are coming quickly) , pandemic’s caused by COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE use of antibiotics in animal feed ( WE KNOW, this is altering the balance of microscopic species, and mutilating them against us)/ genetic mutilation (even a worm should know better, damned fools)/ blind damnation as has ” big science” become to this world (playing with bringing heat, vacuums, and energies beyond what is found in the common universe here to earth; just how brain dead do you have to be/ how utterly arrogant and filled with the cancer called pride to fail to understand such stupidity is being dead: WAKE UP); and more. HOW IS THREATENING AN ENTIRE WORLD/ THIS ENTIRE NATION CONSTITUTIONAL: Explain it, this is our lives & our future. NOT your damned toy.
35. Based upon critical facts and foundations of knowledge: WE KNOW, how much oxygen it takes to burn fuels in fire. WE KNOW, how much fuel is sold/ therefore we know how much fire, and as a consequence how much oxygen by volume must be dedicated to these fires. Use math, and learn that consumption exceeds the ability of plants on this earth to replace that oxygen (even before a single living creation, takes a breath). WE KNOW, by the experiments done in the desert, “for space exploration”; That the oxygen needed to be produced will fail. PROVE, it is not “governments job” to intervene in this catastrophe.
36. Based upon critical facts and absolute truth with regard to known realities: PROVE the religious education called evolution/ should not only be “evacuated or destroyed from all governmental and education institutions”. PROVE YOUR FACTS, or fail and be dissolved forever. PROVE, what the body does not need immediately, or it will die. Prove this religion of the damned, has any place among the living.
37. Based upon JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY is not being dissolved in a courtroom. Prove the tyranny of a courtroom wherein words and rules are used as weapons: whose objective is to steal, pillage, rape, and destroy the trust of the American people in their NEED FOR LAW; by becoming a place only of money. Life is not defined by money/ it is created by truth, established in society by honor/ developed through the disciplines that are duty and responsibility. It is not for the greedy to be held high, “as winners”. NOT FOR lawyers, corporations, and others that manipulate the law, bribe the lawmakers, and are nothing more than treasonous enemies to the harmony and peace intended by fair play. OUR foundation demand upon the employees of this government called WE THE PEOPLE; Is justice. Prove this is not so.
38. BASED UPON REALITY: prove there shall not be change/ from one end of governmental influence, to the other: until such time exists, that this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA again stands for honor, respect, and TRUTH. Prove every employee shall not comply with the demands of a courtroom to create a full and complete understanding of what is real and true, in this United States of America. There shall be NO “fifth amendment” with regard to an employee of the people/ THEY SHALL ANSWER WITH ALL HONESTY AND INTENT FOR TRUTH.
39. Based upon fair play, honorable action, honest and valid truth, duty and responsibility: define and explain WHY the bad decisions of the wealthy, are my responsibility. Define and explain, WHY I/ WE MUST PAY OUR DEBTS/ AND THESE OTHERS, who have had “every resource available to them, for free, have had access to all necessary information, and chose ONLY TO BE GREEDY AND CONSUME US:” NEED NOT PAY THEIRS. Take back the money/ and produce penalties and payments from them.
40. BASED UPON TRUTH: the foundation laid by “institutions too big to fail”/ HAS PROVEN TO BE A CATASTROPHE FOR THE NATION. Thereby, none of these shall ever exist in this nation again. Prove no law should be enacted: to establish the same. Thereby demand of the executive and legislative branches: that they will produce this law/ whereby NO ENTITY shall ever take control over this people again. There shall be limits/ and these shall be protected by constitutional amendment. Every state and territory shall abide/ and NO entity shall do business here, that does not comply; including foreign or off shore concerns. We will have protection for the people, with truth in what can harm us; and reality in what will protect us as life.
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
This foundation law of the Constitution labeled as the first amendment to the document NEEDS NO other authority. THE CONSTITUTION IS LITERALLY THE LAW OF THIS LAND/ AND THERE IS NO OTHER, SUPERIOR TO IT. Any other construction or interpretation is either irrelevant, or criminal by its intent/ even treasonous.
The foundation demand for actions and reactions by our government employees in the purpose of guiding and protecting our lives, and this nation: AS IS DECLARED WITHIN THE PREAMBLE OF THE US CONSTITUTION: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves, and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.
This article 3 of the constitution whereby the judicial services and responsibilities are proclaimed : section 1, the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme court…. And shall hold their offices during good behavior…. Establishes the law, that there is NO restriction upon the court/ NOT to hear any case under original jurisdiction that they choose to hear; except as identified in section 2. 1 “The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity, arising under this constitution………to controversies in which the United States shall be a party;….and between a state, or the citizens thereof…
Because the concept of redress of grievances came after the constitution itself, as an amendment it lacks the absolute clarity of original jurisdiction/ but there can be no doubt, that the purpose of the court is to support and defend WE THE PEOPLE, under that redress of grievances: according to what is necessary, and within the intent of the people called this United States of America. ARTICLE 3, is thereby amended by the purposes and intent of the first amendment itself/ to protect the people, and defend this nation.
The decision of the US court of appeals for the 7th circuit was entered : DISMISSED on February 4, 2009 . On March 30, 2009 this court issued a mandate to remove and destroy the record , and evidence of appeal, after 10 days. Those documents appear in the appendix
The appellate court for the 7th circuit argues lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This petitioner agrees: THEY SHALL NOT/ ARE NOT Authorized to hear a first of its kind, first amendment REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES as petitioned for me, & for the people, by me. These are matters which can be dealt with only at the very highest level of judicial competency and authority. That means a first amendment redress of grievances can only be heard under original jurisdiction by the US SUPREME COURT. The appellate court agrees, it cannot hear this case. That leaves DUE PROCESS at the doorstep of those employees called the judges, of this US supreme court.
Are extended to the words and truths as are defined and declared the “people right” under the BILL OF RIGHTS, as are known to be pivotal in the creation of this nation itself. Thereby they are indeed companion documents of this US constitution. Particularly section 2. “That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all time amenable to them.
And section 3; that government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-administration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and infeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.
And section 4. That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community…
And section 15. That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.
Are extended to the words and truths as are defined and declared the “people’s truth;” under the Declaration of Independence; as is known to be pivotal in the creation of this nation itself. Thereby they are indeed companion documents of this US constitution. Particularly
“….we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that wherever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. ….”
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This petition seeks review of the extraordinary need, for redirection and stabilization of this nation. The foundations set up by the founding citizens of this nation are clear. That we the people are OWNERS OF THIS NATION and this STATE OF ILLINOIS.
That as OWNERS OF THIS NATION and THIS STATE OF IL, it is our right to assess and investigate, and examine, and decide what has gone wrong with our nation.
It is our right as OWNERS OF THIS NATION and THIS STATE OF IL, to investigate, examine, identify, and decide the truth of what our employees have done to us AND SEEK appropriate and real opportunities for change/ including but not limited to: the removal or punishment of any and all employees involved in corruption or criminal acts.
It is our right as OWNERS OF THIS NATION and THIS STATE OF IL; to a redress of grievances for this very purpose. Creating through the courtroom: an opportunity to hear and collect the truth, that we may indeed decide as a people, by our own educated vote.
THE DECISION OF THE APPELLATE COURT FOR THE 7TH CIRCUIT; DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH THE FOUNDATION AND LAWS OF THIS LAND/ THIS CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
The decision of the appellate court lacks respect for the law/ is devoid of respect for the first amendment/ is evidence of a disease within the courtroom of America (under the control of the US supreme court), that is in denial of the first amendment redress of grievances; A LEGAL RIGHT PROVIDED TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS USA.
The appellate court denies strictly on the appellants brief and record: demanding this is “completely incoherent and contains no discernable claims…. The district court found that the case was frivolous and insubstantial and therefore dismissed it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Quoting law (federal courts lack jurisdiction over claims that are so insubstantial as to be devoid of merit) And arising as liars and traitors to the reality of constitutional demands applied to the court system of America.
The appellate court “seems to claim”/ that there is no discernable relationship to the collection of taxes, and the expectation or contractual intent of the constitution that these taxes should be used as the constitution had intended. Basic contractual law disagrees.
The appellate court argues ” a litigant in this court must supply an argument consisting of more than a generalized assertion of error, with citations to supporting authority”. They thereby discard the first amendment of the constitution as “null and void” creating for themselves a delusion of superiority to the law.
The appellate court claims ” although we construe pro se filings liberally, even litigants proceeding without the benefit of counsel must articulate some reason for disturbing the district courts judgment”. Thereby proving through the evidence and facts of this case, that there is NO RESPECT FOR THE CITIZEN, and NO RESPECT FOR THE OWNERSHIP CALLED “WE THE PEOPLE”. For there is indeed argument based upon the promises made to the people, by these very employees, all employees: for they are not “kings or queens, or in any way superior to the law. The law is established to protect the people, and that means all the people. ANY JUDGE, who declares themselves so incompetent as that they cannot understand what the vast majority of the people of this nation CAN UNDERSTAND/ says of him or herself: I MUST BE FIRED.
The appellate court suggests that I do not challenge the district courts reasoning for calling the demand for a first amendment redress of grievances “frivolous and insubstantial” even though the failure on all counts as is reported daily through media/ the threats as are constant and real against our lives ARE KNOWN to any and every educated person as substantial. Argument is unnecessary, where such fantasy and delusion exist. Where a judge cannot raise him or herself out of kindergarten/ or is in contempt of the constitution of this United States itself. Because reality states: this is no game! Because truth states: playing with criminals or spoiled little children, “is unnecessary”. Dismissed for lack of merit.
THE DECISION OF THE APPELLATE COURT IS WRONG
A. THE CONSTITUTION guarantees this people, and me; the right to a redress of grievances. THE ACCOUNTING and THE COURTROOM: NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND, what our employees have done to us. AND TO FIND TRUTH, through investigation, examination, identification, and decision as the people choose for themselves.
B. THE EVIDENCE DECIDES, if a petition to grant redress of grievances and identify all the participants/ threats/ thefts/ lies/ and failures of our employees is necessary. THE COURT, BY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, is required to comply.
That evidence is INSURMOUNTABLE.
C. THE EXAMINATION OF ALL THAT HAS, CAN, SHALL, OR MIGHT AFFECT OUR LIVES, OUR FUTURE, OR OUR PLANET cannot be denied.
WE ARE THE OWNERS OF THIS NATION/ not our employees.
NO LAW or RULE, EXISTS IN CONTRADICTION TO THE DEMANDS OF OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
Only the examination of evidence to determine if the constitutional mandate FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY AND FREEDOMS OF THE PEOPLE CAN DECIDE, this right to trial of our employees, BY WE THE PEOPLE.
THE LAW DECIDES/ NOT THE JUDGE. The law walks with me. THE “FACTS OF FAILURE” by our employees are insurmountable.
UNDER ANY VIEW OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, THE FOUNDATION OF THIS NATION: THERE IS NO ALLOWANCE FOR THE JUDGE TO DECLARE THEMSELVES AS SUPERIOR TO THE LAW. NO AUTHORITY, beyond what the constitution allows. The duty of interpretation is not a right/ it is a demand to adhere to the true intent, purpose, and desire as described within the document itself. IF that duty is not “substantially upheld”/ THEN the oath of office sworn to, “as my truth, my work, my job” is sacrificed to treason and its purposes, by the judge.
GRANT THIS PETITION FOR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS GUARANTEED TO WE THE PEOPLE!
UNDERSTAND, THE LAW and THIS NATION: BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE, NOT the court, NOT the executive power, NOT the legislative power, NOT the military, NOT the university or its lawyers. BUT TO TH E PEOPLE.