What happens if the Supreme Court imposes ITS will upon the nation, contrary to the specific provisions of the Constitution? The Founders knew this possibility existed, and Alexander Hamilton wrote:

“The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body.”

Hamilton had already pointed out that an unconstitutional act of the legislative body is null and void. It should be clear, then, that an unconstitutional edict by the Supreme Court would be equally invalid.

But if this happens, where is the remedy? By what means do the people protect themselves against an unconstitutional edict by the Supreme Court? Apparently the Founders were so concerned about an overzealous Congress that they neglected to protect themselves from an overzealous judiciary. The only checks and balances provided in the Constitution are as follows:

All judges have to be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Article III, section 2, authorized the Congress to restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts, but this has been rarely attempted.

The Congress can impeach judges for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” but not for an unpopular decision. Even when the Supreme Court has seriously violated its constitutional limitations by making new laws through judicial decree, no effective congressional action has been asserted.

From this it will be readily seen that insofar as checks on the judiciary were concerned, a major loophole was left in the basic structure of the Constitution. Perhaps the Founders were too busy to read an article in a New York paper signed “Brutus” (believed to have been Robert Yates) which said:

“It is of great importance to examine with care the nature and extent of the judicial power, because those [Supreme Court judges] are to be rendered totally independent, both of the people and the legislature, both with respect to their offices and salaries. No errors they commit can be corrected…. The only causes for which they can be displaced [are] convictions of treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors…. The power of the judicial will enable them to mold the government into almost any shape they please.”

While the loophole is acknowledged, the Founders likely never imagined that the American Bar Association would present a constitutional calamity where over 25 years (1984-2009) EVERY state supreme court would enact one (1) law which violates a litigants rights protected by both the state Constitution AND the Constitution of the United States with all enforcement actions being kept Confidential with every level of state and federal law enforcement prevented from prosecuting the crimes (injustice and judicial corruption) by a Federal Law enacted by the US Congress and FURTHER prevented from addressing the litigant’s loss of constitutional rights by LOCAL RULES enacted by the Federal District and Appeals Courts which incorporated the one (1) repugnant law.

The only remaining constitutional law enforcement authority, THE SHERIFF, has been convinced of a greatly diminished role by their lawyers and the state judiciary.

This type of circumstance does not happen by chance.

These were the deliberate and secret retaliatory actions of the American Bar Association after the FBI’s Operation Greylord investigated and prosecuted such extreme judicial and courthouse corruption within the Cook County Courthouse in Chicago.

The US Congress can address a repugnant law by modifying the jurisdiction of the Federal Court to exclude jurisdiction to hear actions based on the Courts ability to create law for the operation of the courts.

BUT, this is a state law. IN EVERY STATE. Federalism may be a factor which prevents federal intervention into a state law.

THE STATE Supreme Court is not permitted by law to adversely affect their own integrity by exposing the most egregious violation of the public trust by any government.

This repugnant state law MUST be suspended by the Legislature pursuant to their EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND LAWS.

Article I, Section 12 “No power of suspending laws shall be exercised unless by the Legislature or by its authority.”

Article I, Section 26 “Neither The Commonwealth nor any political subdivision thereof shall deny to any person the enjoyment of any civil right, nor discriminate against any person in the exercise of any civil right.”

Article I, Section 1 “All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.”

Article I, Section 2 “All power in inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.”

Article I Section 20 “The citizens have a right in a peaceable manner to assemble together for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance.”

Article II, Section 7 “No person hereafter convicted of embezzlement of public moneys, bribery, perjury or other infamous crime shall be eligible to the General Assembly, or capable of holding any office of trust or profit in this Commonwealth.”

THE PEOPLE will accept resignations from Senators and Representatives who are members of the American Bar Association and affiliated federal, state and local organizations whose seditious and treasonous actions
– have undermined the state and federal judiciary and compromised the integrity, judicial independence and jurisdiction of the courts;
– who have violated, neglected and ignored their oath of office;
– who have conspired, obfuscated, prevented and denied without mercy, empathy or conscience the inherent rights of the people which are protected and secured by the US Constitution and the Constitution of Pennsylvania;
– who have deliberately ignored their sworn responsibilities to the Constitution in a persistent and intentional dereliction of the public trust;
– who have failed to act to address, resolve or discuss the situation created by their organization

The actions of other public officials / members of the American Bar Association and affiliates were mandated by the state Supreme Court to inaction and conflicting legality without opportunity to expose, address and resolve the issue. Their circumstances should be reviewed by a citizens committee/organization with recommendations to the House of Representatives with regard to impeachment and prosecution.

Senators and Representatives had the information and knowledge of the situation and the constitutional authority YET FAILED TO MEET with litigants, AND FAILED TO TAKE ANY ACTION to suspend the repugnant unconstitutional law permitting the problem to persist within the courts on a state and federal level without concern for the irreparable damage done to the People.

Pennsylvania Senator Stewart Greenleaf who had full knowledge of the matter of Healy v Healy and the effect of the loss of constitutional rights on a litigant AND was the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary should be prosecuted criminally and civilly for his criminal abuse of power.


No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: