Monday, May 17, 2010

Mr. President we have a problem

Monday, May 17, 2010

President Barack Hussein Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500-0001

Re: United States Constitution Article 2. Section 3
“he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”

Dear People,
As referenced above, I am sure you are aware the Executive per our Constitution is charged with taking “Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” That being said I would like to bring to your attention the unlawful, unconstitutional assertion of immunity by the Judicial Branch.
     
Immunity from the law is uncivilized. Civilization is based on the Rule of Law, the protection of laws. This was established when the first two cave person attempting to share the first cave established the first law, “No punching in the nose.” We have, since the first cave-person’s initial attempt at civilization, grown and progressed. We have laws that now protect the snail darter and laws that defend the innocence of confessed would be martyr terrorists, Zacarias Moussaoui .

The United States Supreme Court via Chief Justice John Marshall in 1803 re-affirmed the protection of laws in 1803. It was then and still is true “The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection,” MARBURY V. MADISON, 5 U. S. 137 (1803) and BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN FED. NARCOTICS AGENTS, 403 U. S. 388 (1971).

We have a problem. We as American Citizens do not TODAY enjoy the protection of the laws. The Judiciary via precedent starting with BRADLEY V. FISHER, 80 U. S. 335 (1871) and continuing on through today with affirming precedent PIERSON V. RAY, 386 U. S. 547 (1967) hold that the Judiciary has discretion, broad jurisdiction and absolute sovereign immunity for their Judicial actions. With discretion, broad jurisdiction and absolute sovereign immunity they are empowered to literally go wherever they want to, disregard the constitution, the law and our rights at will and we are powerless to do anything to oppose them, they have established precedent that says ““This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly, and it “is not for the protection or benefit of a malicious or corrupt judge, but for the benefit of (the people being robbed and disenfranchised) the public, whose interest it is that the judges should be at liberty (to act without regard to the law or the rights of “We the People”) to exercise their functions with independence and without fear of consequences. ” and “a judge of a criminal court, invested with general criminal jurisdiction over offenses committed within a certain district, should hold a particular act to be a public offense, which is not by the law made an offense, and proceed to the arrest and trial of a party charged with such act, or should sentence a party convicted to a greater punishment than that authorized by the law upon its proper construction, no personal liability to civil action for such acts would attach to the judge ”

To be at someone’s discretion is incompatible with “the Blessings of Liberty ”. To “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” the law has to be unequivocal and transparent. To have the law at the Judiciary’s discretion is to forfeit our liberty.

That all being said I make and official request of my president, I voted for you, that “the Laws be faithfully executed.” I am enclosing a copy of the 30+ page petition entitled David G. Jeep vs. United States of America, et al.

You can reach me via the below mailing address or e-mail address. E-mail is of course preferred.
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.


Dave@DGJeep.com


David G. Jeep

cc: Supreme Court
file