We can not allow 5 Votes on the Supreme Court
to Decide Health Care Policy
The FLAW in American Justice
Sunday, June 12, 2011, 3:39:25 PM
When has the Supreme Court ever given us good advice negating our legislative will and majority? Rarely, I would assert NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Justice Scalia repeatedly raves about vagueness: “Today’s opinion,” I wrote, “permits an unintelligible criminal statute to survive uncorrected, unguided, and unexplained. We should admit that ACCA’s residual provision is a drafting failure and declare it void for vagueness.” (550 U. S., at 229–230 and 564 U. S. ____ (2011) (7)). But yet he can insert the shibboleth laden labyrinth of limited liability of CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11) that overrides the CLEAR statutory STRICT CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITY of Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242, and Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985.
I agree with him it is insanity “Insanity, it has been said, is doing the samething over and over again, but expecting different results. Four times is enough” (Scalia 564 U. S. ____ (2011) (7)) but I assert it is 220 years of Judicial (Supreme Court) HUBRIS not HUMAN error.
In the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) they over ruled our legislative will and majority in the Civil Rights Act (1876). We had to wait nearly 100 hundred years to OVERCOME their CORRUPT precedent and REPASS a duplicate now known as the Civil Rights Act (1964). Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) was not a miraculous fix by the Supreme Court. Brown was a cover up for the MISTAKES the Supreme Court had foisted upon We the People’s legislative will and majority when they mad SEGREGATION the law of the land by over ruling the Civil Rights Act (1876) with Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883)and installing GOVERNMENT sanctioned segregation over the will of the expressed legislative will and majority with Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
The Supreme Court in Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) established the doctrine of “Liberty of Contract” that slanted the economics of the time to FAVOR capital over the common man. The Common Man had no right with their expressed legislative will and majority to set a minimum wage, regulate child labor or limit work rules because the Constitution as seen by a majority of the Supreme Court said the Constitution prohibited it. It wasn’t until FDR threatened to pack the court that it relented when in 1937 the Court reversed its view in the case West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937).
I asked when has the a Supreme Court Majority ever lead the way in solving our problems over We the People’s legislative will and majority. We the People’s legislative will and majority has passed The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). It may not be perfect, but at least it is a START in a positive direction. To allow 5 votes on the Supreme Court to VETO the will of We the People as represented by its congressional and presidential passage is INSANE!!!!!!!!!!!
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice and
"fraud upon the court."
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour, " denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive justice between the government and the people, CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11) and "fraud upon the court" with Ashcroft v. al-Kidd No. 10–98!!!
The Right of Petition is the right to substantive justice between the government and the people. We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"" for the deprivation of “any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America” e.g., To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process, The Exclusionary Rule, Grounds for Impeachment, Jeep v Obama, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947, Jeep v Jones “The most humble Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115.”
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Sunday, June 12, 2011, 3:39:25 PM, 5 Votes on the Supreme Court to Decide Rev 00.doc
 “To assume that Congress, which had enacted a criminal sanction directed against state judicial officials, intended sub silentio to exempt those same officials from the civil counterpart approaches the incredible… Because, (Page 460 U. S. 363) as Representative Shellabarger stated, § 1 of the 1871 Act provided a civil remedy "in identically the same case" or "on the same state of facts" as § 2 of the 1866 Act, it obviously overrode whatever immunity may have existed at common law for these participants in the judicial process in 1871.”
 Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
 Article III Section 1 the Constitution for the United States of America "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour"