Monday, May 16, 2016
PWC 15-8884 - MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF “LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS” AND REHEARING ON THE MERITS.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001
Re: PWC 15-8884 - David Gerard Jeep and heir, Petitioner
v. United States (corporation) - USAP8 15-3403 -
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF "LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS" AND REHEARING ON THE MERITS.
Dear
Ginsburg,
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make
violent revolution inevitable" (John F. Kennedy). "Any un-enacted "policy" proclamation
by judicial officials who uniquely benefit from their self-legislation does and
should suffer the presumption of reckless-illegitimacy."[1]
If you are wondering when or how I lost respect for you, and your quisling, it was about five, maybe six well-reasoned[2] unconstitutionally
denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court ago…
i.e., 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030, 14-5551, and 14-10088!
Are you atomistically myopic? Proverbially speaking, "You cannot see the forest for the
trees." You say my petition is frivolous,
malicious[3] or both, how?
You and the general public are all probably salivating for the
Supreme Court's first take on the "transgender
restroom issue." Transgender
persons in the United States of America amount to maybe 0.22%[4] of the population. The issue of restroom use as a constitutional
right is debatable,
as yet unestablished.
Yet my petition in regard to a long well-established right[5] violated by actors
"under color of law" i.e., unreasonable
probable cause" for the undeniably ubiquitous
and commonplace use of an unconstitutional
ex parte order of protection
over many years in many states, in
genderdisputes that realistically could affect 50+%
of the population is frivolous? My issue's population clearly has 200+ times the
gravitas of transgender's
0.22% of the population want-a-be restroom issue. GET A GRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As regards the potential for malice,
as it is very closely related to Justice. I offer an example, I have four fingers on my
right hand, I ask the court to cut off a finger on your right hand without reason. That is malice.
But if you had cut off my finger, and I asked the court to cut
off your finger that is biblical justice.
Civilized 7th Amendment CONSTITUTIONAL justice would be to ask for a financial
award for a remedy.
The "unreasonable probable cause" for
the undeniably ubiquitous and clichéd use
of an unconstitutional
ex parte order of protection
in my dispute put me on the street taking
my son, my home, everything in the world I once held dear
and then forcing me into an un-justice, unequal, and unconstitutional
system
Article III system, where my fraudulent[6] and
criminal[7] adversaries had been
empowered by possession of everything that had been taken from me,
my son, my home, everything in the world I once held dear.
I am not asking for Biblical Justice I am asking for a Civilized
7th Amendment CONSTITUTIONAL justice, a financial award for a remedy.
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard,
please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
cc: My Blog
- Monday, May 16, 2016, 3:26:58 PM
[1] Appeal
No. 14-56140 IN The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit - California
Coalition For Families And Children, PBC a Delaware public benefit corporation,
Colbern C. Stuart, III, v. San Diego County Bar Association, et. al
[2] Picking v. Pennsylvania
R. Co., 152 F.2d 753 (3d Cir. 1945)
[3] See Rule 39.8.
[4] How Many People are
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender?
By Gary J. Gates April
2011 - The Williams Institute
[5] 4th, 5th,
6th, 7th, 8th
Amendment right
[6] Sharon G. Jeep (spouse)
and Kristen M. Capps (stepdaughter) Missouri Revised Statutes Section MRS –474.150.1
Gifts in fraud of marital rights--presumptions on conveyances
and 570.030.2
Robbery Stealing and Related Offenses, AND 18 U.S. Code § 1001 - Statements
or entries generally
[7] 18
USC §241
- §242
Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep,
Federal Inmate
#36072-044 (formerly)
My E-mail addresses
are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com or
DGJeep01@yahoo.com
(314) 514-5228
David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999
PWC 15-8884 May 16 2016 The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Rule 39. Proceedings In Forma Pauperis
8. If satisfied that a petition for a writ of certiorari, jurisdictional statement, or petition for an extraordinary writ is frivolous or malicious, the Court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)