Friday, January 23, 2026 - 11:37:03 AM
Pat, I am OK. You are OK.
Trump is the Symptom not the cause.
1429 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Senator Josh Hawley
381 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Eric Schmitt
404 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Governor Mike Kehoe
P.O. Box 720,
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Re: The issue today in the United States is NOT Donald Trump.
Dear People,
The whole idea of the judge-made-law of immunity from a constitution and the laws it creates is antithetical to the raison d'être for the very idea of a constitution and the rule of law. The insanity is beyond belief. I have been fighting this for 20+ years[1]!
The issue today in the United States is NOT Donald Trump. Donald Trump is not SMART enough to be an issue. The issue in the United States's representative-democracy today is judge-made-law.
Donald Trump got elected in 2016 with a bastardized supreme[2] Court pick in his pocket. Then he luckily got to name two more supreme[3] Court picks.
The issue of judge-made-law started with Alexander Hamilton, when he expressed a need in Federalist Papers 78-83 (1788). Hamilton anonymously talked about a desire and a need for a learned Judiciary to review the constitutionality of laws. But while it was probably discussed at the writing of the Constitution. Neither judicial constitutional review or judge-made-law made it into the binding 4,000 words of the actual constitution written and signed a year prior to the Federalist Papers. Federalist papers are NOT constitutionally binding.
Chief Justice John Marshall's (1755–1835) attempted, via "argumentative sleight of hand" to constitutionalize judge-made-law with Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803). But it was again NOT constitutionally binding.
John Marshall asserted the right to judge-made-law but he rarely, if ever used it. It was an abomination when Marshall's successor Chief Justice Roger B. Taney "supreme Court[4]" fired the first shot of the Civil War when his judge-made-law ruled Free States unconstitutional and that negroes "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit[5]" - Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856).
It was a furtherance of the abomination when judge-made-law in 1887 over ruled Ida B. Wells's 1st and 7th Amendment award of $500 (~$17,498 in 2024). It was a continuation of the that same abomination when the judge-made-law in Rosa Park's case fined her $10, plus $4 in court fees (equivalent to $164 in 2024) in 1955-1956 after appeal.
Today the SAME abomination of judge-made-law still reigns supreme in the Jane Crow era with DGJeep v supreme Court of the United States,[6] DGJeep v Missouri Department of Social Services[7], and 23-939 Trump v. United States (07/01/2024).
This is ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of "We the People's" [8] intent to "establish justice." [9]
Abraham Lincoln, Barry Goldwater, and William F. Buckley are screaming from their graves at the horror of Trumpism and M.A.G.A. feigning to be their Republican Party.
The supreme Court's[10] sophistry[11] tells us, "We the People" sub silentio[12] traded the "King can do no WRONG" for the ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE actions of the "malicious or corrupt" judges,[13] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor[14], the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[15], the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant, conscientiously stupid actions of "all persons (spouses) -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process,"[16] the actions of federal, state, local, and regional legislators[17] and now PRESIDENTS[18] acting under color of law to render absolute corruption of inalienable constitutional rights.
The "supreme Court[19]" handed Trump his 2024 victory.
This is ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of "We the People's" [20] intent to "establish justice." [21]
The whole idea of the judge-made-law of immunity from a constitution and the laws it creates is antithetical to the raison d'être for the very idea of a constitution and the rule of law. Article III has usurped power never conceived of by the Founding Fathers.
Sir William. Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England" published[22] prior to and was the basis for Article III, it "is not possible to lay down, with mathematical precision, any rule in regard to the authority of precedents. Every judge and every court must consider that their function is jus aïcere and not jus dare.[23] "
Thomas Jefferson summed it up repeatedly and effectively in 1820:
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves (think "Voting," "due process of law" & "juries"): and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their controul with a wholsome discretion, the remedy is, not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. this is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." (Thomas Jefferson 9/28/1820, in writing to Mr. JARVIS, from Monticello – bolding, underlining, and parentheticals added)
"For the first nearly 100 years, the last clause of the First Amendment held, that preceded Randall and Bradley (1776-1868). There was neither need nor questions regarding Judicial Immunity and then TWO despotic precedents within 3 years:
Ø Randall v. Brigham, 74 U. S. 536 (decided April 15, 1869) sophistry in response to the criminal liability in The Civil Rights Act of 1866 passed in to law April 9, 1866 and then..
Ø Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (decided April 8, 1872) sophistry in response to civil liability in the Civil Rights Act of 1871 passed into law April 20, 1871 are the origins of unconstitutional "immunity" in the American Justice system.
If there is anything further, please let me know.
"Time is of the essence"
Thank you in advance.
David G. Jeep
cc: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
file
The Constitution for the United States - Article I, II, and Schoolhouse Rock's[24] "I'm Just a Bill[25]" clearly define how to make law. Show me where in the amended Constitution for the United States "judge-made-law" is called for or authorized[26]?
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/06/sc.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVfm-ushzCCTS5BtH1R7MeOvnDvh_kqv/view
The Issue with Trump, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP!
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/03/the-issue-with-trump.html
American Exceptionalism – NOT SO MUCH
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2023/10/american-exceptionalism-not-so-much.html
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2013/04/equal-rights-in-free-market-economy.html
A Balanced Budget for America
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2012/07/balanced-budget-for-america.html
BE AWARE, but do not be afraid, Trump is, at best and at worst, pathetically incompetent and INEFFECTIVE manager / leader!
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/be-aware.html
Trump does not know the name of the country he was or is to be president of...
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/istgtdnk.html
The constitutional small "d" undemocratic corrupt "dark money" Senate and Electoral College
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/dark-money-senate.html
Trump is a convicted and diagnosed psychotic criminal, chronic degenerate, maniacal liar and a "fucking moron!"
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/be-aware.html
The constitutional small "d" unrepresentative corrupt "dark money" Senate and Electoral College
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/dark-money-senate.html
The Judicial sophistry of "absolute immunity" creates "absolute power" to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's unalienable rights under color of law... the AUDACITY of the INSANITY, ignorance and stupidity in support of a "fantastic or delusional" scenario.
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/if-that-is-not-absolute-corruption-of.html
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-facts-of-my-case-are-without.html
DGJeep v. Supreme Court of the United States (Petitions for Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856)
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=David+Jeep&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets
Friday, January 23, 2026 - 11:37:03 AM
[1] DGJeep v. Supreme Court of the United States (Petitions for Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856)
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=David+Jeep&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets
[2] Article III of the US Constitution posits a "supreme Court" among the many courts NOT a Supreme Court outside of the many. Any and ALL Article III Judicial power REQUIRES the assent of an instant local jury.
[3] Article III of the US Constitution posits a "supreme Court" among the many courts NOT a Supreme Court outside of the many. Any and ALL Article III Judicial power REQUIRES the assent of an instant local jury.
[4] Article III of the US Constitution posits a "supreme Court" among the many courts NOT a Supreme Court outside of the many. Any and ALL Article III Judicial power REQUIRES the assent of an instant local jury.
[6] Writ of Certioraris to the supreme Court of the United States and associated District and Circuit petitions… 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856.
[7] APPEAL No.: 4925-SLMB-T-FY24STL -- DAVID JEEP, Petitioner, V. STATE OF MISSOURI, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Respondent -- Case No. 2422-CC11396
[8] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States
[9] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States
[10] Article III of the US Constitution posits a "supreme Court" among the many courts NOT a Supreme Court outside of the many. ALL Article III Judicial power REQUIRES the assent of an instant local jury.
[11] Sophistry(?) is a logical fallacy that involves the use of deceptive, superficial arguments.
[12] sub silentio is a Latin phrase that means "under silence" or "in silence". It's often used in legal contexts to describe something that's implied but not explicitly stated. For example, a court might overrule a case's holding sub silentio without explicitly stating that it's doing so. Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U. S. 362
[13] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)
[14] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976)
[15] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)
[16] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)
[17] Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138
[19] Article III of the US Constitution posits a "supreme Court" among the many courts NOT a Supreme Court outside of the many. Any and ALL Article III Judicial power REQUIRES the assent of an instant local jury.
[20] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States
[21] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States
[22] Blackstone's treatise was republished in 1770, 1773, 1774, 1775, 1778 and in a posthumous edition in 1783
[23] "This phrase translates to: "To declare the law, not to make or give the law". " Sir William Blackstone. Blackstone 1387-01 (Kindle Locations 23832-23834). Kindle Edition. Blackstone's treatise was republished in 1770, 1773, 1774, 1775, 1778 and in a posthumous edition in 1783.
Thanks in advance...
"Agere sequitur esse" ('action follows being')
David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044 (formerly)
www.DGJeep.com - Dave@DGJeep.com - David.G.Jeep@Gmail.com
Mobile (314) 514-5228 leave message
David G. Jeep
1531 Pine St Apt #512
St. Louis, MO 63103-2548
