Monday, June 29, 2026 - 10:18:44 PM
Pat, I am OK. You are OK.
Humphrey's Executor
Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), was a landmark U.S. supreme[1] Court decision that acknowledged the U.S. Congress, and the President[2], may limit the power of the President of the United States to fire certain government officials, as they had jointly agreed prior with statute law, even though the president is the chief executive of the U.S. government.
The recent judge-made-law Trump v. Slaughter attempts to unconstitutionally overrule constitutional representative-democratic LAW.
First and most importantly, show me where in the 4,000 +/- words of the current Constitution of the United States it says “It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.[3]”?
It emphatically ain’t there!!!!!!
FYI, in Marbury on the originating issue, Chief Justice John Marshall says he needs specific enumerated Constitutional jurisdiction and then in the power grab he emphatically asserts jurisdiction without any specific enumerated Constitutional jurisdiction. Read it is emphatically self-contradictory, Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 177 (1803). Marbury is pure BS!!!!
All the talking heads today are saying the supreme[4] Court took back the power of the executive from Congress’s commissioners of independent agencies within the executive branch of the government that served a "quasi-legislative" or "quasi-judicial" purpose could not be removed at will by the president.
What too few people see is the supreme[5] Court is trying to divide to conquer with their unconstitutional judge-made-law. They are, like Marshall in Marbury, POWER HUNGRY!!! The supreme[6] Court is emphatically setting themselves up as judge-made-lawmakers overruling the laws passed by Congress and the President without AUTHORITY.
The supreme[7] Court fails to address the fact that Congress and the President jointly and emphatically setup the independent agencies within the executive branch of the government that served a "quasi-legislative" or "quasi-judicial" purpose and could not emphatically be removed at will by the president.
If there is a problem, there is a representative-democratic way to change the law. Write a new law, eliminate independent agencies, pass it by congress and the president. The thought that an unconstitutional unrepresentative, undemocratic despotic oligarchy can at will make assertedly MORE perfect law is DELUSIONAL!!!
Judge-made-law emphatically ain’t constitutional!!!!!!
The Constitution for the United States - Article I, II, and Schoolhouse Rock’s[8] “I’m Just a Bill[9]” clearly define how to make law. The supreme[10] Court emphatically don’t make law.
The Article III Courts have absolutely no power at all without the consent of a trial-specific-local jury. Show me where in the amended Constitution for the United States “judge-made-law” is called for or authorized[11]?????
Judge-made-law emphatically ain’t constitutional!!!!!!
The Constitution for the United States - Article I, II, and Schoolhouse Rock’s[8] “I’m Just a Bill[9]” clearly define how to make law. The supreme[10] Court emphatically don’t make law.
Now if perfection walked this planet, I would support it. Ain’t nobody perfect on this planet. Judge-made-law has too often installed their corrupt laws as assertedly mofe perfect with stare decisis to cover up their “fraud on the court, by officers of the court” e.g., Randall[12], Bradley[13], Lochner[14], Plessy[15], Pierson[16], Bivens[17], Imbler,[18] Stump[19], Butz[20], Nixon (yes that Nixon)[21]Bogan[22], and most recently, importantly and flagrantly 23-939 Trump v. United States (07/01/2024).
BTW any and all assertions of “absolute immunity” for government actors is unconstitutional under the last clause of the First Amendment i.e. the right "to petition the government for redress of grievances"[23].
Judge-made-law emphatically ain’t constitutional!!!!!!
Monday, June 29, 2026 - 10:18:44 PM
The last clause of the First Amendment makes any assertion of IMMUNITY unconstitutional.
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2026/02/last-clause-1a.html
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://drive.google.com/file/d/1UmmaZmRkIUZ3EdC_9iI0Bpojr6LZ_lU0/view?usp=sharing
Petition supreme[27] Court website https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-5856/62608/20180904161503131_00000007.pdf
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-facts-of-my-case-are-without.html
DGJeep v. supreme[28] 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
Monday, June 29, 2026 - 10:18:44 PM
[1] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[2] And yes there is a way for Congress to make law without the consent of the president. In effect making binding Constitutional Law that the president and the supreme Court must obey. !
[3] Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 177 (1803)
[4] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[5] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[6] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[7] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[10] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[11] https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/06/sc.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVfm-ushzCCTS5BtH1R7MeOvnDvh_kqv/view
[12] 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
[13] 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
[14] Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) Lochner era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lochner_era
[15] Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was a landmark Supreme Court case that legalized racial segregation in the United States .
[16] Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967)
[17] Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
[18] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976)
[19] Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)
[20] Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978)
[21] Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)
[22] 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
[23] The right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances" will not tolerate harassment or "absolute immunity."
[26] https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/06/sc.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVfm-ushzCCTS5BtH1R7MeOvnDvh_kqv/view
[27] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[28] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
Thanks in advance...
“Agere sequitur esse” (‘action follows being’)
David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044 (formerly)
www.DGJeep.com - From: Dave@DGJeep.com - David.G.Jeep@Gmail.com
Mobile (314) 514-5228 leave message
My “Manifesto”
David G. Jeep
1531 Pine St Apt #512
St. Louis, MO 63103-2548
