Wednesday, April 22, 2026 - 8:27:16 AM
Pat, I am OK. You are OK.
Marbury v. Madison is pure BS.
You ask your favorite committed legal afficionado they will most likely reference their much-beloved expansive verbiage and legal reasoning of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) as their favorite legal precedent / judge-made-law. It is completely self-serving legal fiction. Marbury, as it is commonly known, is often referenced as the seminal legal authority giving originating force and credibility to all legal authority in the exceptional[1] United States and their supplicant worldwide legal adherent organizations.
Chief Justice Marshall is full of SHIT in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). First, he reverentially and overtly asserts he does not have “original jurisdiction” over a “public Minister[2]” and then he emphatically GRABS for original jurisdiction “to say what the law is[3]” when he clearly does not have jurisdiction and NEVER SHOULD interpret the law for We the People!
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia[4] made the case in 1989, 3 years after his appointment 1986, for the abolition of the Supreme Court, though he did not mean to, in “The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules.[5]” He said “Predictability, or as Llewellyn put it, "reckonability," is a needful characteristic of any law worthy of the name.” Therefore we do not need anyone “to say what the law is”[6] we need laws that have “reckonability.”
What Scalia would never admit is a need for humility in every task. Scalia, till his death, saw his job as deciding the big issues, with stare decisis attached for all time. And unless you are perfect, that assertion should be humbling and admittedly impossible.
Marbury v. Madison is pure BS.
The would-be binding forever and ever seminal supreme[7] Court precedent, Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), stare decsis attached is, was, and always will be PURE bull shit.
You have to have some history and to read the full 10,000 +/- words of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) to fully confirm. But I can give you the proverbial “CliffsNotes.”
To set the stage the first judicial act of Congress, the Judiciary Act of 1789 (formally "An Act to Establish the Judicial Courts of the United States"), was signed into law by President George Washington on September 24, 1789. As provided by the Constitution.
John Adams was a critical part of George Washington’s administration, serving as the first Vice President of the United States for both of Washington's terms from 1789 to 1797. As a Federalist, Adams supported Washington's policies and cast 31 tie-breaking votes in the Senate, the second-most in history.
Thomas Jefferson was appointed by George Washington as the first Secretary of State but he resigned before the end of Washington’s first term due to his issues with the Federalists.
In 1801, the rise in factionalism was a distasteful issue all by itself.
Without specifically saying it, Thomas Jefferson got elected the 3rd President over John Adams, the 2nd President, on a pro 10th Amendment Democratic-Republican Party pro French Revolution and as an anti-Federalist’s Party pro England/Monarchial Platform.
Jefferson had seen the Washington/Adams administrations taking too much Federal power for themselves over the democratic-republican 10th Amendment he had intended to provide in his Declaration for Independence.
They weren’t calling each other derogatory names, like today, when they called each other by their party’s names Adams a Federalist and Jefferson a Democratic-Republican.
John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, once close friends and Revolutionary comrades, became fierce political rivals whose feud was rooted in ideological differences over the strength of the federal government. As a Federalist, Adams favored a strong central government, while Democratic-Republican Jefferson favored the people’s rights and states' rights. Their bitter competition, particularly in the contentious Presidential elections of 1796 Admas won and 1800 Jefferson won, led to a decade-long estrangement before they reconciled (1812) in old age.
The Federalist had the nearly 8 years of Washington’s administration and the 4 years of Adams administration to freely appoint the new judiciary under the Judiciary Act of 1789.
The issue in Marbury v. Madison -- Adam’s administration had done all the paperwork to appoint Marbury as a “justice of the peace of the District of Columbia,” a “public Minister,” short of delivering the papers. When Madison, Jefferson’s secretary of state, took over the office he had possession of the paperwork. Possession is 9/10ths of the law. Marbury, thinking he was a presidentially appointed as a “public Minister,” even though he did not have the papers, went to the supreme[8] Court to get the papers and thus the appointment.
Chief Justice Marshall reverentially declined original jurisdiction over the issue, stressing that though the Constitution Article II Section 2.2 gave the president the power to appoint “public Ministers and Consuls”. And per Article III Section 2.2 “In all Cases affecting… other public Ministers and Consuls… the supreme[9] Court shall have original Jurisdiction,” Chief Justice Marshall declined the “original Jurisdiction” the constitution had given the supreme[10] Court
Putting that aside, WITHOUT any constitutional reference or JURISDICTIONAL authority. Chief Justice Marshall made a laughably emphatic POWER GRAB for “the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.[11]”
It was a lot more significant at the time, than it is today, but We the People had just ratified the original 4,000 words of the 1789 Constitution as a self-evident document. NOT NEEDING any specific assistance in interpreting it.
Jefferson and Madison were the winners in Marbury v. Madison result. Jefferson and Madison had nothing to appeal or argue with in the RESULT.
Now I have no issue with learned men presenting non-binding precedent in an adversarial due process of law before a criminal or civil local jury. But to make any high-falutin interpretation binding on a local jury’s decision is unrepresentative, undemocratic and UN-Constitutional!
Chief Justice Marshall is full of SHIT in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). First, he reverentially and overtly asserts he does not have “original jurisdiction” over a “public Minister[12]” and then he emphatically GRABS for original jurisdiction “to say what the law is[13]” when he clearly does not have jurisdiction!
Marbury v. Madison is pure BS.
Wednesday, April 22, 2026 - 8:27:16 AM
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[15] “I’m Just a Bill[16]” 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[17]?
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[18] Court website https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-5856/62608/20180904161503131_00000007.pdf
The FACTS of MY case are without question
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
Wednesday, April 22, 2026 - 8:27:16 AM
[1] American Exceptionalism - NOT SO MUCH https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2023/10/american-exceptionalism-not-so-much.html
[2] Article III Section 2.2 “In all Cases affecting… other public Ministers and Consuls… the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”
[3] Marbury - Page 5 U. S. 177
[4] Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
In office September 26, 1986 – February 13, 2016
[5] The University of Chicago Law Review VOLUME 56 NUMBER 4 FALL 1989, http://games.stanford.edu/complaw/readings/scalia.pdf
[6] “It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U. S. 178.
[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 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 and an accurate interpretation. A sis 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.
[8] 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 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 and an accurate interpretation. A sis 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.
[9] 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 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 and an accurate interpretation. A sis 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 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 and an accurate interpretation. A sis 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.
[12] Article III Section 2.2 “In all Cases affecting… other public Ministers and Consuls… the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”
[13] Page 5 U. S. 177
[14] Page 5 U. S. 177
[17] https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/06/sc.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVfm-ushzCCTS5BtH1R7MeOvnDvh_kqv/view
[18] 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 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 and an accurate interpretation. A sis 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 - Dave@DGJeep.com - From: 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
