Saturday, February 28, 2026 - 3:54:44 PM
Pat, I am OK. You are OK.
The last clause of the First Amendment makes any assertion of IMMUNITY unconstitutional.
The TOOOOO often overlooked last clause of the First Amendment makes any assertion of IMMUNITY unconstitutional.
The First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The last clause of the First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting… the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[1]
When the Founding Fathers explicitly created the last clause of the First Amendment, the Founding Fathers knew that it would be needed. The Founding Fathers knew that it would need to be constitutionally protected! The right "to petition" assumes due process local jury revue of the specifics.
That held fast, for almost 100 years, through the Civil war. And then TWO despotic UNCONSTITUTIONAL judge-made-laws 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.
Now I would have probably given the ability to make judge-made-law to Plato's concept of philosopher kings, James Madison (Federalist Paper #47), Alexander Hamilton (Federalist Papers #78, #79 and #81), or even maybe John Marshall (Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)).
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney proved the inherent fallacy of judge-made-law. When he STARTED the Civil War with his assertion a black man 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. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic whenever a profit could be made by it" - Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 407 (1856) in the free states and the new territories.
But the Founding Fathers had the good sense to NOT create the concept of judge-made-law in the 4,000 words of their original or the now amended Constitution of the United States.
Justice Thurgood Marshall reconfirmed it,
"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." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 362 (1983)
The supreme[2] Court's sophistry[3] a.k.a. "judge-made-law" tells us, "We the People" sub silentio[4] traded the "King can do no WRONG" for the ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE actions of the "malicious or corrupt" judges,[5] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor[6], the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[7], the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant, conscientiously stupid actions of "all persons (spouses) -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process,"[8] the actions of federal, state, local, and regional legislators[9] and now PRESIDENTS[10] acting under color of law to render absolute corruption of inalienable constitutional rights.
Any assertion that the "King can do no WRONG" or anyone else can do no wrong is self-contradictory to the First Amendment's "Congress shall make no law respecting… the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The right "to petition" assumes due process local jury revue of the specifics. Yet, immunity from the Constitution / rule of law is self-contradictory. Why would the Founding Fathers even write a Constitution and then give future leaders immunity from it. Judge-made-law was thus NEVER reasonably conceived of by the Founding Fathers. Therefore judge-made-law was never incorporated into the original constitution's 4,000 words nor has been incorporated since.
Do you still wonder how or why We the People imprison ourselves at 4-5 times[11] the rate of the rest of the CIVILIZED WORLD? We the People have no enforcement mechanism for Constitutional rights. Our rights are dolled out by the "despotism of an oligarchy".[12]
The Constitution for the United States - Article I, II, and Schoolhouse Rock's[13] "I'm Just a Bill[14]" 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[15]?
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
Saturday, February 28, 2026 - 3:54:44 PM
[1] Judge-made-law was never conceived of by the Founding Fathers.
[2] 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 jury.
[3] Sophistry(?) is a logical fallacy that involves the use of deceptive, superficial arguments.
[4] 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
[5] 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)
[6] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976)
[7] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)
[8] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)
[9] 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
[11] Comparison of United States incarceration rate with other countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_United_States_incarceration_rate_with_other_countries
[12] "(Y)you seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots…."
"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/parentheticals) added)
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
No comments:
Post a Comment