SCOTUS to finally hear case to force federal judges to obey the constitution

[oyashango]

United States Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on the Validity of the Constitution


The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution.  The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather.  The decision should be rendered by the end of the year.  Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=xprnw.20101113.CL01025&show_article=1

[Dok]

Windsor says: "If The Supreme Court fails to act against these federal judges, the citizens of the United States need to know that there is not a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts.  Corruption has consumed the federal court system, and we now live in a police state.  Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want.  Our laws are meaningless.  Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books."

The Supreme Court may render its decision before the end of the year.  It's one retired grandpa against the United States government. 

[ekimdrachir]

Yikes... All in favor of all money to me, say aye. Aye! Thank you muchly.

[NWOSCUM]

[lamourlady]

More like "Grandpa against every other citizen in the U.S."

[lee51]

Oh puhleeze, someone tell gramps to move to Cuba or North Korea---there the courts/gov. do their own thing and any constitution they may have doesn't really matter.  

Better yet, the Supreme Court can move to North Korea or Cuba (if they do away with the constitution) and we will replace them with REAL patriotic Americans.

[birther truther tenther]

More like "Grandpa against every other citizen in the U.S."

Oh puhleeze, someone tell gramps to move to Cuba or North Korea---there the courts/gov. do their own thing and any constitution they may have doesn't really matter.  

I can tell you guys didn't read the article.  READ THE F*KING ARTICLE BEFORE YOU COMMENT!!!!!!!!!

It should be Federal Judges against every US Citizen.

The "grandpa" is going to the Supreme Court, because the lower courts straight up ignore the US Constitution.

If Federal Judges don't see the Constitution as valid, they need to be removed from their position immediately!!!!!

[s3d1t0r]

United States Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on the Validity of the Constitution


  Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=xprnw.20101113.CL01025&show_article=1

So, if Judges are free to void the Constitution, that means I can void the Constitution as well?

Also... I read the article and really really hope I dont wake up one day soon and read that the Supreme Court goes against the Grandpa.

That would be the wake up call from hell.

[One Revelator]

This subject illustrates the root of a glaring problem.

-- A person’s word used to mean something
-- A handshake used to mean something
-- A signature used to mean something
-- A solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution used to mean something

I remember seeing legal cases that cheapened/nullified oral promises, handshakes, and even signatures on documents.  Now I see oaths becoming legally meaningless depending on your perceived caste in society.

If there are no longer fixed principles that apply to everyone, then the principles just float around to suit whatever interpretation is convenient at the time.  The ideas of honor, justice, and personal integrity become meaningless.  This is what I see happening and it gives rise to all manner of corruption, evil, despair, and hopelessness.

The fact that the Supreme Court is due to issue a decision about the validity of a document representing guiding principles that they themselves have sworn to uphold and defend is ludicrous.  I shouldn’t even be seeing this.  In the past, the aforementioned points would have been obvious to everyone.

[lamourlady]

I can tell you guys didn't read the article.  READ THE F*KING ARTICLE BEFORE YOU COMMENT!!!!!!!!!

It should be Federal Judges against every US Citizen.

The "grandpa" is going to the Supreme Court, because the lower courts straight up ignore the US Constitution.

If Federal Judges don't see the Constitution as valid, they need to be removed from their position immediately!!!!!

My bad, I read the initial post and then Dok's quote and was under the impression that gramps was against the validity of the constitution.  Yes, I was doing a quick read, sorry.

[pac522]

Does this have anything to do with the Sovereign and Moor people movement? And jurisdiction and why acting judges can not concern themselves with the Constitution because they do not have jurisdiction to render judgment over the Constitution, just the codes and statutes?  That going on the record and being put under someone's jurisdiction so that they may prosecute you. What validiity do these videos have?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7z1BVG0W3w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fADsSQNozE0

[Dig]

United States Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on the Validity of the Constitution


The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution.  The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather.  The decision should be rendered by the end of the year.  Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=xprnw.20101113.CL01025&show_article=1

Talk about your Bilderberg covert operations.

Have the Supreme Court (created by the constitution) rule that the constitution is invalid (thus making them invalid). bwaaaaahahaahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

derrrrr, this is the plot for both Dogma and Constantine.

Bilderberg morons must be so shitting bricks to attempt to invalidate the constitution via the Supreme Court. Especially since the Supreme Court has zero authority to rule on the validity of the constitution. their limited powers only allow to rule against violations of the constitution.


I changed the BS title to more accurately reflect the issue here.

[Freeski]

This subject illustrates the root of a glaring problem.

-- A person’s word used to mean something
-- A handshake used to mean something
-- A signature used to mean something
-- A solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution used to mean something

I remember seeing legal cases that cheapened/nullified oral promises, handshakes, and even signatures on documents.  Now I see oaths becoming legally meaningless depending on your perceived caste in society.

If there are no longer fixed principles that apply to everyone, then the principles just float around to suit whatever interpretation is convenient at the time.  The ideas of honor, justice, and personal integrity become meaningless.  This is what I see happening and it gives rise to all manner of corruption, evil, despair, and hopelessness.

The fact that the Supreme Court is due to issue a decision about the validity of a document representing guiding principles that they themselves have sworn to uphold and defend is ludicrous.  I shouldn’t even be seeing this.  In the past, the aforementioned points would have been obvious to everyone.

Very well said, sir.

[Freeski]

Especially since the Supreme Court has zero authority to rule on the validity of the constitution. their limited powers only allow to rule against violations of the constitution.

Exactly!

Where, though, is this obvious principle carved in stone? Is it in the Constitution itself?

[jofortruth]

Article III, Section 1 & 2 applies to Supreme Court

[Freeski]

Article III, Section 1 & 2 applies to Supreme Court

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A3Sec1

Section 1 - Judicial powers

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. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section 2 - Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials

(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

--------------

Holy cow that's hard to understand! Needs a few readings, like most law.

[PMF]

Talk about your Bilderberg covert operations.

Have the Supreme Court (created by the constitution) rule that the constitution is invalid (thus making them invalid).  bwaaaaahahaahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]
derrrrr, this is the plot for both Dogma and Constantine.

Bilderberg morons must be so shitting bricks to attempt to invalidate the constitution via the Supreme Court. Especially since the Supreme Court has zero authority to rule on the validity of the constitution. their limited powers only allow to rule against violations of the constitution.

LMAO! Not only that, but how about this.........

If I was Grandpa and the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution (Grandpa's Constitutional Rights) can be voided by a Federal Judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals , I would speak to the media right after the ruling, then say the following......

Today the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the the lower Federal Courts, the Constitution of the United States (MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS) can be voided by the lower Federal Courts. Because of the Constitution being voided during my case before the lower Federal Courts and the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Lower Federal Courts, I will OBEY the decission/s, even if  the Supreme Court didn't consider.

Since the the 16th Amendment is also part our Constitution I no longer have to Pay Federal Income Taxes to the IRS, the Lower Federal Courts Voided that also!
 


Why can't we start playing catch-22 with these Federal Judges?
For Example....

Federal Courts see no problems if it's true and there really is a 100 mile Constitution Free Zone on our borders, if Federal Courts see no problem then people living/working in the zone no longer should have to Pay Federal Income Taxes to the IRS. After all, the 16th Amendment is also part our Constitution! ;-)

Federal Courts see no problems with Mayors of towns/cities Banning or Regulating our Constitutional Rights such as the 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment for example. If I was a Mayor what would the Federal Courts do if I Banned or Regulated the 16th Amendment???

Federal Courts see no problems when local goverments make 1st Amendment Free Speech Zones. Can local goverments also make 16th Amendment Free Federal Income Tax Zones?

And Etc Etc

[donnay]

This subject illustrates the root of a glaring problem.

-- A person’s word used to mean something
-- A handshake used to mean something
-- A signature used to mean something
-- A solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution used to mean something

I remember seeing legal cases that cheapened/nullified oral promises, handshakes, and even signatures on documents.  Now I see oaths becoming legally meaningless depending on your perceived caste in society.

If there are no longer fixed principles that apply to everyone, then the principles just float around to suit whatever interpretation is convenient at the time.  The ideas of honor, justice, and personal integrity become meaningless.  This is what I see happening and it gives rise to all manner of corruption, evil, despair, and hopelessness.

The fact that the Supreme Court is due to issue a decision about the validity of a document representing guiding principles that they themselves have sworn to uphold and defend is ludicrous.  I shouldn’t even be seeing this.  In the past, the aforementioned points would have been obvious to everyone.

Well said, indeed!

[Kinpa]

 i cant wait to see  what comes from this...