U.S. Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision: Constitution is Void

[irishspirit]

ATLANTA, Jan. 18, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that serves to allow judges to void the Constitution in their courtrooms. The decision was issued on January 18, 2011, and the Court did not even explain the decision (Docket No. 10-632, 10-633, and 10-690). One word decisions: DENIED.
Presented with this information and massive proof that was not contested in any manner by the accused judges, at least six of the justices voted to deny the petitions:


"There is no legal or factual basis whatsoever for the decisions of the lower courts in this matter. These rulings were issued for corrupt reasons. Many of the judges in the Northern District of Georgia and the Eleventh Circuit are corrupt and violate laws and rules, as they have done in this case. The Supreme Court must recognize this Petition as one of the most serious matters ever presented to this Court."


The key questions answered negatively by the U.S. Supreme Court was:
"Whether federal courts must be stopped from operating corruptly and ignoring all laws, rules, and facts."


By denying the petitions, SCOTUS has chosen to sanction corruption by federal judges and to allow federal judges to void sections of the Constitutional at will.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=xprnw.20110118.CL31921&show_article=1

[Suriel]

They are making a big deal out of this on alternative media sources. Are there any comments?

[irishspirit]

What has me shocked on this subject, not just on this forum, but on talk radio and so forth in America, people just seem to have accepted it! What? Really come on people, this is the worlds greatest document for freedom. no longer mattering in a place sworn to uphold it.

[conk]

I've got to get working on my The End Is Near sandwich sign.

Seriously, this is not good folks. Torches are $3. Pitchforks around $15. I hope they sell out fast.

[jeannacav]

It is so hard for me to believe this is actually happening and has happened to this beautiful constitution.

The manipulations have been coming fast and from many directions to kill that document.
I hope a lot of people will scream very loud about this.

Thanks for the heads-up,

jeanna

[Arrowwind]

Just how do we scream?

Better get those letters rolling to congress and senate

[giovonni]

Just how do we scream?

Better get those letters rolling to congress and senate

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YGLQQZTHoU0/So3iCBpTS1I/AAAAAAAAJk4/ydnaY7nt9D4/s1600/dumpster-constitution.JPG

The Supreme Court gave us a clear indication on how one might go about doing this earlier this year :wof:

http://www.acslaw.org/files/corporate%20campaigning_1.JPG

[anikohu]

What has me shocked on this subject, not just on this forum, but on talk radio and so forth in America, people just seem to have accepted it! What? Really come on people, this is the worlds greatest document for freedom. no longer mattering in a place sworn to uphold it.

Thank You Irishspirit! This is HUGE !!!None of the local news talked about it. And how about Obama NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER....CONGRESS OFFICALLY IRRElEVANT,,,

[anikohu]

I CANT FIND WORDS, over 300 million people????!!! Are they already dead???--- and no IM NOT SUPRISED ABOUT CONGRESS THEY ARE GOOD FOR NOTHING. I WAS THINKING OF THE SAME AS YOU IRISHSPIRIT. WHAT HAPPENED HERE. SOME KIND OFF FOG COME ONTO THIS FORUM? ( CHARLES TOOK OVER)
THIS MORNING I WAS READING ALL THIS HORRIBLE NEWS THEN I CALLED EVERYBODY ALL OVER I SENT EMAILS TO EVERY ONE I KNOW.

[irishspirit]

I CANT FIND WORDS, over 300 million people????!!! Are they already dead???--- and no IM NOT SUPRISED ABOUT CONGRESS THEY ARE GOOD FOR NOTHING. I WAS THINKING OF THE SAME AS YOU IRISHSPIRIT. WHAT HAPPENED HERE. SOME KIND OFF FOG COME ONTO THIS FORUM? ( CHARLES TOOK OVER)
THIS MORNING I WAS READING ALL THIS HORRIBLE NEWS THEN I CALLED EVERYBODY ALL OVER I SENT EMAILS TO EVERY ONE I KNOW.

The problem with congress is they are doing what they are told, do you really think they care for the man on the street? No. Americas only hope is Ron Paul, and his logic falls on deaf ear. What scares me, is so many people in America seem to revolve around the constitution, it is my constitutional right this, that and the other, and they don't seem to release that it is being killed off in front of their eyes.

Coming from and Irishman who has lost his, do not loss yours.

[giovonni]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.politicsdaily.com/media/2009/01/thomas-2.jpg
:gossip: Clarence Thomas Sleeping Through Obama's Inaugural Address with Scalia to the Far the right!

Group:
Supreme Court justices ‘participated in political strategy sessions’ before Citizens United

On the first anniversary of the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, which overturned nearly a century of restrictions on campaign spending, a progressive group has asked the Department of Justice to look into "conflicts of interest" two justices may have had when issuing the ruling.

In a petition to be sent to the department this week, Common Cause will argue that Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas should have recused themselves from the campaign finance decision because of their involvement with Koch Industries, a corporation run by two conservative activists who many say directly benefited from Citizens United.

“It appears both justices have participated in political strategy sessions, perhaps while the case was pending, with corporate leaders whose political aims were advanced by the decision,” the letter alleges, as quoted at Politico.

The group will urge the department to disqualify Scalia and Thomas from the ruling. If that were to happen, the Supreme Court could vacate the ruling, effectively returning the campaign finance restrictions that existed until 2010. But, as Common Cause itself admits, the odds are against it.

ut Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UC-Irvine, had far less faith in Common Cause's effort.

“I am a big critic of the Citizens United case. I would love to see it reversed,” Hasen told Politico. “But this approach seems both unlikely to yield the desired result of seeing the case overturned and appears to be an unwarranted attack on the ethics of the Justices.”

Hasen noted, “Justice Scalia has refused to recuse himself from cases involving a far closer relationship."

Arn H. Pearson, a Common Cause vice president, made it clear that the group doesn't see its effort as an open-and-shut case.

“We’re treading in new territory here for us,” he told the Times. “But a situation like this raises fundamental questions about public confidence in the Supreme Court.”

At the center of the group's claims is a document from Koch Industries unearthed last fall by ThinkProgress and the New York Times. In an invitation to a Palm Springs retreat to be held this month, Charles Koch boasted that previous events were attended by Scalia and Thomas.

If Scalia or Thomas attended a Koch event between 2008 and 2010, when the court was dealing with issues

affecting Citizens United, “it would certainly raise serious issues of the appearance of impropriety and bias,” the Commons Cause petition states, as quoted in the New York Times.

Since the Citizens United ruling, many critics have focused on the role of the Koch brothers in US politics, arguing that the oil-business billionaires have placed themselves at the nexus of big business and conservative politics.

The Koch brothers are generally believed to be behind Americans for Prosperity, a group that has been accused of distorting facts in campaigning against health care reform and climate change legislation. President Obama last fall referred to the group as an example of how Citizens United has allowed large corporations to use political groups to funnel unlimited amounts of money into campaigns.

“They don’t have to say who, exactly, Americans for Prosperity are," Obama said. "You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation [or even] a big oil company.”

Steven Gillers, a legal ethics professor at NYU, told the Times that Common Cause's campaign is "a steep uphill climb ... but not an insurmountable one." He suggested that even if the effort failed, it would still allow for a "public airing" of concerns surrounding the Supreme Court's impartiality.

Source;
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/group-demands-doj-probe-citizens-united/

[haibane]

Well, since in a democracy all laws are are based on a constitution, removing the basis would mean all the laws being void as well? The only thing left would be the court decision precedents, outside which the courts / judges would be free to rule as they wish? This would be analogous to the fiat currency - a fiat legal system based on pretty much nothing except a collection of the previous courts’ precedential rulings. Anyway, since I'm neither a lawyer, nor a U.S. citizen, I asked around and got this:


US Supreme Court cannot ever issue a valid decision “constitution is void” such a decision would be null because it would be issued by then illegal court due to Amendment 14th sec. 3. Moreover, a US Supreme court decision “constitution is void” must not be respected due to Declaration of Independence which is the supreme, unamendable and unvoidable law of the United States and expressly institutes the duty to throw despotic government.

But it always comes down to the sheeple to be willing enough to enforce their constitution - where I'm from we have the Lisboa treaty, and something like 99% of the population have no clue and don't care they've ever had their own constitution.