THE MUTILATION / STERILIZATION of a 15 year old young girl
HAS GIVEN THE “ CASE LAW” not the “LAW”
used by JUDGES across the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
to FALSELY BELIEVE THAT JUDGES are
“ABOVE THE LAW” and have “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
Supreme Court of the United States
(SCOTUS)
Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)
No. 76-1750
Argued January 10, 1978
Decided March 28, 1978
Syllabus
A mother filed a petition in affidavit from in an Indiana Circuit Court, a court of general
jurisdiction under an Indiana statute, for authority to have her "somewhat retarded" 15-year-old
daughter (a respondent here) sterilized, and petitioner Circuit Judge approved the petition the same
day in an ex parte proceeding without a hearing and without notice to the daughter or appointment of a guardian ad litem.
The operation was performed shortly thereafter, the daughter having been told that she was to have
her appendix removed.
About two years later, she was married, and her inability to become pregnant led her to discover that
she had been sterilized.
A mother filed a petition in affidavit from in an Indiana Circuit Court, a court of general
jurisdiction under an Indiana statute, for authority to have her "somewhat retarded" 15-year-old
daughter (a respondent here) sterilized, and petitioner Circuit Judge approved the petition the same
day in an ex parte proceeding without a hearing and without notice to the daughter or appointment of a guardian ad litem.
The operation was performed shortly thereafter, the daughter having been told that she was to have
her appendix removed.
About two years later, she was married, and her inability to become pregnant led her to discover that
she had been sterilized.
As a result, she and her husband (also a respondent here) filed suit in Federal District Court pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against her mother, the mother's attorney, the Circuit Judge, the doctors who
performed or assisted in the sterilization, and the hospital where it was performed, seeking damages
for the alleged violation of her constitutional rights.
Holding that the constitutional claims required a showing of state action and that the only state action alleged was the Circuit Judge's approval of the sterilization petition, the District Court held that no federal action would lie against any of the defendants because the Circuit Judge, the only state agent, was absolutely immune from suit under the doctrine of judicial immunity.
The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the "crucial issue" was
whether the Circuit Judge acted within his jurisdiction, that he had not, that, accordingly, he was not immune from damages liability, and that, in any event, he had forfeited his immunity "because of his failure to comply with elementary principles of procedural due process."
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against her mother, the mother's attorney, the Circuit Judge, the doctors who
performed or assisted in the sterilization, and the hospital where it was performed, seeking damages
for the alleged violation of her constitutional rights.
Holding that the constitutional claims required a showing of state action and that the only state action alleged was the Circuit Judge's approval of the sterilization petition, the District Court held that no federal action would lie against any of the defendants because the Circuit Judge, the only state agent, was absolutely immune from suit under the doctrine of judicial immunity.
The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the "crucial issue" was
whether the Circuit Judge acted within his jurisdiction, that he had not, that, accordingly, he was not immune from damages liability, and that, in any event, he had forfeited his immunity "because of his failure to comply with elementary principles of procedural due process."
Held: The Indiana law vested in the Circuit Judge the power to entertain and act upon the petition
for sterilization, and he is, therefore, immune from damages liability even if his approval of the petition was in error. Pp. 435 U. S. 355-364.
for sterilization, and he is, therefore, immune from damages liability even if his approval of the petition was in error. Pp. 435 U. S. 355-364.
Read More: Justia https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/435/349/
Not only is the case "SICK" that the mutilation / sterilization of a young the “BULLSHIT” of
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY FOR JUDGES” it is even “SICKER” that any JUDGE man or
woman would walk into a courtroom and believe they can do that and many other
things to a person / American Citizen and have “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”.
Judges only have 5 rules which can be found: https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-
conduct-united-states-judges
Not only is the United States of America a two tier Judicial system what an American Citizen needs to understand is that they must support change in our Government, our Judiciary to hold these people accountable for treasonous acts and actions against innocent citizens for personal and or financial gain.
Code of Conduct for United States Judges: includes the ethical canons that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties and engagement in a variety of outside activities.
State Judges in each state have a similar Code of Conduct.
Canon 1: A Judge should uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities
Canon 3: A Judge should perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4: A Judge may engage in Extrajudicial Activities that are consistent with the obligations of Judicial Office
Canon 5: A Judge should refrain from Political Activity
But Judges with regularity acts and actions include and are not limited to:
1. Bias to the person they want to lose in court
1. Bias to the person they want to lose in court
2. Bias if not paid off
3. Bias for not using their friend as an attorney
4. Bias for Friendship
5. Bias over Sex
6. Bias another Judge needs a favor
7. Bias the Judges who needs the favor show up the day of the court hearing and conspire with the appointment and or other judge to ensure an outcome of a lover, friend or someone owed a favor by the Judge
8. Judges accept breakfast, lunch, dinner, a weekend getaway, sex, a golf game where the lawyer lost and paid the Judge for golf holes etc, etc, etc
Not only is the United States of America a two tier Judicial system what an American Citizen needs to understand is that they must support change in our Government, our Judiciary to hold these people accountable for treasonous acts and actions against innocent citizens for personal and or financial gain.
Judge that have acted without Jurisdiction and the “ORDER” that is “VOID” is outside
his or her job and he or she becomes personally responsible for such acts and actions.
The problem: Judge have a “Black Robe” agreement, much like the
"Blue Wall of Silence" that the police have.
When a Judge acts and actions are with “BIAS” and or any other type of act or actions outside the Judicial Canons he loses Jurisdiction. When a Judge has lost Jurisdiction “ALL HIS ORDERS ARE VOID” not “VOIDABLE” but “VOID”. That there is no statute of limitations when a
By Anonymous
Another Thought or Solution:
The solution is actually quite simple. In fact it's already law. Here's why:
English common law (i.e, pre-American Revolution/Constitution) during which people were ruled-by-a-dictatorial monarch and his "King's Bench" of stalwart pro-monarch judges. For details the briefing before the 9th Circuit and read Picking v. Penn. Railroad. Picking is the only conceivably correct analysis.
Yet Congress can correct the error of Pierson v Ray very simply--just amend the act of 1871 and include a phrase that it applies to judges Boom-done deal, and you no longer live under the judicial tyranny.
Folks--your judges are criminals. Outlaws, Miscreants, Cowards, Family judges even worse.
his or her job and he or she becomes personally responsible for such acts and actions.
The problem: Judge have a “Black Robe” agreement, much like the
"Blue Wall of Silence" that the police have.
When a Judge acts and actions are with “BIAS” and or any other type of act or actions outside the Judicial Canons he loses Jurisdiction. When a Judge has lost Jurisdiction “ALL HIS ORDERS ARE VOID” not “VOIDABLE” but “VOID”. That there is no statute of limitations when a
By Anonymous
Another Thought or Solution:
The solution is actually quite simple. In fact it's already law. Here's why:
English common law (i.e, pre-American Revolution/Constitution) during which people were ruled-by-a-dictatorial monarch and his "King's Bench" of stalwart pro-monarch judges. For details the briefing before the 9th Circuit and read Picking v. Penn. Railroad. Picking is the only conceivably correct analysis.
Yet Congress can correct the error of Pierson v Ray very simply--just amend the act of 1871 and include a phrase that it applies to judges Boom-done deal, and you no longer live under the judicial tyranny.
Folks--your judges are criminals. Outlaws, Miscreants, Cowards, Family judges even worse.
The Civil Rights Act of 1871 abolished any "absolute judicial immunity" that may have existed at
Similarly, the appellant's argument and Justice Douglas's dissent in Pierson v. Ray denying absolute immunity is the only defensible position--the majority led by Chief Justice Warren was simply lying.
Read more here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/386/547/ Justice Douglas articulated this clearly in his lone dissent in Pierson, but Chief Justice Warren simply ignored the law, ignored
Constitutional separation of powers, and usurped congressional (law-making) powers, and usurped
congressional (law-making) power to cloak judges (and only judges) with a non-existent "absolute
immunity.
"Absolute immunity is probably the biggest lie any American institution has ever told.
Judges can murder someone in their own courtroom and can't be liable? Bullshit. Read up and you'll see.
The alternative, "qualified immunity"--like every other branch of government--is more than sufficient. But judges have trampled multiple clear expressions by Congress and the Constitution to protect themselves. Sadly, Gorsuch included. What do we do with those kind of people? Jail them for a long, long time. Or worse. I'm down for whatever ... "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"What to do? Certainly not sit by and just "take it" right?
Here's a suggestion not quite as extreme as imprisoning or murdering judges:
Write to Trump and Sessions--Trump hates judges--particularly liberal judges like Earl Warren (Pierson v. Ray's "biggest lie.)".
Write to Chuck Grassley (Senate Judiciary Committee Chair) and Mitch McConnell (Senate majority leader).
Write to Paul Ryan (House Speaker). Hell, write to Rand Paul and the Freedom Caucus. Write to heritage.
Enclose materials and tell them that Congress, and only Congress, can speak on the issue of immunity, and did so in the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. sec. 1983)--expressly stating the act would do away with the absolute immunity.
Similarly, the appellant's argument and Justice Douglas's dissent in Pierson v. Ray denying absolute immunity is the only defensible position--the majority led by Chief Justice Warren was simply lying.
Read more here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/386/547/ Justice Douglas articulated this clearly in his lone dissent in Pierson, but Chief Justice Warren simply ignored the law, ignored
Constitutional separation of powers, and usurped congressional (law-making) powers, and usurped
congressional (law-making) power to cloak judges (and only judges) with a non-existent "absolute
immunity.
"Absolute immunity is probably the biggest lie any American institution has ever told.
Judges can murder someone in their own courtroom and can't be liable? Bullshit. Read up and you'll see.
The alternative, "qualified immunity"--like every other branch of government--is more than sufficient. But judges have trampled multiple clear expressions by Congress and the Constitution to protect themselves. Sadly, Gorsuch included. What do we do with those kind of people? Jail them for a long, long time. Or worse. I'm down for whatever ... "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"What to do? Certainly not sit by and just "take it" right?
Here's a suggestion not quite as extreme as imprisoning or murdering judges:
Write to Trump and Sessions--Trump hates judges--particularly liberal judges like Earl Warren (Pierson v. Ray's "biggest lie.)".
Write to Chuck Grassley (Senate Judiciary Committee Chair) and Mitch McConnell (Senate majority leader).
Write to Paul Ryan (House Speaker). Hell, write to Rand Paul and the Freedom Caucus. Write to heritage.
Enclose materials and tell them that Congress, and only Congress, can speak on the issue of immunity, and did so in the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. sec. 1983)--expressly stating the act would do away with the absolute immunity.
The Late Cole Stuart
A really good guy who lost his son to a bitter x-wife with the help of Judges and others. He spent almost 2 years in jail for saying "FUCK" in an email.
A really good guy who lost his son to a bitter x-wife with the help of Judges and others. He spent almost 2 years in jail for saying "FUCK" in an email.
The blog is hacked it appears and the writing is changing every few hours - I am doing my best to try and get it correct so it is easy to read.
ReplyDelete