SCOTUS: It's Not Nice To Challenge SCOTUS Treason
Posted by freedomforall 8 months ago to Politics
Sorry, America, your right to a fair election is overruled by the treasonous SCOTUS again.
Excerpt:
"In the unorthodox lawsuit, Mr. Brunson argued that avoiding an investigation “of how Biden won the election, is an act of treason and an act of levying war against the U.S. Constitution which violated Brunson’s unfettered right to vote in an honest and fair election and as such it wrongfully invalidated his vote.”
In that appeal, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari, or review, in an unsigned order on Jan. 9, 2023. No justices dissented. No reason was provided for the decision. At least four of the nine justices have to vote to approve a petition for certiorari for it to advance to the oral argument stage.
The court denied a petition for rehearing on Feb. 21, 2023, in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented.
This week, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari in Brunson v. Sotomayor in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented, but Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson did not participate in the ruling.
The petition had been docketed with the high court on March 29, with Mr. Brunson serving as his own counsel.
Mr. Brunson argued in the second lawsuit that the justices violated their judicial oath in Brunson v. Adams."
Excerpt:
"In the unorthodox lawsuit, Mr. Brunson argued that avoiding an investigation “of how Biden won the election, is an act of treason and an act of levying war against the U.S. Constitution which violated Brunson’s unfettered right to vote in an honest and fair election and as such it wrongfully invalidated his vote.”
In that appeal, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari, or review, in an unsigned order on Jan. 9, 2023. No justices dissented. No reason was provided for the decision. At least four of the nine justices have to vote to approve a petition for certiorari for it to advance to the oral argument stage.
The court denied a petition for rehearing on Feb. 21, 2023, in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented.
This week, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari in Brunson v. Sotomayor in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented, but Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson did not participate in the ruling.
The petition had been docketed with the high court on March 29, with Mr. Brunson serving as his own counsel.
Mr. Brunson argued in the second lawsuit that the justices violated their judicial oath in Brunson v. Adams."
compounding treason
What else can be we expect sneaky traitors to do to the rule of law?
They wouldn't have done so otherwise.
Paraphrasing Captain Barbossa, it's not a law, but a code of ethics that are
just guidelines that the justices are supposed to follow. If it's politically
important to the puppeteers, the 'justices' will find a way to ignore the ethics
guidelines. There is no method of enforcing the guidelines.
I hope your brother has a positive (non-invasive) outcome.
I feel fine too today after a good night's sleep. I shouldn't post stuff reeling ragged.
Must be nice to operate under unenforceable guidelines. Me dino had to sign for subjects taught at the end of two weeks of annual training when I worked for 21 years for the Alabama Department of Corrections.
That meant if I screwed up I'm legally liable for this and that and not the state.