jurisnot
Cochise County The Tip Of The Iceberg
Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:13
207.160.231.221
Ladies & Gentlemen , Ol Jud Witham here, don't look to hard there on the
Border all sorts of SCHEMES are being played out against "Jone and Joe Six
Pack" Check into the MONEY TRAIL and who's getting RICH. JW
Since you all are in COCHISE COUNTY, AZ you need to take a good hard LONG look at all the THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of Illegal, Clinton/Rose Law Firm/Guy Tucker N - COMPANY , Style, Madison S&L Gang patterned COLONIAS or Illegal land Developments all over TEXAS, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California and the REST OF THE USA. Check the US Senate and Congress for the many, many, many BILLIONS US Taxpayers have spent FIXIN all those Arkansas Whitewater Like Illegal Land Developments. See http://www.co.cochise.az.us/treasurer/LandFraud.htm for some background.
The simple FACT is simple, the MASSIVE Illegal land Development Problems called ILLEGAL LAND DEVELOPMENTS/Colonias is RAMPANT all across the Mexican , US Border. Closely check into the Links at http://www.geocities.com/jurisnot and you will begin to understand ILLEGAL WORKERS are a GOLDMINE to many, many, many financial supporters of most ALL Top Level Politicians. If you want much more GOOD INTEL on this matter Write Me, I spent 25 years researching the POLITICIANS that make this all possible.
http://www.co.cochise.az.us/treasurer/LandFraud.htm and http://www.geocities.com/jurisnot
The MOB MONEY and the Money Laundering at these ILLEGALLAND DEVELOPMENTS is very, very, very BIG Corruption.
Judson Witham
Hey Minutemen THIS IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY
all-time high of $61.04 billion in February
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON - The U.S. trade deficit, exacerbated by surging imports of oil and textiles, soared to an all-time high of $61.04 billion in February
The Commerce Department said Tuesday that the February imbalance was up 4.3 percent from a $58.5 billion trade gap in January as a small $50 million rise in U.S. exports of goods and services was swamped by a $2.58 billion increase in imports.
The surging trade deficit is leading to an increase in protectionist pressures as American textile and clothing manufacturers are lobbying the administration to limit imports of Chinese textile and clothing goods to ward off a flood of products now that global quotas have expired.
For February, imports of textiles and clothing from China rose by 9.8 percent even though America's overall trade gap with China actually narrowed to $13.9 billion, down by 9.2 percent from a January deficit of $15.3 billion. The improvement reflected an increase in U.S. exports to China and declines in other import categories outside of textiles.
For the first two months of this year, the trade deficit is running at an annual rate of $717.2 billion, a full $100 billion above the record imbalance of $617.1 billion set for all of 2004.
Trade deficits of this magnitude have raised worries among economists about America's ability to continue to attract the foreign financing needed to cover the shortfall between exports and imports. If foreigners decided to hold fewer dollar-denominated investments such as stocks and bonds, it could trigger steep declines in U.S. stock prices and a sharp increase in interest rates.
Critics point to the soaring deficits as evidence that President Bush's free trade policies are not working and have instead contributed to the loss of 3 million American manufacturing jobs since 2000.
The Bush administration argues that the deficit primarily reflects the fact that the U.S. economy has been growing at a much faster pace than the economies of its major trading partners, pushing up imports while dampening demand for U.S. exports. Treasury Secretary John Snow was expected to use a Saturday meeting of finance officials from the Group of Seven major industrial countries to once again lobby for Europe and Japan to pursue more growth-oriented policies.
The U.S. dollar has been declining for three years, a fact that should help narrow the trade deficit by making imports more expensive to American consumers while making U.S. exports cheaper. However, economists say the dollar needs to fall further to deal with the widening trade deficit, and they are predicting a further increase in the trade gap this year.
The record February deficit of $61.04 billion surpassed the old record of $59.4 billion set last November.
Imports of goods and services rose by 1.6 percent to an all-time high of $161.5 billion.
Demand for foreign petroleum products shot up 10.3 percent to $18.2 billion, the second highest level on record, surpassed only by $19.6 billion in imports of petroleum last November.
The February increase reflected higher prices as crude oil climbed to $36.85 per barrel, compared to $35.25 in January, offsetting a drop in the volume of oil imports. Analysts said America's foreign oil bill is likely to climb even further in months ahead, reflecting further increases in global oil prices.
Exports were up by $50 million to a record $100.48 billion in February, reflecting increases in shipments of drilling and oilfield equipment, civilian aircraft and pharmaceutical products. These gains offset declines in sales of U.S.-made cars and auto parts and food.
The administration, at the urging of U.S. textile and clothing manufacturers, has begun investigations into whether to re-impose quotas on Chinese imports of various products to protect the domestic industry from market disruptions following the removal of global quotas that had restricted shipments to the United States for more than three decades.
NOW for a little heads-up on JUDICAL / LAWYER TYRANNY
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org wrote:
From:
To: "www.jail4judges.org"
Subject: A Former Lawclerk Who No Longer Trusts Judges
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:05:47 -0700
J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California April 11, 2005
______________________________________________________
Mission Statement JNJ Library PayPal Support
Federal J.A.I.L. FAQs What?MeWarden?
______________________________________________________
A Former Lawclerk Who
No Longer Trusts Judges
by Charles E. Lincoln, charles.e.lincoln@worldnet.att.net
Mr. Robert P. Grey, Jr.
President of the American Bar Association
Dear Mr. Grey:
I have served as a lawclerk for two of the finest District and Circuit judges, both liberal and conservative, in the entire Federal Judiciary. I studied law under half a dozen other current federal judges at the University of Chicago Law School, where I received my J.D. in 1992.
A balanced and even-handed appreciation, acquired only after hours if not days of hard work and exhaustive consideration, of the legal and factual issues in every case was always the cornerstone of law and judicial decisionmaking as I learned it, both from great conservatives like Michael W. McConnell and liberals like Diane Wood at Law School, or Stephen Reinhardt and Kenneth L. Ryskamp in whose chambers I worked on the opposite ends of both the political spectrum and the geographic boundaries of this country.
I do not believe that the judicial ideals I learned working for these men, the judges whom I served, or at law school, are reflected or embodied in the larger body of current American (state or federal) judiciaries AT ALL. Judges have learned to use their power in manners which I can only describe as consistently
oppressive, arbitrary, and capricious, and violative of the Constitution.
Civil rights actions, and every other procedure by which the people might challenge their government or the wealthy, have been struck down and redefined and limited almost out of existence. Rather than using the Courts to protect the poor, Judges maximize the advantage of the rich, strike down the rights of the pro se or indigent parties. The quality of mercy is most definitely strained in this country, and everyone knows it.
It can be said that few if any "modern" judges keep the balance nice and even. That is my experience, the experience of those around me, and in fact I know of only a few widely scattered exceptions all of whom I can count with one hand. The most common characterization of judges behind their backs, even among seasoned lawyers, is not as scholars or workaholics but as "eight hundred pound gorillas." The judges with whom I studied and worked were only scholars and workaholics, but the simians have come to the bench in greatest numbers and at all levels.
And for this reason, the even well-balanced scales, that ancient ideal and symbol of the judiciary seems to be everywhere dead.
I am sending you two recent essays I have "published" on-line, but I would like to add that, based on my experience, I have devoted my entire strength, my entire educational background, and what remains of my own judge-shattered career to fighting judicial immunity, restricting judicial discretion to that which the law allows, and in general to reimpose the lofty rights enshrined in the Constitution of the United States on a judiciary which seems to have all but forgotten that all men are created equal.
In short, I think you are wrong---the American judiciary as a whole has not earned our respect. There is a certain parallel---albeit not exact---between what I have written below and what Texas' Junior Senator said on the Senate Floor the other day---the American judicial system has degenerated to the point that no one can trust it, and it must be reformed---or else the constitution itself will crumble and dissolve in a cesspool of the people's disappointed tears and bloodied lives.
The judiciary and its judges are the least visible and most poorly understood branch and actors of the government, but it can no longer be said that they have just powers derived from the consent of the governed.
Charles E. Lincoln, Lago Vista, Texas.
************************************************************
http://victimsoflaw.net/ABAonjudges3.htm#__Judges_Deserve_Our_Respect,_Not_Our_Sc
Response to "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn"
In Response to: "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn"
-- By: Charles E. Lincoln
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citizen's Response to the ABA Statement
Dear Mr. Grey:
In Response to: "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn" ©2005
I have written elsewhere on this website (A Comparison of “An Act for the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo”with existing law under 28 U.S.C. §1343 and 42 U.S.C. §1983), that from at least one perspective it is Congress who cast the ultimate vote of no confidence in the judiciary when it re-enacted pre-existing laws to guarantee that Terri Schiavo's case could be reviewed in the Federal Courts. If Congress had believed that the U.S. Courts were consistently (or even "ever, recently") willing to follow and apply the laws already enacted by Congress and entered on the books, such as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, it is hard to understand why Congress would have needed or bothered to enact a special bill for Terry Schiavo that did not expand on the rights already conferred by that statute.
It was once my privilege to work for a man whom I consider to be one of the finest U.S. District Judges in the state of Florida, actually in all the United States, the Honorable Kenneth L. Ryskamp of Palm Beach, a man of utterly unimpeachable integrity, intelligence, and honor. One of Judge Ryskamp's mottos was "if judges don't follow the law, then who will?"
Now, however, it seems that one can rely on both State and Federal Judges for little else other than their complete willingness to disregard the law, to twist it to purposes inverse from original framer's or legislative intent (if the law involved is constitutional or statutory) or unrecognizably out of the original context and factual framework (if the law involved is based on judicial precedent).
I have recently worked very hard to clarify and limit the proper understandings of two doctrines, Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris which support or even advocate a national judicial policy of "jurisdictional helplessness" which has been used to defeat federal civil rights litigation. Cf., Susan Bandes, "Evaluating Rooker-Feldman's Jurisdictional Status, 74 Notre Dame Law Review, 1186 n. 58 (1998-1999)(Symposium: Rooker-Feldman Doctrine: worth only the powder to blow it up?).
The simple but unspoken truth is that the judicial over-extension and over-application of both Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris, far beyond what those extremely sound precedents originally stood for in the context of the facts and circumstances of the cases they decided, are part and parcel of a nationwide movement over the past two decades to cut-back on the civil rights progress which the Courts had made against arbitrarily and capriciously oppressive, discriminatory, and biased local customs, policies, and practices during the 1950s-1970s.
It is politically impossible for the anti-civil rights crowd to repeal such monumental pieces of civil rights legislation as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, but it has so far not been at all politically impossible to whittle away civil rights piece-by-piece judicial rewriting of these laws to the point where they no longer effectively enforce or preclude ANYTHING.
So, when the terribly sympathetic case of Terri Schiavo made it to the top of the news, Congress had no choice but to recognize the reality that activist anti-civil rights judges, many in the name of "opposing judicial activism", had so curtailed the civil rights laws of these United States, so obliterated the enforcement of the law as an expression of the "consent of the governed"---acting through their democratically elected representatives in Congress, that Terri Schiavo's ONLY access to the Federal Courts to clarify the extent of her SUBSTANTIVE due process rights was for Congress to RE-ENACT the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 (now 42 U.S.C. Section 1983) specifically in her name and for her benefit only.
It is patently obvious (as I described in my article) that Congress specifically intended to eliminate the barriers set up by both the judge-made Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris jurisdictional and "abstention" doctrines, in enacting the Schiavo bill----while Congress shied away from expanding Terri's (or anyone else's) substantive due process rights to life, liberty, or property.
Thus, Congress showed, for all the world to see, that Congress knows what the U.S. Courts have done to the U.S. Civil Rights law, and Congress, albeit to no result or end, wanted to give Terri Schiavo, or her parents, a one-time access to the U.S. Judiciary, acknowledging thereby what everyone knows: namely that, historically, the US Courts were the "last best hope" for those whose life, liberty, and property was threatened or endangered.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Lincoln
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Charles E. Lincoln lives in Lago Vista, Texas. After his B.A. at Tulane in New Orleans (1980), he received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1990 and a J.D. from the University of Chicago in 1992. He clerked for U.S. District Court Kenneth L. Ryskamp in Palm Beach, Florida, in 1992-1993 and before that was a judicial extern for U.S. Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Los Angeles, in 1988-9
http://victimsoflaw.net/SchiavoPrecedent2.htm
A Comparison of “An Act for the Relief of the Parents of
Theresa Marie Schiavo”with existing law under
28 U.S.C. §1343 and 42 U.S.C. §1983
-- By: Charles E. Lincoln -- 4/5/05
Substantive And Procedural Due Process:
A Comparison of
“An Act f
Since you all are in COCHISE COUNTY, AZ you need to take a good hard LONG look at all the THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of Illegal, Clinton/Rose Law Firm/Guy Tucker N - COMPANY , Style, Madison S&L Gang patterned COLONIAS or Illegal land Developments all over TEXAS, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California and the REST OF THE USA. Check the US Senate and Congress for the many, many, many BILLIONS US Taxpayers have spent FIXIN all those Arkansas Whitewater Like Illegal Land Developments. See http://www.co.cochise.az.us/treasurer/LandFraud.htm for some background.
The simple FACT is simple, the MASSIVE Illegal land Development Problems called ILLEGAL LAND DEVELOPMENTS/Colonias is RAMPANT all across the Mexican , US Border. Closely check into the Links at http://www.geocities.com/jurisnot and you will begin to understand ILLEGAL WORKERS are a GOLDMINE to many, many, many financial supporters of most ALL Top Level Politicians. If you want much more GOOD INTEL on this matter Write Me, I spent 25 years researching the POLITICIANS that make this all possible.
http://www.co.cochise.az.us/treasurer/LandFraud.htm and http://www.geocities.com/jurisnot
The MOB MONEY and the Money Laundering at these ILLEGALLAND DEVELOPMENTS is very, very, very BIG Corruption.
Judson Witham
Hey Minutemen THIS IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY
all-time high of $61.04 billion in February
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON - The U.S. trade deficit, exacerbated by surging imports of oil and textiles, soared to an all-time high of $61.04 billion in February
The Commerce Department said Tuesday that the February imbalance was up 4.3 percent from a $58.5 billion trade gap in January as a small $50 million rise in U.S. exports of goods and services was swamped by a $2.58 billion increase in imports.
The surging trade deficit is leading to an increase in protectionist pressures as American textile and clothing manufacturers are lobbying the administration to limit imports of Chinese textile and clothing goods to ward off a flood of products now that global quotas have expired.
For February, imports of textiles and clothing from China rose by 9.8 percent even though America's overall trade gap with China actually narrowed to $13.9 billion, down by 9.2 percent from a January deficit of $15.3 billion. The improvement reflected an increase in U.S. exports to China and declines in other import categories outside of textiles.
For the first two months of this year, the trade deficit is running at an annual rate of $717.2 billion, a full $100 billion above the record imbalance of $617.1 billion set for all of 2004.
Trade deficits of this magnitude have raised worries among economists about America's ability to continue to attract the foreign financing needed to cover the shortfall between exports and imports. If foreigners decided to hold fewer dollar-denominated investments such as stocks and bonds, it could trigger steep declines in U.S. stock prices and a sharp increase in interest rates.
Critics point to the soaring deficits as evidence that President Bush's free trade policies are not working and have instead contributed to the loss of 3 million American manufacturing jobs since 2000.
The Bush administration argues that the deficit primarily reflects the fact that the U.S. economy has been growing at a much faster pace than the economies of its major trading partners, pushing up imports while dampening demand for U.S. exports. Treasury Secretary John Snow was expected to use a Saturday meeting of finance officials from the Group of Seven major industrial countries to once again lobby for Europe and Japan to pursue more growth-oriented policies.
The U.S. dollar has been declining for three years, a fact that should help narrow the trade deficit by making imports more expensive to American consumers while making U.S. exports cheaper. However, economists say the dollar needs to fall further to deal with the widening trade deficit, and they are predicting a further increase in the trade gap this year.
The record February deficit of $61.04 billion surpassed the old record of $59.4 billion set last November.
Imports of goods and services rose by 1.6 percent to an all-time high of $161.5 billion.
Demand for foreign petroleum products shot up 10.3 percent to $18.2 billion, the second highest level on record, surpassed only by $19.6 billion in imports of petroleum last November.
The February increase reflected higher prices as crude oil climbed to $36.85 per barrel, compared to $35.25 in January, offsetting a drop in the volume of oil imports. Analysts said America's foreign oil bill is likely to climb even further in months ahead, reflecting further increases in global oil prices.
Exports were up by $50 million to a record $100.48 billion in February, reflecting increases in shipments of drilling and oilfield equipment, civilian aircraft and pharmaceutical products. These gains offset declines in sales of U.S.-made cars and auto parts and food.
The administration, at the urging of U.S. textile and clothing manufacturers, has begun investigations into whether to re-impose quotas on Chinese imports of various products to protect the domestic industry from market disruptions following the removal of global quotas that had restricted shipments to the United States for more than three decades.
NOW for a little heads-up on JUDICAL / LAWYER TYRANNY
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org wrote:
From:
To: "www.jail4judges.org"
Subject: A Former Lawclerk Who No Longer Trusts Judges
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:05:47 -0700
J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California April 11, 2005
______________________________________________________
Mission Statement JNJ Library PayPal Support
Federal J.A.I.L. FAQs What?MeWarden?
______________________________________________________
A Former Lawclerk Who
No Longer Trusts Judges
by Charles E. Lincoln, charles.e.lincoln@worldnet.att.net
Mr. Robert P. Grey, Jr.
President of the American Bar Association
Dear Mr. Grey:
I have served as a lawclerk for two of the finest District and Circuit judges, both liberal and conservative, in the entire Federal Judiciary. I studied law under half a dozen other current federal judges at the University of Chicago Law School, where I received my J.D. in 1992.
A balanced and even-handed appreciation, acquired only after hours if not days of hard work and exhaustive consideration, of the legal and factual issues in every case was always the cornerstone of law and judicial decisionmaking as I learned it, both from great conservatives like Michael W. McConnell and liberals like Diane Wood at Law School, or Stephen Reinhardt and Kenneth L. Ryskamp in whose chambers I worked on the opposite ends of both the political spectrum and the geographic boundaries of this country.
I do not believe that the judicial ideals I learned working for these men, the judges whom I served, or at law school, are reflected or embodied in the larger body of current American (state or federal) judiciaries AT ALL. Judges have learned to use their power in manners which I can only describe as consistently
oppressive, arbitrary, and capricious, and violative of the Constitution.
Civil rights actions, and every other procedure by which the people might challenge their government or the wealthy, have been struck down and redefined and limited almost out of existence. Rather than using the Courts to protect the poor, Judges maximize the advantage of the rich, strike down the rights of the pro se or indigent parties. The quality of mercy is most definitely strained in this country, and everyone knows it.
It can be said that few if any "modern" judges keep the balance nice and even. That is my experience, the experience of those around me, and in fact I know of only a few widely scattered exceptions all of whom I can count with one hand. The most common characterization of judges behind their backs, even among seasoned lawyers, is not as scholars or workaholics but as "eight hundred pound gorillas." The judges with whom I studied and worked were only scholars and workaholics, but the simians have come to the bench in greatest numbers and at all levels.
And for this reason, the even well-balanced scales, that ancient ideal and symbol of the judiciary seems to be everywhere dead.
I am sending you two recent essays I have "published" on-line, but I would like to add that, based on my experience, I have devoted my entire strength, my entire educational background, and what remains of my own judge-shattered career to fighting judicial immunity, restricting judicial discretion to that which the law allows, and in general to reimpose the lofty rights enshrined in the Constitution of the United States on a judiciary which seems to have all but forgotten that all men are created equal.
In short, I think you are wrong---the American judiciary as a whole has not earned our respect. There is a certain parallel---albeit not exact---between what I have written below and what Texas' Junior Senator said on the Senate Floor the other day---the American judicial system has degenerated to the point that no one can trust it, and it must be reformed---or else the constitution itself will crumble and dissolve in a cesspool of the people's disappointed tears and bloodied lives.
The judiciary and its judges are the least visible and most poorly understood branch and actors of the government, but it can no longer be said that they have just powers derived from the consent of the governed.
Charles E. Lincoln, Lago Vista, Texas.
************************************************************
http://victimsoflaw.net/ABAonjudges3.htm#__Judges_Deserve_Our_Respect,_Not_Our_Sc
Response to "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn"
In Response to: "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn"
-- By: Charles E. Lincoln
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citizen's Response to the ABA Statement
Dear Mr. Grey:
In Response to: "Judges Deserve Our Respect, Not Our Scorn" ©2005
I have written elsewhere on this website (A Comparison of “An Act for the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo”with existing law under 28 U.S.C. §1343 and 42 U.S.C. §1983), that from at least one perspective it is Congress who cast the ultimate vote of no confidence in the judiciary when it re-enacted pre-existing laws to guarantee that Terri Schiavo's case could be reviewed in the Federal Courts. If Congress had believed that the U.S. Courts were consistently (or even "ever, recently") willing to follow and apply the laws already enacted by Congress and entered on the books, such as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, it is hard to understand why Congress would have needed or bothered to enact a special bill for Terry Schiavo that did not expand on the rights already conferred by that statute.
It was once my privilege to work for a man whom I consider to be one of the finest U.S. District Judges in the state of Florida, actually in all the United States, the Honorable Kenneth L. Ryskamp of Palm Beach, a man of utterly unimpeachable integrity, intelligence, and honor. One of Judge Ryskamp's mottos was "if judges don't follow the law, then who will?"
Now, however, it seems that one can rely on both State and Federal Judges for little else other than their complete willingness to disregard the law, to twist it to purposes inverse from original framer's or legislative intent (if the law involved is constitutional or statutory) or unrecognizably out of the original context and factual framework (if the law involved is based on judicial precedent).
I have recently worked very hard to clarify and limit the proper understandings of two doctrines, Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris which support or even advocate a national judicial policy of "jurisdictional helplessness" which has been used to defeat federal civil rights litigation. Cf., Susan Bandes, "Evaluating Rooker-Feldman's Jurisdictional Status, 74 Notre Dame Law Review, 1186 n. 58 (1998-1999)(Symposium: Rooker-Feldman Doctrine: worth only the powder to blow it up?).
The simple but unspoken truth is that the judicial over-extension and over-application of both Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris, far beyond what those extremely sound precedents originally stood for in the context of the facts and circumstances of the cases they decided, are part and parcel of a nationwide movement over the past two decades to cut-back on the civil rights progress which the Courts had made against arbitrarily and capriciously oppressive, discriminatory, and biased local customs, policies, and practices during the 1950s-1970s.
It is politically impossible for the anti-civil rights crowd to repeal such monumental pieces of civil rights legislation as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, but it has so far not been at all politically impossible to whittle away civil rights piece-by-piece judicial rewriting of these laws to the point where they no longer effectively enforce or preclude ANYTHING.
So, when the terribly sympathetic case of Terri Schiavo made it to the top of the news, Congress had no choice but to recognize the reality that activist anti-civil rights judges, many in the name of "opposing judicial activism", had so curtailed the civil rights laws of these United States, so obliterated the enforcement of the law as an expression of the "consent of the governed"---acting through their democratically elected representatives in Congress, that Terri Schiavo's ONLY access to the Federal Courts to clarify the extent of her SUBSTANTIVE due process rights was for Congress to RE-ENACT the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 (now 42 U.S.C. Section 1983) specifically in her name and for her benefit only.
It is patently obvious (as I described in my article) that Congress specifically intended to eliminate the barriers set up by both the judge-made Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris jurisdictional and "abstention" doctrines, in enacting the Schiavo bill----while Congress shied away from expanding Terri's (or anyone else's) substantive due process rights to life, liberty, or property.
Thus, Congress showed, for all the world to see, that Congress knows what the U.S. Courts have done to the U.S. Civil Rights law, and Congress, albeit to no result or end, wanted to give Terri Schiavo, or her parents, a one-time access to the U.S. Judiciary, acknowledging thereby what everyone knows: namely that, historically, the US Courts were the "last best hope" for those whose life, liberty, and property was threatened or endangered.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Lincoln
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Charles E. Lincoln lives in Lago Vista, Texas. After his B.A. at Tulane in New Orleans (1980), he received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1990 and a J.D. from the University of Chicago in 1992. He clerked for U.S. District Court Kenneth L. Ryskamp in Palm Beach, Florida, in 1992-1993 and before that was a judicial extern for U.S. Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Los Angeles, in 1988-9
http://victimsoflaw.net/SchiavoPrecedent2.htm
A Comparison of “An Act for the Relief of the Parents of
Theresa Marie Schiavo”with existing law under
28 U.S.C. §1343 and 42 U.S.C. §1983
-- By: Charles E. Lincoln -- 4/5/05
Substantive And Procedural Due Process:
A Comparison of
“An Act f
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
