Posted by
Glenn Flowers on Monday, October 20, 2008 10:23:47 AM
In 2004 a man named Bill Walker filed a lawsuit against every member of Congress in federal court charging them with failure to abide by the Constitution, Article V, and call for a convention for the states to propose ammendments to the Constitution. It was dismissed with prejudice that the court had no jurisdiction to rule on the charges.,This allowed it to be appealed.
In the appeal the charges were more clearly defined as being one felony count of violating the law of the Constitution, Art. V, and one felony count of violating their sworn Oath of Office. The case was assigned to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and in May, 2006, the court ruled, again, with prejudice that they had no jurisdiction over Congress, which automatically sent the suit to the US Supreme Court. During this appeal in the Ninth Circuit, the DOJ attorney representing congress made official statements and decisions required by law that set the stage for the ruling that would eventually be made by the Supreme Court.
These statements and decisions were in regard to a) the DOJ being replaced by the Solicitor General as attorney of record for members of Congress, and that each member of Congress had to submit a written request to join in the mutual defense of Congress and be represented by the SG. This was done by all 534 representitves and senators. And b) that they would waive privelage of Congress and answer all subpeonas and abide by the court’s rulings. This waiver was agreed to unanimously.
In August, 2006, the Supreme Court issued an order for a writ of certiorari to be submitted by the plaintiff outlining the charges and the basis of those charges and the plaintiff's legal reasoning for bringing the charges against the defendants. The court would use the writ as an aid in determining whether or not to take the appeal to trial. The court had no immediate objection to the plaintiff’s writ and then noted the defendant’s right to submit a response to the writ stating why the assertions of the plaintiff were not true and the law used as the basis of the suit had not been violated. If the defendant’s attorney waives the right to submit a response to that writ it is a formal and official acknowledgement that the charges in the writ of certiorari from the plaintiff are correct and true. The Solicitor General, with the approval of all 534 members of Congress, decided to waive any challenge to the plaintiff’s writ, thereby entering a confession by all 534 defendants to being guilty of two federal felonies per the charges.
The court dismissed the suit, but not before establishing the fact and entering into the court and public record that all charges against the defendants had been found to be true and correct as to the law and fact and admitted to by all defendants, individually before the judge. They were all guilty by admission, and that guilt was a matter of record.
The dismissal had the virtual affect of endorsing the "right" by Congress to ignore the Constitution, but did not exempt them from prosecution for doing so.
Ironically, the court refused to try the case, but then entered the admission of every member Congress to being guilty of the charges into the official record allowing any future court accepting jurisdiction to bypass a trial and immediately sentence the defendants per their confessions already on record.
Congress came away with the arrogant attitude that they were not penalized for choosing to violate the Constitution and were therefore able to ignore it anytime they chose. Actually, they only escaped prison sentences because the court decided it had no jurisdiction over Congress. If Mr. Walker, or anyone else continues to pursue this case, there might be a judge somewhere in Washington who believes he does have the right to pass binding judgement on Congress, and that would trigger the arrest and incarceration of every senator and representitive who held office in August, 2006.
Let us pray for a judge with an attitude to find this case on his dockett.
Glenn Flowers