Urmări @ Lockdownlive pe twitter.



  • Numele Guvernului: Dimitrie Hill
  • Numărul de înregistrare: 68133-053
  • Vârstă:35
  • Timp Servit:10+ ani
  • Home Town:New York, New York
  • Propoziție:20 ani
  • Curentul de incarcare:Infractor în POS. de arme de foc; Interferențe w / Comerț prin jaf de traficanții de droguri; conspirație la jaf a traficanților de narcotice spus
  • Alias:O.G, Panteră
  • Data de lansare:Data de lansare
  • Afilierea închisoare:Sânge (95KShine)
  • Cercul de influență:Tewhan Butler
  • Instituție:Unitatea de Management special la USP Lewisburg
  • Când va u elibera și ia această durere

Supreme Tirania: Dictatura de Nouă

Fiecare milioane de ani sunt afectate de S.U.A. Interpretarea Curții Supreme de S.U.A.. drept. Aceste decizii judecătorești sunt legea supremă a țării prin clauza supremație a SUA. Constituție (Articolul VI). Este reflectă democrației americane care nouă bărbați și femei interpreta legea să fie aplicată pentru milioane de oameni? Mai mult, aceste nouă judecători (denumită în continuare “The Supremes”) au indoctrinations ideologice clare și sunt, de fapt, “ales” by presidents of one political party or another. Whichever political party controls the Congress will determine the fate of the president’schoice”. Exemplu, Chief Justice John Roberts was chosen by George W. Bush, a conservative; Antonin Scalia was chosen by his father, another conservative . . . on and on it goes with The Supremes.

How is possible that nine Supremes have the interpretive capability of law that will affect millions?

Are their rulings reflective of American values, especially the lowest class of Americans?

Can it be said that their rulings are not colored by their politics and cultural experiences and prejudices?

In theory, trues checks and balances would exist between our three branches of government. In that, yes The Supremes may decide any rule, regulation, drept, or legislation set forth by Congress unconstitutional. True as well, the president retains veto authority and Congress may filibuster away and refuse to pass legislation or authorize funding for legislation they oppose.

What of the many judicial decisions, which The Supremes issue that affect the rights of millions of lower class citizens, yet are irrelevant to Congress and the president? The rulings of which have no relevance to them or their constituents i.e. all the cases of injustice that they refuse to grant Writ of Cert. de. The Supremes only accept 5% of the nation’s cases. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of cases not reviewed without stated reason. Rulings such as those that have acquiesced in eviscerating Habeas Corpus Writs, which are unequivocally embodied in the U.S. Constitution Art. 1, Sec. 9, Clause 2 to millions of American citizens incarcerated, which this clause was clearly meant to protect. Or theinfringement of the right of the people to keep and bear armsas ratified by Amendment II. And the continual erosion of the IV Amendment command of probable cause, and against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the judicial supplanting ofreasonable suspicionto avoid warrants and affect intrusive searches, at gunpoint more often than not. Or judicial rulings that condone and perpetuate the war of attrition on Amendments I, V, VI for in orderpeaceably to assemblewe must have a government permit and state who we are and why we come. Perpetually citizens aretwice put in jeopardy of life and limbduring retrials due tohung jury”, mistrials etc. In a day and time where confessions are coerced or manufactured and perhaps voluntary outside of the tribunal, these oral or written confessions, however ill-gotten, “compel (persons) in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,” while the accused most assuredly languishes years without theenjoyment of the right to a speedy and public trial.Those years shall be confined due to the requirement of excessive bail. And according to Supreme Clarence Thomas, “cruel and unusual punishment inflictedclause of Amendment VIII was never meant to apply to American prisons nor its prisoner citizens . . . not to forget the Dred Scott decision, separate but equal (Plessy v. Ferguson; overruled by Brown v. Board of Education). Abortion Rights (Roe v. Wade under attack again soon); the “judicial electionof George W. Bush; Guantanamo Bay detainees, enemy combatants; wiretap laws, The Patriot Act; and now American healthcare!!!

Multe, if not most, of the decisions affected millions on each side of the spectrum, and the decisions were split down ideological lines, Exemplu nelegate. 5-4 votes as with the majority of hot button issues. Acestea fiind spuse,, the rulings affecting criminal procedure affect a vastly inferior minority. There are 2.4 million people incarcerated in America who are affected by all criminal procedure rulings. The extreme majority are people of color. There are extremely few millionaires in prison, so that the prisoner’s class is under-represented and a constituent of no one (with the exception of Maxine Waters and a few others). So as The Supremes and Circuit Courts continuously erode poor peoples’ rights, neither Congress nor the president does anything. Until Enron CEOs, Abramoff, and their ilk are encaged and spend millions on the best lawyers money can buy, The Supremes are allowed free reign to do as they ideologically feel to poor peoples’ rights. These constitutional rights are not a concern to the vast majority who are free. Because the laws are becoming more invasive and abusive, the dynamic is changing. It needs to change now.

Nine men and women interpreting what is or is not constitutional for 300 million would be called tyranny if it were any other country. Certainly no educated people believes these nine sacrosanct and gifted beyond all 300 million, or are reflective, rather are capable of being reflective, of millions of poor, working-class Americans, never mind the entire American population. În schimb, these Supremes are reflective of an elite class of the two ruling parties- Democrat și republican. Din nou, the elite class. As for sure they are not reflective of the millions of black women who are single parents working for subsistence wages who most always vote Democrat. Nor are they reflective of rural Whites with a Bible and shotgun who most always vote Republican, in the absence of a viable conservative.

The Supremes have all received elite Ivy League educations and the vast majority over the years has been employed in the legal profession. They serve lifetime appointmentsduring good behavior;” well we citizens should be polled; surely we would find the erosion of the constitutionbad behavior,” and contrary to their sworn oath.

Understanding the first ten Amendments were ratified as a Bill of Rights for all U.S. citizens (vedea, The Federalist Papers) any deviation by judicial decree borders on treason, as even The Supremes are bound topreserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

We the people should demand The Supremes be voted in by the people, yet the number of Supremes must be expanded to be truly reflective of the 300 million Americans. Their election is to be voted on by the people of the U.S. A.

Din nou, the history of The Supremes proves why nine men and women are not truly reflective of the masses of Americans. Let us recall a few history lessons from that August institution. The Civil Rights Act (1875) was ruled unconstitutional; în Texas v. Alb, the Reconstruction Acts ruled unconstitutional (aided by then President Hayes); the Colfax Massacre sanctioned in S.U.A.. v. Cruikshank; the sanctioning of the PLRA (Prison Litigii Actul de reforma) and A.E.D.P.A. (Anti-Terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act) the former eroding prisonersconstitutional right of Habeas Corpus. Not forgetting the many men and women denied justice because The Supremes refused to even consider reviewing their cases, and many who have been killed via state authorized executions, without DNA testing, prosecutorial misconduct, and abuse, with derelict and ineffective court appointed attorneys.

There is a valid case that the Dictatorship of Nine should be ended, and the court, as it exists today, abolished. S.U.A.. Supreme Court represents a tyranny and stands in the way of true democracy.

Before roe v. Wade is overturned and a new Dred Scott decision issued . . .

În lupta,



2 responses to “Supreme Tirania: Dictatura de Nouă”

  1. Anonymous says:

    The Million Mask March started off as a single protest in Washington D.C. în 2013. It has since grown in to what has been dubbed the largest mass protest in human history with over 500 simultaneous protest around the world. Also with countless nation and world wide street actions on a weekly and monthly basis including such things as clothing drives, street protests, feeding the homeless and in some cases traveling to help those in times of need.

  2. The Million Mask March started off as a single protest in Washington D.C. în 2013. It has since grown in to what has been dubbed the largest mass protest in human history with over 500 simultaneous protest around the world. Also with countless nation and world wide street actions on a weekly and monthly basis including such things as clothing drives, street protests, feeding the homeless and in some cases traveling to help those in times of need.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Read this book!

Alegeți limba

Editare traducere