A MOST IMPORTANT CALL
9pm EST / 6pm Pacific Tuesday
Subject to Change at the Last Minute, as Always…..
M A R K Y O U R C A L E N D A R
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
NOTICE:
After the ruling on Carol Ann Bond v. United States by the Supreme Court, 6/16/11, the lower courts are taking a more careful position regarding challenges to jurisdiction. Tony Davis has accumulated the most information and case law related to a challenge to the jurisdiction of the federal courts regarding Public Law 80-772, Title 18 of the Criminal Code, and its subdivision, 18 USC section 3231, which is the only statute which gives the district courts authorization to prosecute any person since 1948. Under the in toto rule, if the principal statute, Title 18 is invalid, then its sub-component, 18 USC section 3231, is likewise invalid. With multiple attorneys and paralegals working on the issue for 9 years, Davis is probably the only person who can beat any argument submitted by the government on this issue. In fact, Davis has received 3 out of 3 show cause orders by federal judges who received his paperwork related to Title 18.
A. Class Action Being Filed
The most significant challenge to federal court jurisdiction is being filed shortly as a class action challenging the jurisdiction of the DOJ to incarcerate federal prisoners. LAW is a group dedicated to the preservation of Constitutional and Human Rights. The lawsuit, in D.C., seeks expungement plus $3,000/day/person. Cost is $2,000 to cover expenses.[1]
B. The Challenge
Our group has obtained and verified the evidence directly from Congress that Public Law 80-772 was never passed by Congress, the only statute which gives the court jurisdiction to indict and convict on any crime (Title 18, Title 21, Title 26). No court has addressed the challenge as presented properly[2], nor the evidence obtained by us directly from Congress. Over 3 years, all administrative and court remedies have been exhausted.
C. Bond Opens the Door
One of the most significant cases in recent history related to jurisdiction and the right to challenge a federal statute was ruled on by the Supreme Court on June 16, 2011. In Bond v. United States, No. 09-1227, the Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, ruled that Bond had “standing to challenge a federal statute on grounds that the measure interferes with the powers reserved to States”, pg. 3-14. “Anything in repugnance to the Constitution is invalid or unlawful”. Bond, supra.
Bond now opens the door for us to challenge 18 USC section 3231, part of the enactment of Title 18, which states: “The district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of all offenses against the laws of the United States. Nothing in this title shall be held to take away or impair the jurisdiction of the courts of the several States under the laws thereof.” Without the validity of 18 USC § 3231 a federal court must revert the powers of the federal courts back to the states. The Bond ruling provides standing for anyone to challenge 18 USC § 3231 and any crime that could have been tried by the state where you would have received less time (in many cases the state decided not to prosecute at all). See U.S. v. Sharpnack, 355 US 286 (1957). " It further specifies that "Whoever . . . is guilty of any act or omission which . . . would be punishable if committed or omitted within the jurisdiction of the State . . . in which such place is situated, by the laws thereof in force at the time of such act or omission, shall be guilty of a like [federal] offense and subject to a like punishment."
D. Services Provided By LAW
Class action challenging jurisdiction
Bond v. U.S. petitions for a reduction or elimination of sentence.
3582 crack motions.
28 USC § 2255 motions
28 USC § 2241 petitions
Complete case investigations
WHAT PEOPLE SAY
“I heard your show last night. You were awesome!!” Joe F. Cal., 9/28.11. (LAW has been on radio talk shows 6 times in the last few weeks explaining the class action.)
Over 50 wins!
Only research group accepted directly 5 times on habeas into Supreme Court!
“What you wrote is awesome!” Habeas, NDCal, 8/25/11. Karen F.
Massive Grand Jury Fraud uncovered! C.D.Cal., 6/1/11.
“You’re known for not quitting until you get results.” G. Spry, S.D.W.Va., 6/10/11.
Revised 10/22/11
WHY THE BOP DOES NOT WANT YOU TO JOIN THE CLASS ACTION
After 9 years of research, we have established conclusively by fact and law that Public Law 80-772 was never enacted by Congress, which contains 18 USC § 3231, the only statute allowing a court criminal jurisdiction, making illegal any charge or conviction.
The BOP admitted that in an internal memo from Harley Lappin, BOP Director (below). The facts in the memo have been verified. Thus any court has no jurisdiction to sentence. The BOP Budget for FY 2011 is $6.8 Billion, a 10% increase from 2010.[3] We have already caught one warden giving legal advise.[4] “Trust me, I am from the government.” Or is it about money? Below is memo:
From: "Harley G. Lappin" lappln@usdoj.gov> Sent: Monday, July 27, 20093:17 PM
“Attention all Department Heads, there has been a large volume of inmate Requests for Administrative Remedies questioning the validity of the Bureau's authority to hold or classify them under 18 U.S,C, §§ 4081, et seq., (1948). On the claim that Public Law 80-772 was never passed or signed In the presence of a Quorum or Majority of both Houses of Congress as required by Article I, § 5, Clause 1 of the Constitution, Although most courts have, thus far, retied on Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649(1892) to avoid ruling on the moots of these claims, however, there have been some which have stated that they were not bound by the Field case, but those cases did not involve any Quorum Clause challenge. So out of an abundance of caution, I contacted the Office of Legal . Counsel, the National Archives and the Clerk of the House of Representatives to learn that there is no record of any quorum being present during the May 12, 1947 vote on the H.R. 3190 Bill in the House (See 93 Cong.Rec. 5049), and the record is not clear as to whether there was any Senate vote on the H,R. 3190 Bill during any session of the 80th Congress, There is only one Supreme Court case that says in order for any billto be valid the Journals of both Houses must show that it was passed In the presence of a Quorum. See United States v. Ballin, Joseph & Co., 144 U.S. 1, 3 (1892). The Clerk of the House states that the May 12, 1947 vote was a 'voice vote,' but the Parliamentarian of the House states that a voice vote is only valid when the Journal shows that a quorum is present and that it's unlawful for the Speaker of the House to sign any enrolled bill in the absence of a quorum. On May 12, 1947, a presence of 218 members in the hall of the House was required to be entered on the Journal in order for the 44 Member 38 to 6 voice vote to be legal. It appears that the 1909 version of the Federal Criminal Code has never been repealed. Therefore, in essence, our only true authority is derived from the 1948 predecessor to Public Law 80-772. “Although adjudication of the constitutionality ofcongressional enactments has generally been thought to be beyond the jurisdiction of federal administrative agencies, this rule is not mandatory," according to the Supreme Court in the case of Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich, 510 U,S, 200,215 (1994), Therefore, the Bureau under the advice of the Legal Counsel feels that it is in the best interest of public safety to continue addressing all of these Administrative Remedy Requests by stating ,that only the Congress or courts can repeal or declare a federal statute unconstitutional.”
Revised 10/11/11 ©2011
[1] The BOP receives about $100+ per day for each day a person is in prison. Funding comes from Congress. Lappin knew about the problem at the latest in 2009, exercised his “discretion” to leave people in prison, then the BOP submitted their FY2011 budget for $6.8Billion without advising Congress of the problem.
[1] It is understandable that the BOP is concerned. BOP was required to notify Congress re 2011 budget they had a major problem, and ask Congress to address it. Instead, concealment. Obstruction of Congress???
UPDATE ON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
A. All administrative remedies have been exhausted
LAW specializes in the preservation of Constitutional and Human Rights. As of August 31, 2011, LAW had exhausted all administrative remedies related to the class action lawsuit as well as all court remedies, thus freeing up LAW to file the class action.
B. Number of People on the Lawsuit
We currently have about 250 people on the class action. We anticipate having approximately 500 prior to filing. The brief has already been written and will be filed in the next few weeks. Anyone wishing to join should contact us immediately.
C. The Bond Case has Opened the Door
In their 9-0 ruling in Carol Ann Bond v. United States, 09-1227, the Supreme Court stated that any act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution is void. Lower courts are required to follow Supreme Court rulings, and we have seen an improved attitude in district courts after the Bond ruling regarding jurisdictional challenges. We currently have filed an amicus curaie brief in a case in Denver, a case in New Jersey, the government has waived argument on a habeas case in Houston, and the district judge in Miami has stated on the record that if the facts could be proven, the person would be released. One of the members of LAW has been interviewed on 6 radio talk shows regarding the petition.
D. Request for Declatory Judgment
As part of the class action lawsuit, LAW will also file a request for Declatory Judgment pursuant to 28 USC § 2201, et seq., in order to force the court to research the Congressional records and declare the statute invalid.
E. Who Is Eligible
Anyone charged with a federal crime since 1948, pretrial, post-trial, or released.
You are receiving this email because you are a member of www.
If you want to stop receiving these emails, please sign into your account and change your preferences.
If you want to be removed from our database and close your account, please reply to this email with the word REMOVE in the Subject line.
Please DO NOT reply to this email EXCEPT to remove yourself from our database and close your account.
This mailbox is electronically scanned for the word REMOVE in the subject line of received emails. All other email’s received will be deleted.
If you want to stop receiving these emails, please sign into your account and change your preferences.
If you want to be removed from our database and close your account, please reply to this email with the word REMOVE in the Subject line.
Please DO NOT reply to this email EXCEPT to remove yourself from our database and close your account.
This mailbox is electronically scanned for the word REMOVE in the subject line of received emails. All other email’s received will be deleted.
No comments:
Post a Comment