My Letter to the Supreme Court of the United States

December 12, 2020. Updated: July 2, 2021

I have been thinking about what has been going on not only with this mess of an election, but the ramifications from never ending election fraud for our country.   There may still yet be a hearing for President Trump at the Supreme Court after new lawsuits are filed in lower State courts to give President Trump “Standing” to try to get in front of the Supremes with his case and his legal team to which I am so indebted.     With this last gasp ray of sunlight at the end of the tunnel, I have written a letter that I will be sending to the Supreme Court in the event they can ultimately review and provide remedy for the 2020 election, as it should be.   Whether you are on the Right or even one of the few on the Left who wants credible elections, feel free to send this letter as is,  pass on and/or plagiarize as needed.  Contact info is at the end.  They must hear from us, now more than ever.   Here is my letter:

To Supreme Court Justice (Fill in the name) of the United States:

I am by no means a legal or constitutional law scholar.   I am writing this as simply an American that loves his country and for all the Good it has done not only for myself and my fellow Americans but for citizens around the world.

You are sitting on the most important Supreme Court in the history of the United States.    Your time and place in the history of America is etched in stone, forever.    Whether Fate or God himself put you personally in this position is unknown, but I can tell you that your decision regarding the Presidential election of 2020, so clearly fraught with Fraud by the Democrat Party, will have consequences that could undermine our Constitution and determine either the survival or destruction of this great country, and the Liberty we stand for.   This is not hyperbole.   It is a fact.

The basic question before you is whether or not a Presidential election, or any other election, can be determined in advance by a political party using election High Tech Fraud technologies which are provable in practice but whose specific and ultimate  effects may be unprovable in results.    This should not mean that the bar for judicial remedy be made impossibly high.    If you set the bar too high for proof of overturning Fraud to the exact degree needed to overturn an election result,  then election Fraud not only can never be stopped but you will effectively be assuring that future elections will be determined by whoever has the best method to rig our elections.   America wants a war of ideas, not of technology.  If you set the bar too high for proof of overturning Fraud, you will be giving license to any political party to engage in Fraud, forever, until this country is no more.   If this is allowed to occur, our Nation is doomed to tyranny of one party or the other and will no longer be the Republic that you have sworn to protect and defend.

It is understandable that the SCOTUS does not want to overturn the will of the people and determine an election winner.    The answer for America is for the SCOTUS not to choose one candidate or the other, but to only assure that this all important election is credible to the half of America that has, if Biden’s “win” is allowed to stand, been disenfranchised more than any other group in American history.    Disenfranchisement is what the Democratic Party has used to eliminate nearly all of the common sense voter restrictions used in democratic countries around the world.

Here is a possible judicial remedy.    Without overturning all of the votes and starting over, the SCOTUS can order a Presidential Reelection only in the key Battleground States where Fraud has been proven and is most evident (Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin).  This would call for a standardized election process that could and should be federally legislated, or even as an Amendment to our Constitution due to its long term critical importance to the survival of America.    The process must involve the lowest of non-hackable technologies using traceable paper ballots with voter Picture IDs and unrestricted Bi Partisan oversight.   Like Jury Duty, people could also be called to participate and oversee the election process as part of their Civic Duty, a duty at least as critical as serving on Juries.

It will be difficult to take a stand when the highest court prefers not to be involved, but as defenders of the Constitution, you must be involved.  You must not allow election Fraud to destroy our country just as it has in Totalitarian regimes throughout history.  If that occurs, there will be no Constitutional protections for the people, let alone a functioning SCOTUS.

I implore you, time is of the essence.    Please make the right decision for me, my family and my fellow Americans of all political stripes who Love America and our Constitution as I know you do.  Hear this case.  You are the People’s last backstop against Tyranny.  The People are depending on you to come through for us and all those that came before – and died for our Liberty!

Sincerely,

Disenfranchised Citizen Voter

========================================================

U.S. Mail:
Supreme Court of the United States
 1 First Street, NE
 Washington, DC 20543

Telephone: 202-479-3000
TTY: 202-479-3472
 (Available M-F 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. eastern)

Where to Send Questions or Comments:

For technical questions or to report problems with this website, email: Webmaster

For time sensitive or urgent questions please contact the Public Information Office at the following number: 202-479-3211, Reporters press 1

For general questions that are not time sensitive, email: Public Information Office

Contact the Public Information Office by US Mail:
Public Information Officer
Supreme Court of the United States
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Sic Semper Tyrannis

33 thoughts on “My Letter to the Supreme Court of the United States

    1. I think about how John Roberts did things and yelled at others…. was it because John Roberts has been to Epstein Island…. God knows. You are a disgrace to the American people your actions are nothing but PREDATORY. RESIGN

      Liked by 2 people

      1. You loons are hilarious. You’ll believe ANYTHING that fits your narrative. Sure… Roberts yelled at everyone and said EXACTLY what would make Republicans get erect and wet. And now you’re throwing in the Epstein thing. TRUMP was friends with Epstein, yet you ignore that while throwing the accusation and everyone you don’t agree with. SCOTUS did the right thing. Stop being such a sore loser.

        Like

    1. They did do their job properly. There was no widespread fraud. Texas KNEW that the lawsuit would be turned down. They’re doing it for SHOW to keep you riled up and happy. And you fell for it. Sad.

      Like

  1. Hello Sir,
    I can’t put into words here the distress, anger and heartache I feel for what is happening in our country. We are in very troubling times for our Nation, and we as a people are looking up and trying to find where are our Patriots?

    I voted, but next time will my vote count? Mine and everyone I know have little to no faith in the integrity of our vote actually counting.
    If we do not condemn this widespread voter/election fraud, then we accept it. To accept such fraud as a Nation, condemns our future as a free and constitutional nation.

    We wonder and worry is there any agency in our government who is willing to fight or criminally investigate all the election fraud?
    I’m asking for you to do your duty.
    If this deeply embedded fraud and corruption isn’t stopped now, Our future generations will not thank us. The ultimate sacrifice our soldiers gave for this country will be in vain.
    Our Country, rights and freedoms have and will continue to decay and suffocate under this corruption!
    Patriotism, honor, and loyalty to our country needs to awaken in our quiet government agencies and officials now!!!!
    Courageous and brave Republican Electors in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Michigan, Arizona, and New Mexico cast their votes for Trump. This is the first step toward righting a grievous fraud. Bravery must continue now. It will pass to you to make the right and lawful decision. We the people are demanding a lawful constitutional election, which has been criminally denied.

    The forensic audit of Dominio

    his type of fraud has been implemented across our nation. The voting machines all use the same processes and programs as Dominion.
    How long before the DNC implements such fraud permanently across our nation?
    I also request that our Republican Congressmen, and Senators push to have this election fraud criminally investigated nationally. To not investigate such widespread fraud, is blatant dishonor to those who fought and died for these rights, freedoms paying the ultimate price with their lives! For them and our future generations, it should not go unpunished.
    Our legal right to vote should be fiercely protected from any form of fraud or manipulation for ill gains. It’s treasonous what has happened and should be punished as such.
    Other nations are watching us closely, watching us as we represent the standard bearer for Freedom around the world, and our example will be followed.
    What example will we show, if we deny our own citizen’s sworn truths, deny blatant fraud. We must continue with courage and bravery knowing our actions will affect the world and history.

    I ask you, as an American Patriot of a Constitutional Republic, we ask ALL our congressmen to REJECT the state submission of Electoral College votes. You have millions of us standing behind you, praying and willing to stand with you.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Sure… so Dominion’s machines were used to cheat… but not in Georgia, where a hand recount showed no discrepancy between Dominion’s final tally and the paper ballots (and yes, signatures were checked… TWICE)… and also not in the 12 of 14 PA counties where Trump won… and not in any of the red states… but ONLY in the areas where Biden won.

      You’re not an American Patriot. You’re a dishonest, gullible person who can’t deal with the loss of the election. In just over a month, Trumplicans have shown more butt-hurt than Democrats did in four years. And you continue to show a vile hatred of democracy. Yes, we are the standard bearer and these false election fraud claims are DESTROYING our reputation. Voting in Trump was bad enough. Crying about him losing to the point of making up dozens of lies about election fraud is showing the world that our country shouldn’t be respected every again. Congratulations.

      Like

      1. Zeroed Out: You’re right: if I can PREVENT illegal ballots from initially being identified as illegal, then no matter. how many times I count them, I can STILL KNOW I’m counting illegal ballots.

        Like

  2. I totally understand that we have to go through different channels as was John ROBERTS or one of the JUSTICES remarks or maybe it was vote them out or something of that nature…. however, When there is this level of FRAUD, AND the SUPREME court justices don’t think 75 million people need to be listened too makes me wonder what or who are they afraid of ?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. No widespread fraud has been shown. There have been allegations, voter numbers that turned out to be lies, and false reports by people with a vested interest in the Republican Party (like the guy who did the “analysis” of the Dominion machines being a former candidate). And the guy who brought the Texas lawsuit to SCOTUS is under investigation and only did it to curry favor with Trump so that he could be pardoned. THAT is where the real fraud is, but you refuse to see it.

      Like

      1. Zeroed Out: What does “widespread fraud” mean to you? To me, it means former vice president Biden presented 20 million votes more than President Obama received when re-elected. But I always thought BHO was more popular, but obviously not. Your side STILL wants the “white guys” running things. I guess that SHOWS the left is EVEN MORE RACIST than the Conservatives are. I was surprised also, after all the Racist-Rhetoric I heard, but Democrats are OBVIOUSLY the White-Supremacists. Thanks, I hope I’ll be able to remember that in the future.

        Like

  3. As an Australian I view that there must be a “court of disputed returns, where for federal political election issues, being for president or members of congress must be pursued in a federal Court of Disputed Returns, whereas for state political elections it must be a State Court of Disputed Returns.
    Which means that regardless which state is involved regarding any federal political election it always will be the federal Court of Disputed Returns and so be consistent for all States. No longer different State Court having different federal political election procedures.
    The Court of Disputed Returns then could be sitting as to represent the legislators of the States. SCOTUS would then sit as a Court of Disputed Returns as a political representative of the legislators, as is eventuating in Australia. For the States their Supreme Courts could sit as a political representative for the State legislators in political elections. This would mean that the justices in the Court of Disputed Returns is not taking over the political battle as they are representing the legislatures and not sitting per se as a Court of Law. Meaning, there is no conflict of SCOTUS to become political, this as it would merely sit with its competence of knowing legal rules how to act on behalf of the legislature involved. Ordinary a legislative body can oust any members of the Parliament/Congress where it is deemed that a Member may not be validity sitting, etc. However, to ensure that any Member is not deprived of his legal rights it is therefore far better to have competent judges representing the interest of the legislature(s) to make the decision on their behalf. Where for example the Secretary of State and/or the Governor or others are acting contrary to the legislators of a State then this can be transferred to the Court of Disputed Returns which then can using their legal skills to determine the appropriateness of any decision. Where the is a legal issues involved then SCOTUS or other Court sitting as a Court of Disputed Returns then can place this before SCOTUS as to determine the legal issues and then having had the determination re-commence the Court of Disputed Returns hearing.
    To give an example:
    A person challenges the validity of an election by filing an application with the Court of Disputed Returns. To use an example:
    Hillary Clinton commenced to challenge the right of Barack Hussein Obama to be President of the U.S.A. Allegedly he had been granted a study as a foreign person in the U.S.A. Also, his limited birth certificate was in question. There was more to it. Had a (federal) Court of Disputed Returns existed it then would have been SCOTUS sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns for all States and Territories to hear the case. However as this was a legal issue it would then have to had the case heard and determined by SCOTUS (not sitting as a Court of Disputed Returns) and then required Barack Hussein Obama to explain why he should be deemed a person born in the U.S.A considering details of his past which clearly questions his eligibility. SCOTUS then could have, it were to determine so, ruled that Barack Hussein Obama was deemed not to be entitled to be a presidential candidate and could have declared Hilary Clinton to be the rightful candidate.
    In Australia, various persons were sworn in, and served about 10 years or more, and then the High Court of Australia determines that the person actually never was entitled to be in the Parliament and so declare his seat vacant. Depending on what the circumstances are a Senator who was second place getter may then be sworn in instead. If it is the House of Representatives then a by-election is held.
    The good think with having a Court of disputed Returns is that you create a new court system but you do not need to appoint new judges as the same judges can hear the matter just under a different umbrella/status.
    If the U.S.A were say today implement this Court of Disputed Returns it could in the interim use the Australian system with slight modifications and it could immediately be used.
    Now, you find numerous cases before various State Courts all about the validity or the lack thereof the political presidential election, which could have been all filed in a federal Court of Disputed Returns.
    SCOTUS sitting as a Court of Disputed Returns cannot then deny any application challenging an election to be heard as it must hear matters as to any evidence pursued, or the lack thereof.
    Now we have SCOTUS not wanting to get involved in a political battle and by this in a sense disregarding the very constitution it is to serve.
    In my view, the Congress can immediately establish the Court of Disputed Returns and enable it to hear and determine matters as a matter of urgency.
    It is totally absurd, that any Supreme Court (State/ Territory or Federal) would as a legal body hear and determine political issues. Yet, that is the current system, and hence the Court of Disputed Returns is a well overdue required system.
    I am not pretending that a Court of Disputed Returns will resolve all problems, as I am too well aware that the Courts themselves cause problems. For Example in 200 I challenged the validity of the 2001 federal election, and subsequently also the 2004 federal election and on 19 July 2006 (representing myself) succeeded in both appeals.
    But better to have some system then no system at all.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You’re so wrong. First, Obama released both of his birth certificates. Only tinfoil hat wearers still believe in that nonsense. Second, SCOTUS didn’t disregard the Constitution at all with their decision. Trumplicans love to say this, yet they can never back it up. HOW are they disregarding the Constitution? The Texas lawsuit was doomed to fail. SCOTUS isn’t going to allow a state to determine the election laws of another state. That is INSANITY. Do you really think Alabama wants California to be able to go to court and force them to change the way they do their elections? Several of the things that they’re been bringing up has been on the books for a while and no one complained. Others were this year, but again, no one took them to court BEFORE the election. If SCOTUS had thrown out MILLIONS of votes that were made by people who were going by their state’s established laws and voted in good faith, THAT wouldn’t been against the Constitution’s election laws.

      You’re saying that it’s absurd that any Supreme Court would determine political issues, but that’s EXACTLY what the Republicans have been wanting them to do and that is exactly what the Supreme Court is refusing to do. So… you’re saying they shouldn’t be political… but then are upset that they aren’t taking the case, which is entirely political by nature? Yeah, that makes sense.

      Like

      1. No matter what the MSM allows you to think (on your own, that’s novel), about 30% of Dems (!) and nearly 65% of Reps believe there was rampant Fraud that gave election to Biden. My solution is the only one – unless of course you fear the outcome. if you are right and Biden actually received millions MORE votes than Oblama (objectively the most Anti American POTUS in history) then you should have no problem with a redo as suggested so that we can move on and not have War.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I did not make any determination of Barrack Obama was or was not a valid American, merely used it as an example. As for the State of Texas or any other State to challenge election laws of another State in my view this is constitutionally appropriate where a State allows unchecked votes to be counted which would allow anyone to file a multitude of votes and so undermine the equal protection of the voting rights of others. It should be a criminal offence to vote more than once. Currently any person who voted in one state may vote in another state because of the failure in some states to ensure that only legitimate voters can vote. Where then there are voters voting in excess of the number of persons legally allowed to vote in a county then I view that in itself underlines voters fraud. In my view it is NOT a political but rather a constitutional issue that the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) determines that where there is any county returning more counted votes then there are eligible voters then the voting count must be declared invalid. In my view where say 46 states/territories follow proper voting procedures as provided for in their respective constitutions and/or other legal provisions and 4 or more states/territories uses a system that by this can rob the other states/territories of a p[roper election result then this is I view a “constitutional” issue not a political issues. It also should be kept in mind that prior to the 3 November 2020 presidential elections 2 former Democrat presidential candidates were complaining that the Dominion voting systems were open for manipulation and couldn’t be trusted. Those complaints were made in writing and cannot be ignored, merely because the end result might we what the Democrats desired. Getting back to the birth certificate of BHO, anyone can present some document claiming it to be original but we have courts that should make the legal determination. As I understand it, Barack Hussein Obama was granted a foreign student (living in Indonesia) entitlement to study in America and as such by this himself claimed to be a foreign student. Hence, a Court of law would have to consider if by this the claimed birth certificate was to be deemed valid or that it may have been fabricated, etc. Fraus et jus numquam cohabitant. Fraud and justice never agree together. Wing. 680. Let it be clear that then presidential candidate Hilary Clinton as a member of the Democratic Party commenced to raise the issue that another presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama another member of the Democrat party was not eligible to become President of the USA being born outside the USA. It was therefore not at all some political battle between opposing political parties but rather between members of the same political party. I could, for example, create a birth certificate that I was born in some USA State/Territory, but that doesn’t mean it will be valid unless the courts determine it is a valid birth certificate.
        Another issue is that where Federal Law prescribes when a election is to be held, and this for 2020 fell on November 2020 then I view no State constitution/law can alter this and any legislation that allows votes to be admitted after November 2020 would be in defiance of the Federal legislation. As such, I view that SCOTUS disregard its constitutional obligation, to ignore a constitutional principle that is that State/Territorial law cannot override Federal law. It also means that no State Supreme Court can override Federal Law where it is not even exercising federal jurisdiction. If a State Court were to exercise federal jurisdiction it can nullify certain federal legislation to be in violation of the US constitution and its Amendments. However, as this didn’t eventuate then State Supreme Court are bound to ensure that all and any votes must be limited for counting that were received by November 2020. Again, in my view a State Court and so State supreme Court neither any State legislative body can override Federal legislation and allow votes to be accepted arriving after the federal legislated election date.
        Denning L.J. in Entores Ltd v. Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 Q.B. 327.
        QUOTE
        When a contract is made by post it is clear law throughout the common law countries that the acceptance is complete as soon as the letter of acceptance is put into the post box, and that is the place where the contract is made.
        END QUOTE
        This means that any postal vote that was returned within the respective legislative provisions are validly postal marked by USPS to be counted, where the postal marking was showing 3 November 2020 or earlier. However, any alleged postal votes that were not properly postal marked cannot be accepted as a valid vote. This means that those challenging the election results are not, but often wrongly perceived, to deny eligible voters to have their votes counted, as really it is the USPS that by its failure to comply with its federal legislative obligations is the one who prevents postal votes to be counted.
        Another issue is that in my view no election official should be allowed to in any manner duplicate or otherwise interfere with any ballot. A ballot must be accepted in its condition as is. Meaning if it cannot be counted due to dubious issues then it can not be marked by any election official or be duplicated or otherwise have to allowed to be accepted by some person doing so in secrecy. The onus is upon the voter to ensure that all documentation is appropriately submitted. There are numerous other issues and to me it makes not one of iota difference which political view any voter may have, as ultimately what counts is the integrity of the election system and that every voter has an obligation that when participating in a political election to do so according to legal requirements. From the numerous articles that I read and videos I watched I have not become aware that those challenging the validity of counting somehow sought to disenfranchise any voter. The challenges merely appears to me to relate to the inappropriate counting. Regardless of which political view anyone might be this is a legal ground that should be appropriately heard and determined.

        Like

  4. Perhaps it isn’t “policy” for SCOTUS to explain any decisions, except carefully crafted For/ Against statements AFTER a case is decided, but I am becoming VERY disillusioned with the “illusions of Justice” that I am seeing SCOTUS taking. I’m SURE you remember “the Mob” banging on the doors of SCOTUS last summer, and wonder what it will take to invoke Judicial Employment (do your damned job as judges) and HEAR some evidence, instead of “dance on the head of a pin, and hope no-one falls off” declaring “No Standing,” which is closer to a SCOTUS declaration of “not MY president” than I EVER expected a branch of MY government to approach. I think I WILL snail-mail the above letter to SCOTUS, knowing FULL-WELL that it will only end up as a clerk’s checkmark in the “disappointed” column of one associate justice’s daily report. But we must do whatever we can to influence those that claim to work in our stead..

    Like

    1. My lord, man… just STOP.

      SCOTUS declared “no standing” because LEGALLY, there wasn’t. Texas has NO STANDING in telling another state how to run their elections. Nor do you want them to. Can you imagine CA or NY telling Alabama how to run their elections? Would you be okay with that? To suggest that them going by the law is basically them saying “not MY president” is ridiculous, especially since six of them are Republicans, two of which were heavily pushed by Trump in the past year. You don’t want them to go by the law. You want them to ignore the law and do what the whiny Trump supporters want them to do. There have been dozens of court cases and all of the “evidence” has shown no widespread fraud. So, what is there to show SCOTUS? A bunch of affidavits that don’t prove anything and are often batshit crazy? A bunch of numbers of dead voters and illegals that never include an actual list of people who voted illegally? The analysis of Dominion machines done by a guy who ran for Republican office and is trying to make a name for himself? SCOTUS has better things to do than kowtow to the whims of a bunch of sore losers.

      Like

  5. OT hearing the facts or evidence in this case is an injustice. Maybe it is inaccurate maybe it isn’t, but leaving it unknown is unacceptable. This should absolutely be verified and validated without question. This is America that should mean something and taking the oath to uphold the law and the constitution offers no other option. For bad things to happen only requires good people do nothing. Is it fear? Cannot be lack of evidence of it should have been publicly reviewed and tossed. The fact it has been rejected lends to conspiracy theories.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The Supreme Court DID uphold the law. The Texas lawsuit was never a serious thing. They knew that SCOTUS wasn’t going to hear it because they have no standing to sue other states for their own election laws. The only reason the lawsuit was started is because the guy who did it is under investigation and knows that Trump is giving out pardons like candy.

      Like

      1. ZEroed Out: (no standing to sue other states). The last I knew, a fraudulent “election” of POTUS (President of the United States) means EVERYBODY in U.S.A. would be harmed by cheating (whether globalism/ socialism/ or communism), and that is what “standing” is supposed to be about.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I am not an American and so not a voter as such in any USA presidential election.
        My understand is that the US Constitution determines how a President is to be elected. As such if a federal issue. Congress (a federal body) has made clear that elections are to be held as I understand it on the first Tuesday in November following the first Monday in November. As such, 3 November 2020 was the date. USPS is a federal postal body and therefore is bound by federal law and cannot therefore violate federal legal provisions and is bound to ensure that postal votes are properly postal marked to show the date it was received. No State constitution or legislation can in any manner alter this.
        It means that neither a State legislator nor any State Court can override the 3 November 2020 date. It means that any counting of ballots in violation of the 3 November 2020 date cannot be counted. It should be understood that some States allow postal voting and voters can apply for this weeks before the election is to be held and as such they could return the postal ballot well before the 3 November election date, if they take the risk not to do so then they may disenfranchise themselves if it results their postal vote arrives too late.
        The legislature of each state is to appoint electors for the Electoral College but while it is entitled to legislate within their respective constitutions how they desire to hold elections any such legislation cannot defy federal constitutional and/or legislative provisions. As such, any State constitution, state legislation or even any State court decision must be to conform with the provisions of the US constitution and federal law.
        If any state or state courts for that matter allows voted to be accepted that are past the 3 November 2020 date received then this violated the federal legislative provisions and are null and void.
        If a State Court or State legislator nevertheless allow for the counting of such votes then I view anyone has a right to challenge this including a state like Texas and I view it gives the party doing so a legal standing.
        A State legislature may arbitrary refuse to certify any presidential candidate which by its election process may have received the majority of votes, even so this may be morally wrong, as constitutionally the State internal legislative powers for elections are for the State to determine provided it doesn’t violate federal legal provisions.
        Every State has an inherit legal obligation to ensure that no person can vote in any election for a presidential candidate in more than one state. This means that in a re-run election (consider Georgia) a person cannot vote when already voted in another State, where this involved a federal candidate.
        In my view, Federal legislation should dictate the minimum age of a voter entitled to vote in federal elections. Such as for example minimum age of 18 years old to be deemed an “adult” fir federal election purposes. However, a State may for its own State elections allow “baby voters” being say 16 year olds to vote. The problem would then arise that a State would have to split elections as to federal political elections different then State political elections. However, all and any State election procedures should in my view for federal political election purposes to be equal in the manner conducted, this as to avoid to undermine the equal protection of electors in other States/Territories. In my view election ballot harvesting could for this be outlawed by federal law where this involved federal political elections.
        States who provide for certain state legislative political election procedures while having a right to legislate as they desire must however be bound to ensure that they do not offend any federal compact or for that any federal legal provisions. Where then as I understand it the Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed postal votes to be accepted with disregard of postal date marking and long after the 3 November 2020 federal presidential election date then to me this is a court decision that has absolutely no legal validity and can be ignored.
        Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally; Re Wakim; Ex parte Darvall; Re Brown; Ex parte Amann; Spi [1999] HCA 27 (17 June 1999)
        QUOTE
        For constitutional purposes, they are a nullity. No doctrine of res judicata or issue estoppel can prevail against the Constitution. Mr Gould is entitled to disregard the orders made in Gould v Brown. No doubt, as Latham CJ said of invalid legislation, “he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour”. That is because those relying on the earlier decision may seek to enforce it against Mr Gould.
        END QUOTE

        Any decision that is made in violation of the constitution in my view has no legal validity at all.
        While SCOTUS may desire not to get involved in a political battle, and I have no issue with this, however, it is obligated to declare the true application of the constitution, and in my view, SCOTUS has failed to do so. It in my view, SCOTUS has made itself to become a political tool to prevent aggrieved parties to have their constitutional claimed rights appropriately heard and determined on basis of “evidence”.
        This should not about which of the candidates shall be successful but about the integrity of any system that is used to elect a president. If voting system machines are unreliable then this may not only affect the presidential election but also the election of members of congress. Hence, it would in my view be utter and sheer nonsense to hold that there is no standing where this can affect the makeup of the Congress also.

        Like

  6. So justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance; truth has stumbled in the streets, honesty cannot enter. Isaiah 59:14
    Lord, We invite YOUR MANIFEST PRESENCE O Lord, to the chambers of the US Supreme Court, even now, that no demonic influence would be welcome or able to remain and that angels would stand watch over these men and women. We fervently cry out to You for each Justice of the Court and for our Supreme Court as a whole! Remind them of the limits of their authority under the Constitution and restrain them from overstepping that boundary. Help them to judge wisely and humbly. Amen.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. John Roberts and the rest of you SC jurists must end this theft of the presidency and many senate and rep seats. Trump rightfully won this election. As the rampant fraud shows. You may not be held accountable by man if you do not turn this around by declaring the election null and void because of this fraud. But, you will be held accountable by God.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. It is a shame that this is going on in our country. We are supposed to be a leader and model to other countries and what a shame and disgrace this has brought on us. Everyone knows that there was rampant fraud in this election and that the Judges in the Supreme Court should step up and do their duty by overseeing all this and look at the facts. What do we have in this country to look out for us if not our Supreme Court Judges? It is a disgrace that they won’t hear this case and look at the facts and make a decision. If they said after looking at the facts that they did not think there was truly fraud I think the people would be more satisfied if they showed their findings but to not even hear the case is truly insane on their part. It is a shame that they are elected for a lifetime if this is the way they feel.
    God help us if this is the way our country is going to be. We have no leadership and no respect for our Constitution.
    I can’t bellieve there are enough people in this country that wants Socialism if they just look at other countries like
    Cuba, etc.. We were respected and looked up to until the Swamp decided they wanted to take over. Now God help us if the people and the Judges don’t wake up and see what is happening to our Great Country.

    Like

    1. What is most alarming to me is how people are being threatened who are attorneys and poll workers, whose job it is to protect our Freedoms by just making sure we eliminate fraud, and NOBODY doing the extortion is ever arrested, indicted or charged with a crime. What is going on when our criminal “justice” system, and maybe our final backstop SCOTUS, lets this stand. I cry for my country and for my fellow Americans to WAKE UP. If Fraud is NOT proven in the courts, I am willing to walk away – but there is ample evidence that it DOES exist and the Judiciary must hear it.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: