Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FForFreedom
Besides, all they have are .pdf files of the entire case that i don't really have the time to read through.
Thanks in advance.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Historic Supreme Court Decisions - by Topic
The decisions in this collection have all been gathered into topical groups. (Many have been listed under several headings.) Clicking on any listed topic will retrieve all opinions classified under it. Instead of or in addition to using these topical groups you can search the entire collection for decisions using particular key words or phrases.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/topic.htm
|
Quote:
Historic Supreme Court Decisions - by Party Name
The cases included in the LII Historic Collection are listed alphabetically below. You can scroll down the list or click on one of the following letters to jump directly to that portion of it. Clicking on a case name will retrieve that case. If you are not sure of a case name, you may wish to search the entire collection using a portion of the name or a key word or phrase likely to be used in it.
Following each case name there are two additional links -- "(recent Fed?)" and "(recent Supct?). These links launch searches of the LII's index of recent U.S. Court of Appeals decisions and its index of recent Supreme Court opinions seeking references to the historic decision in question. Some of these important decisions are not only landmarks, they continue to be invoked or interpreted by appellate courts to this day. Clicking on these search links will tell you if that is true of a case in which you are interested and allow you to see exactly how the case is being used. Inspect the results with some care; the search is a simple one and may yield "chaff" along with "wheat" -- that is, instances where the volume and page numbers of the citation and name of one of the parties are being used in other contexts. A report that there are "0 Returned Object(s)" provides important negative information, namely, that the case has not been cited recently.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/name.htm
|
Quote:
Historic Supreme Court Decisions - by Justice's name
The following list includes all the justices who have served on the Supreme Court. The justices whose names are linked are represented by one or more opinions in this historic collection. Clicking on a linked name will retrieve all the opinions by that justice included in the collection (including concurring and dissenting opinions).
Following each justice's name is a link to a brief biography (Bio). The source for most of these notes is a publication of the Commission on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution, entitled The Supreme Court of the United States: Its Beginnings and Its Justices 1790-1991.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/judges.htm
|
|
If you don't have time to read the whole case through, what's the point?
If you don't read them all the way through, study them, know what they pertain to and say, as well as the dissenting opinion(s), their precedent issues and cases, and antecedent citations, etc., etc., maybe it is better not to use them at all.[/b]
They are all basically a bunch of majority-rule opinionated crap concocted by wizened old politicians appointed to "SCOTUS" (after which they assumed the status of being immune to "law," among other odious assumptions), an
inferior court--inferior because it was constitutionally ESTABLISHED as Congress may from time to time:
Quote:
The Judiciary Act of 1789
September 24, 1789.
1 Stat. 73.
CHAP. XX. – An Act to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States.
|
... "established" AFTER the judicial Power of the United States had been VESTED in one supreme Court (FIRST; PRECEDENT TO), and in inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and ESTABLISH (LATER; CONSEQUENT TO).
Them thar be's one of the two BIG enemies of the guarantee to Liberty through OUR administration of OUR republican forms of government though, hoss--best to know where those cowchips lie, and where they fly maybe?
Quote:
A republican form of government means a republic.
In a republic the administration of affairs is open to all Citizens.
A court is a republican institution where affairs are administered.
You must administer your affairs of court yourself or waive this right.
MOST PEOPLE, myself included, thought that John signed the Great Charter of English Liberties and became good King John afterwards.
This is wrong.
As soon as John got the rebel barons to disband their armies he waged holy war against them for the rest of his life.
Our Constitution for The United States of America,
(not the Tory Loyalist Esquire attorneys' bastardized patchwork crazy-quilt rending of the very fabric under guise of "amendment),
thus, must be defended and we must defend it to the best of our ability.
When you invoke a court you must assert your jurisdiction to hold it and cannot let the judge usurp your judicial power.
This means you do not pay an attorney fee to him to conduct your court, you do not submit documents to him for his approval, you do not motion him to move your court, you deny everything he has tried to file and you strike anything that he has attempted to enter of record.
He will not like you.
You are not trying to make friends with him.
Without the judge you can eject attorneys and enter your own orders including a declaratory judgment if no other party appears for court in person.
|
Invest in precious metals--copper, brass, and lead.
good search engine
