I'm set to be conferenced once again on 11/06/09. SCOTUS dockets but does not conference meritless cases and in this case?
Only SCOTUS can hear the case; if they do not allow an appearance in person in this case then the Constitution is not actual or real for anybody but lawyers. You have zero protection of the law exactly like women have always had zero protection of the law. Thus justice would be nonexistent in the US for men now. Also Roberts cannot overcome the conflict any other way but hearing in person. I highly doubt Roberts will harm his own person! He wouldn't have any protection of the law if he refuses ot hear the case in person, get it?
It's known as peer review as SCOTUS must now subject itself to the review of The People as SCOTUS answers to The People only.
Let's see...so far I have managed to do what every single person said was not humanly possible and I've done what no other American has ever done: forced the Chief Justice to stand aside on 11/20/09.
I'm four for four as you are supposed to abide by a pro se constitutional authority case of o.j. when SCOTUS sets it for conferencing as hearing in person is not supposed to be neccessary as you are to know US law thus anyone not abiding by my ruling and order? Which then is the Declaration and Constitution? You know, actual reality known as those two documents and US history?
You're now liable.
John Marshall said: You aren't supposed to wait for a court to rule to obey the law; he said no court ruling is neccessary as ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Exactly as YOU and YOUR ACTIONS prove the paper not the other way around as YOU are the government and law! You're the constitution; that other stuff? Institutions. You are living they are dead. You emote and you reason; you are endowed with will and liberty - paper is not!!! The paper did not do a damn thing for you as rights are inalienable; all the paper did was make you consciously aware your rights are inalienable.
Some you have slept through both American Revolutions and are yet asleep!
I don't know what she thinks she's saying, but that makes zero sense, legally.