Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on Validity of Constitution (Windsor case)
LawlessAmerica website and Breitbart website, William M. Windsor ^ | 13 Nov 2010 | William M. Windsor via LawlessAmerica & Bretibart

Posted on 11/15/2010 7:27:33 AM PST by mbarker12474

http://www.lawlessamerica.com/

Anybody know anything about this?

ATLANTA, Nov. 13, 2010 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution. The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather. The decision should be rendered by the end of the year. Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

The Questions Presented to The Supreme Court by Grandfather Windsor are:

1. Will The Supreme Court declare that the Constitution and its amendments may be voided by federal judges? 2. Should federal judges be stopped from committing illegal and corrupt acts to obstruct justice and inflict bias on litigants? 3. Will The Supreme Court be afraid to disclose the corruption in the federal courts?

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: federalcourts; scotus; supremecourt; windsor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
Is anybody following this? And can explain?
1 posted on 11/15/2010 7:27:38 AM PST by mbarker12474
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474
Is this a satire?

Without The Constitution, the Supreme Court has no authority, so if they rule it void, then their ruling is without force.

2 posted on 11/15/2010 7:30:39 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (Psalm 109:8 Let his days be few and let another take his office. - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

OK, now what is this case really about?


3 posted on 11/15/2010 7:30:39 AM PST by uscabjd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Let’s hope Mark Levin covers this on his radio program, today!


4 posted on 11/15/2010 7:30:45 AM PST by WestwardHo (Whom the gods would destroy, they first drive mad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Somebody forgot their morning meds?


5 posted on 11/15/2010 7:33:02 AM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Based solely on what’s presented here, it sounds like a pro se appeal - the questions themselves are inflammatory. Not saying these aren’t good points, but the SCOTUS prefers questions of law, not drama. Put your flamers away, I’m just saying that as a PROCEDURAL matter, it’s unhelpful to use arguments designed to inflame the passions.

Colonel, USAFR


6 posted on 11/15/2010 7:33:28 AM PST by jagusafr ("We hold these truths to be self-evident...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: uscabjd
OK, now what is this case really about?

My question exactly!!!

7 posted on 11/15/2010 7:33:28 AM PST by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Don’t know anything about but the title alone seems laughable.

If there is no Constitution on what, then, do we base our laws?

It would mean the Courts are now in activist positions and can interpret law on their bias or even base decisions on international law.


8 posted on 11/15/2010 7:33:49 AM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

This is a press release from the guy involved in the lawsuit. Anything from PRNewswire is a paid promotional release, not a news story.

He sounds like a loony.


9 posted on 11/15/2010 7:34:54 AM PST by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
> Is this a satire?

Nah, too wacky for satire.

> Without The Constitution, the Supreme Court has no authority, so if they rule it void, then their ruling is without force.

True, but rational thought does not apply to lunacy.

10 posted on 11/15/2010 7:35:02 AM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

It is quite simple actually.

The court is authorized by the Constitution. If SCOTUS rules the Constitution invalid, it rules that it is not a lawful body and is not authorized to make such a judgment.


11 posted on 11/15/2010 7:37:05 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Anybody can post anything on PR Newswire. I would want to hear about this from several other sources before believing a word of it. He filed these “petitions” this month and thinks the Supreme Court is going to hear them soon? The Supreme Court, as near as it it possible to tell from this mess of a press release, hasn’t even agreed to hear any of this, let alone issue a decision. This nothing more than a press release from a person who is desperate for personal publicity, and, frankly, a crank. Total waste of time.


12 posted on 11/15/2010 7:38:42 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WestwardHo

Why would he cover this? He doesn’t cover the BC issue in any manner what so ever.


13 posted on 11/15/2010 7:40:18 AM PST by stockpirate ("......When the government fears the people you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

I’ve now looked this up:

“Judicial Misconduct Complaint against Judge Orinda D. Evans”
Friday, 08 October 2010 00:00 William M. Windsor

http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php/news/25-dishonest-judges/47-judicial-misconduct-complaint-against-judge-orinda-d-evans

“Maid of the Mist Accused of Hundreds of Counts of Perjury”
by Niagara Falls Newsline | April 27, 2009
http://www.nowpublic.com/tech-biz/maid-mist-accused-hundreds-counts-perjury


14 posted on 11/15/2010 7:41:02 AM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Maid of the Mist Corporation v. Windsor...
Jul 23, 2010 ...
MAID OF THE MIST STEAMBOAT COMPANY, LTD.,. Plaintiffs - Counter-. Defendants - Appellees, versus. ALCATRAZ MEDIA, LLC,. ALCATRAZ MEDIA, INC. ...
httP://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/unpub/ops/201010139.pdf


15 posted on 11/15/2010 7:45:55 AM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

Kookiness. Shouldn’t have been on Breitbart. The Supreme Court denied cert., which means that they refused to hear it.

There is no “landmark” decision forthcoming. The article is full of other fearmongering.

There are serious problems with what our courts do in real cases. Worry about them, not this one.


16 posted on 11/15/2010 7:53:04 AM PST by almcbean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbarker12474

4. Can man-hating, racist hacks be appointed as associate justices of the Supreme Court?


17 posted on 11/15/2010 7:54:44 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: mbarker12474

bookmark


19 posted on 11/15/2010 7:58:56 AM PST by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

IMHO it’s knowing how to choose your battles. Mark’s a whole lot smarter than this old lady, and being as I can’t go looking for that birth certificate, I will trust his judgement.
Are you not stunned by the depth of corruption on display? It’s way beyond anything we suspected, and grievous. I am not minimizing the BC issue. But, in the beginning, I saw Orly Taites (forgive spelling) interviewed, and she had kook written all over her. That has tainted this whole debate.
It’s knowing how to choose your battles.
The truth will come out.


20 posted on 11/15/2010 8:01:30 AM PST by WestwardHo (Whom the gods would destroy, they first drive mad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson