“You do not seem to have any legal knowledge. Petitions for Writ of Certiorari are not appeals that get granted or denied.”
I practiced law for 25 years. I am admitted to practice before the US Supreme court and several federal circuits, Federal District courts all over the country, and the Supreme Courts of three States. I have a number of reported appellate decisions—most of which I won. I have also had Petitions for Cert granted and denied.
I note that the issues described in the article, which you posted, were: “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?”
I’m not sure why the original issues on appeal in the article you posted are completely different from the issues on appeal you describe in the post to which this is a response. The issues I just quoted from your article are not well-framed issues. The new issues you just described in your post are somewhat better. But it does not surprise me that the supreme court denied cert on either set of issues as framed.
Sorry, but I refuse to believe that you are an attorney. But I guess it does make some sense. The attorneys are almost all dishonest. Please give us the case link on your petitions for cert that were granted so we can see for ourselves.
The reason the news release is worded somewhat differently is because it was written for the general public so they could understand it.
The Supreme Court has not denied cert; they have docketed the Petitions for Writ of MANDAMUS. 10-632 and 10-633. The questions for The Supreme Court are perfect. The issue is whether they are corrupt like the other judges are. The message has been delivered to them loud and clear. And the Appendixes have all the evidence, though they don’t really need to read more than a page or two.
Tell me this, attorney:
What is the law on a summary judgment? If the key fact issue in a case is disputed with sworn testimony from each side, can there be a summary judgment? (Judge Evans and the Eleventh Circuit said disputed fact issues don’t matter.)
If one party never files a sworn affidavit, never admits any documents into evidence, and has no deposition or hearing testimony, can a judge properly claim that this party proved the necessary facts? (All of the judges have issued or upheld fact-specific orders where there was never any admissible evidence of any type from those who prevailed on the motions.)
Is there anything wrong if a judge makes over 200 false statements in an order, statements proven false by the record? (Eleventh Circuit repeatedly issued orders indicating that they believe the judge, even though everything is documented to show where the evidence is in the record that proves the perjury by the judge.)
What is the requirement of a Verified Complaint. Must the person swearing that everything is true and correct based upon his personal knowledge be truthful? Or can he say its is all true when it isn’t? (The entire Verified Complaint was proven false with the deposition testimony of the company’s managers, but all of the judges chose to overlook that absolutely slam dunk essential information.)
What do you say about a judge who ignores the testimony in depositions admitting that the verified the complaint was false (and was never amended)?
I could go on with hundreds of examples. Corrupt federal judges. The Supreme Court either acts, or we all know we are in even worse trouble than we thought.
So, get a life, sport or sportette.