Me vs. The Supremes -- Part IV

In Part III, I related how I filed my second lawsuit against the Supreme Court Justices on January 18, 2006. Before I continue the narrative of that second suit, let me take you back to 1781 for a moment. In adding the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution, the several states wanted to guarantee that: “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved . . .” Hence, my second suit, “at common law” which was for considerably more than “twenty dollars” was guaranteed a “trial by jury”. However, as I fully expected – there was no way a judge would let a jury here my claims for the havoc it could reek upon the judicial oligarchy if judges could be held accountable for their breaches of the law.

Thus, as I fully expected, on October 11, 2006, the District Court entered its order granting the Defendant Justices’ motion to dismiss my suit against them. I, of course, perfected a timely appeal to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeal which was assigned Case No.: 07-5009. On May 15, 2007, the Court of Appeal granted the Defendant Justices’ Motion for Summary Affirmance holding in pertinent part:

Sibley’s claim that the judges and Justices acted in the absence of jurisdiction upon not disqualifying themselves pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §455 and the Ninth Amendment is insufficient to deprive the judges and Justices of immunity, as the decision whether to recuse is in itself a judicial act.

This was a stunning pronouncement when understood in the context in which it was issued. I believe it is as significant to the American political fabric as the Constitution or Emancipation Proclamation. What the Appellate Court said was that a judge could ignore a Congressional statute – §455 which requires disqualification – and there was no consequence. Moreover, a judge could ignore §455 and decide – even though a party to the lawsuit – whether he was personally liable for money damages. But I must leave the full discussion of the full import of that decision for the concluding part of this series as judicially-created immunity is in fact the touchstone of my entire exercise of suing the Supreme Court Justices.

Returning then to the second suit’s procedural history, I then petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review the May 15, 2007, order of the Court of Appeal affirming the dismissal of the second suit by the District Court. That petition was assigned Case No. 07-6522 and on October 29, 2007, the Defendant Justices entered their order on that case. That order was a shocker and as hypocritical as anything I had ever read from a court in twenty-five years of studying the law. I was sickened by how far from the ideals of the Constitutional Convention the judiciary had traveled.

End of Part IV