1095 days and counting . . .

Today marks the third anniversary of the conference the United States Supreme Court held in Sibley vs. Alito, et al, on January 4, 2008, and yet they have not rendered a decision. Why do I have to wait over three (3) years for a simple decision which -- if the Court is intellectually honest -- must admit that the Justices of the Supreme Court supremely violated equal protection, the doctrine of nemo judex parte sua and 28 U.S.C. 455.

By way of background:

In Montgomery Blair Sibley vs. The United States Supreme Court, The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal, Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, David Souter, John Paul Stevens and Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court Case Number: 05-459, on November 14, 2005, Defendants Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, David Souter, John Paul Stevens and Clarence Thomas joined in entering an order in that case denying my Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Yet, in Montgomery Blair Sibley vs. Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, David Souter, John Paul Stevens and Clarence Thomas, Case Number: 07-6522, these same Defendants on October 29, 2007, disqualified themselves from considering my Petition. In both instances, the Justices were named defendants in the respective complaints.

Accordingly, this differing treatment demanded explanation by the Court. Accord: “. . .the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803). This obligation is particularly acute when exactly the same fact patterns result in diametrically opposed results.

So, why am I waiting?