EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This
case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not
affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission.
For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the
qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the
rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic
course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines
these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his
principles at any cos
t.



It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the
law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is
not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a
group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to
humiliate and degrade it.”
In
Re Anastaplo,
18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429
(1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong
dissent
,
366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan,
dissenting.



“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

The list of U.S. citizens with known names, plaintiffs in the #CAIR (hoax) lawsuit, the "American Muslims", who sued American taxpayers for damages and attorney fees under the guise of challenging President Trump's Executive Order on immigration that concerns ONLY non-citizens

It has been reported that CAIR - Council for American Islamic Relations -  has filed a lawsuit against President Trump challenging his immigration executive order.

Here is the Executive Order, it was included into the lawsuit as an exhibit.

Because the alleged (and much-celebrated) temporary restraining orders that were allegedly previously filed regarding the same executive order in federal courts in New York, Virginia and Massachusetts on the official federal court register Pacer.gov, which raises issues about existence, contents and legitimacy of those alleged orders - I immediately went to Pacer.gov to check out whether this new alleged lawsuit can be seen there.

CAIR has been called an unindicted conspirator in a federal criminal court case United States v Holy Land Foundation et al, Case No.: 3:04-cr-240-P in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and also in a letter of President Bill Clinton's U.S. Attorney General's office to the U.S. House Representative Sue Myrick (years of service in the U.S. House of Representative - January 3, 1995 to January 3, 2013), and the letter, sent obviously with the approval of the then-Democratic President Bill Clinton, pointed out to testimony at trial about connections of CAIR and its founders with HAMAS which
was designated as a terrorist organization by:



  • Israel (1989);
  • U.S. (1995 - see the letter of the U.S. Attorney General's office below);
  • Jordan (1999 - outlawed);
  • Canada (2002);
  • European Union (2001/2003 - designation overturned by a court, with European Council appealing the decision);
  • Japan (2006); and, most recently, by
  • Arab Emirates (2014)
but was, reportedly, not designated as a terrorist organization by:



  • Iran;
  • Russia;
  • Turkey;
  • China;
  • Brazil,
  • Norway, and
  • Switzerland

Here is the letter of U.S. Assistant Attorney General under President Bill Clinton, Ronald Weich, to U.S. House Representative Sue Myrick:








The lawsuit by the Committee on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) against President Trump was reportedly filed yesterday in a federal court in Virginia.

There is a civil rights case against Donald Trump available on Pacer.gov in Virginia that was filed on Monday, January 30, 2017.

Yet, CAIR is not a party in that lawsuit, where all plaintiffs are suing in their individual capacity, and not on behalf of CAIR as an organization, see the caption of the lawsuit that the plaintiffs designated and filed with the court themselves:




CAIR is not even representing plaintiffs in that action, even though that is what the complaint says:




The official docket report, on the opposite, says that the only attorney representing all plaintiffs in that action is a solo attorney by the name of Gadeir Ibrahim Abbas who was reported as a "staff attorney" of CAIR in 2015 in the press, but not listed as such in the docket of this particular case:


Here is the text of the lawsuit that I personally, and at my own expense, obtained from Pacer.gov:



And here is the docket report as of today from that same case.

Here is the list, that I compiled based the self-description in the complaint of 15 Plaintiffs with known names (there are several citizen plaintiffs concealing their names, who will be described in a separate blog) in the "CAIR" lawsuit who are American citizens, who self-identify as American Muslims, who claim that their own 1st Amendment (Establishment Clause) rights were violated because of an executive order of the President affecting non-citizens only, and who want money damages and attorney fees from the American taxpayers for such violation.


Name of Plaintiffs, all self-identified as “American Muslims”

U.S. Citizen? Yes/No
State and County of residence

Self-description in lawsuit
1.                Linda Sarsour
Yes
New York, Kings County
·                  Palestinian activist;
·                  Executive Director – Arab American  Association of New York;
·                  Former spokesperson (2016) of Presidential Candidate Senator Bernie Sanders;
·                  One of three national co-chairs for the 2017 Women’s March held the day after the inauguration of Donald Trump;
·                  Appeared in  “The Hijabi Monologues”;
·                  Has her own show “The Linda Sarsour Show”

2.                Rashida Tlaib
Yes
Michigan, Wayne County
·                Former Democratic member of the Michigan House of Representatives;
·                Attorney at the Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice;
·                The 1st Muslim-American woman “to serve” /sic/ (to have served?) in the Michigan Legislature;
·                The 2nd Muslim woman to be elected to serve in a state legislature in America
3.                Adam Soltani
Yes
Oklahoma, Oklahoma County

·                   Executive Director of Council for American-Islamic Relations, Oklahoma;
·                   A prominent civil rights activist;
·                   Chair, Oklahoma Conference of Churches’ Religions United Committee;
·                   Planning member, OKC’s Jewish-Muslim Film Institute;
·                   Former member, the Oklahoma Democratic Party Religious Education Committee;
·                   Former board member, the Interfaith Alliance of Oklahoma;
·                   Former member, the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City Executive Committee

4.                Alia Salem
Yes
Texas, Dallas County
·                  Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Dallas/Fort Worth (CAIR-DFW);
·                  “Plaintiff Salem’s work o CAIR-DFW has been featured on local, national and international media outlets”
5.                Nihad Awad
Yes
Washington, D.C., Washington County

·                  National Executive Director, Co-Founder of CAIR
·                  In 1997 (under president Bill Clinton), served on the White House Civil Rights Advisory Panel to the Commission for Safety and Security;
·                  Testified before both Houses of the U.S. Congress “on matters involving Muslims in America”;
·                  In 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections was a “key figure in voting a Muslim voting block”;
·                  In 2006, traveled to Iraq on a humanitarian mission to secure release of journalist Jill Carroll;
·                  In September of 2011 (under President Obama) traveled to Iran as part of “interfaith delegation” to appeal for release of American hikers held by Iran;
·                  In 2004, National Journal allegedly called Plaintiff Awad one of 100 most influential people in the United States;
·                  In 2009, a Georgetown University publication called Plaintiff Awad one of 500 most influential Muslims in the world;
·                  In 2010, “Arabian Business ranked him 39th in the “Arabian Business Power 100” list, “its annual listing of the most influential Arabs”.

6.      Dawud Walid
Yes
Michigan, Wayne County

·                  Executive Director, CAIR, Michigan (CAIR-MI);
·                  Served in the U.S. Navy;
·                  Earned 2 U.S. Navy & Marine Corp Achievement medals while deployed abroad;
·                  Received awards of recognition from the city councils of Detroit and Hamtramck and from the Mayor of Lansing, as well as “a number of other religious and community organizations”.
7.      Basim Elkarra
Yes
California, Sacramento County
·                  Executive Director, CAIR-Sacramento Valley;
·                  Former board member, ACLU-Sacramento Chapter;
·                  Serves on Executive Board of California Democratic Party;
·                  Serves on the City of Sacramento Community Police Commission
·                  In 2011, under President Obama, “the U.S. Embassy in London sent Plaintiff Elkarra to England to meet young British Muslims as part of a strategy to promote civic engagement”
8.      Hassan Shibly
Yes
Florida,
Hillsborough County
·                  Chief Executive Officer of CAIR-Florida;
·                  “Met with President Obama and several high-ranking government officials regarding Islam and civil rights issues facing Muslims”;
·                  “Serves as a consultant for, among other private entities /sic, italics added/, law enforcement and other governmental agencies”.
9.      Imran Siddiqi
Yes
Arizona,
Maricopa County
·                  Executive Director of CAIR-AZ;
·                  A writer and prominent civil rights activist;
·                  Has written extensively on the subject of Islamophobia, Middle East Affairs, and issues affecting American Muslims.
10.  Julia Shearson
Yes
Ohio,
Cuyahoga County
·                  Executive Director, CAIR-Ohio, Cleveland Chapter;
·                  “Delivered hundreds of lectures and trainings on Islam and Muslims, civil and human rights, diversity, Islamophobia, and immigration justice”;
·                  Was recently honored with other 22 area women for her leadership, activism, and community service in an art exhibit entitled “Reflections: The Many Facets of Stephanie Tubbs Jones” installed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport in memory of the late Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones;
·                  Before joining CAIR-OH, taught in Ohio University for 10 years, Jewish Vocational Services in Boston and the Summer School and Division of Continuing Education at Harvard University
11.  Karen Dabdoub
Yes
Ohio,
Hamilton County
·                  Executive Director, CAIR-OH, Cincinnati Chapter,
·                  Has been “a Commissioner with the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission (CHRC) since 2006”;
·                  Was president of CHRC in 2009-2011;
·                  A founding member of Muslim Mothers Against Violence, founded in 2005;
·                  A member of Martin Luther King Jr. Coalition of Cincinnati since 2006;
·                  A former member of the FBI Multi-Cultural Advisory Council;
·                  A former member, Kentucky Commission on Human Rights Community Advisory Committee;
·                  Member of “Friends of Open House” – Cincinnati Chapter, “an international organization that worked to bring about peace and understanding between Palestinians and Israelis”;
·                  Appears in a documentary “A Visit to a Mosque in America”
12.  Namira Islam
Yes
Michigan,
Oakland County
·                  Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Muslim Anti-Racism Collaborative (MuslimARC), “a faith-based human rights education organization which focuses on racial justice”;
·                  “Worked in the areas of prisoner rights, and on international law and war crimes at the United Nations in The Hague, Netherlands”.
13.  Hussam Ayloush
Yes
California,
Riverside County
·                  Executive Director of CAIR-Los Angeles;
·                  Is a 4th-term elected delegate to the California Democratic Party;
·                  Serves on board of  the Muslim American Homeland Security Congress (MAHSC)
14.  Corey Saylor
Yes
Virginia,
Fairfax County
·                  Director, CAIR, Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia;
·                  “Ran successful advocacy campaigns against corporate giants such as Burger King and Bell Helicopter-Boeing when their actions or advertisements negatively impacted the American Muslim community”
15.  Zahra Billoo
Yes
California,
Santa Clara County

·                  Civil rights attorney,
·                  Executive Director, CAIR-San Francisco Bay Area;
·                  Prominent civil rights activist;
·                  “Is frequently seen at mosques and universities facilitating trainings and workshops as part of CAIR’s grassroots efforts to empower the American Muslim community and build bridges with allies on civil rights issues”


Please, note that this people offer, instead of standing to sue, their credentials, "'service" on various "boards" and "councils", their TV shows, appearances on TV, lectures.

Apparently, service on boards of non-profits is now a substitute of standing in civil actions.

These people, U.S. citizens, under the guise of defending human rights, filed a lawsuit where they have no personal standing, no personal injury, but where they want to nevertheless use the scarce time of a federal court, and to obtain, for themselves, personally, money damages for their non-existent injuries, as well as attorney fees in this frivolous lawsuit paid by the American taxpayers.




Standing to sue in federal court is crucial (and a jurisdictional barrier if it is absent) in a case where, interestingly, by an American citizen located within the country on behalf of non-citizens located outside of the country (in the detention area before immigration checkpoints in airports).


To have standing to sue in federal court, plaintiffs have to have:


1) "injury in fact" - an invasion  of THEIR OWN legally protected interest which is:


    a)  concrete and particularized;

   b)  "actual or imminent",
   c) not "conjectural" or "hypothetical;

2) there must be a "causal connection" (violation of right caused the injury of the plaintiff) between the injury and the conduct complained of:





Also, the U.S. Supreme Court did not recognize "citizen standing" challenging constitutionality of government's actions without a personal actual injury that that government action has caused.

So, what is the standing of American citizens suing President Trump in his official capacity, which means plaintiffs are suing the U.S. and all of its taxpayers, for money damages and attorney fees to be paid to them, individual plaintiffs, by the same U.S. taxpayers who suffer from the justice gap and cannot afford their own attorneys for their own needs?

There is nothing in the complaint that would indicate

1) "injury in fact" - an invasion, by President Trump's Executive Order which says NOTHING about Islam or Muslims, and which is relevant only for non-citizens, of Plaintiffs citizens' own legally protected interests which would be:

    a)  concrete and particularized;
   b)  "actual or imminent",
   c) not "conjectural" or "hypothetical;

and

2) invasion of such interest in such a way that there is a "causal connection" (violation of right caused the injury of the plaintiff) between the injury and the conduct complained of.



The plaintiffs, suing in their individual capacities, and suing frivolously, without standing, demand that American taxpayers pay THEIR attorney fees for the lawsuit under 28 U.S.C. 2412:








And, even though the caption of the lawsuit claims that it is only for "injunctive and declaratory relief" - to prohibit President Trump from enforcing his order, and to declaring rights OF PARTIES -






in the middle of the complaint, all Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizen Plaintiffs who have no standing to sue (I will address the non-citizens' standing to sue in a separate blog) ask also for money damages, for themselves, individually:


So, the U.S. citizen Plaintiffs, trying to impress the court with their service on boards of various non-profits and some of them, having the ear of President Obama during his time in office, are asking (allegations irrelevant to their standing to sue), after prominently claiming on the caption of the lawsuit (which is where many people, including mainstream media sources, start and stop reading the lawsuit) ask for money damages for themselves personally under two statutes for injuries that they did not even claim and that did not occur:



Apparently, U.S. citizen plaintiffs could not, and did not sustain any injury or damages from an Executive Order of the U.S. President that had nothing to do with U.S. citizens.
But, greedy Plaintiffs asked for damages also under 28 U.S.C. 1357, a statute which is specifically designated to recover money damages for "injury to [plaintiff's] person or property" (Linda Sarsour claimed none in the lawsuit) sustained by plaintiff "under any Act of Congress, for the protection or collection of any of the revenues, or to enforce the right of citizens of the United States to vote in any State".


Yet, there is nothing in the complaint about protecting or collecting revenues pursuant to an Act of Congress, or enforcing rights to vote of CITIZENS of the United States - even though U.S. citizen Plaintiffs try to get such money out of a federal court specifically on those grounds, invoking 28 USC 1357.

Why are these citizen plaintiffs doing it?

The ancient reason.

Greed.

Apparently, CAIR, and its executives, could not sleep well because of the sudden fame of ACLU that collected over $24 million dollars in donations based on the hype ACLU flared about their "heroic deeds" in filing lawsuits on behalf of non-citizens

(which lacked standing to sue because they were not admitted yet to the U.S., and there is no constitutional right or privilege existing for a non-citizen to get admitted to the U.S.).

Since CAIR, because of its dubious reputation, could not hope for donations of the level of ACLU, it decided to get money out of a lawsuit, through "damages" and "attorney fees" - by suing AMERICAN TAXPAYERS, using Donald Trump as a red rag to get anything they want, even though their lawsuit is absolutely frivolous.

When President Trump is sued in his official capacity, it is the American taxpayers who are sued.

And, if these frivolous plaintiffs get recovery from the judge, despite total lack of standing - it is the American taxpayers who will have to pay them damages for nonexistent injuries and to pay their attorneys for bringing and prosecuting this frivolous litigation.

So, my dear readers, American taxpayers, do not think CAIR executives are suing Trump.

They are suing YOU.

Have money?




No comments:

Post a Comment