Otsego County Attorney Ellen Coccoma's pocket judge Kevin Dowd strikes at the widow of a Vietnam veteran and supports self-serving practices of Otsego County Board

I have written on this blog a lot about shenanigans of Judge Kevin M. Dowd of Chenango County Supreme Court - his favoritism to various attorneys, including Facebook friends of his law clerk Claudette Newman, Kevin Dowd's incompetence, retaliation against attorneys he hates and ruling against the law for attorneys of high status he favors, his vengeful nature and his anti-Semitic conduct for which he was recently sued (Shtrauch v Dowd in NDNY). 

This blog is word-searchable, you can put "Kevin Dowd" in the Search window and see all blogs I "dedicated" to this antihero of the upstate New York courts.

Kevin Dowd was specifically sued by my husband, Pro Se (Neroni v Coccoma, NDNY), for collusion in litigation and for granting to Ellen Coccoma, a private attorney in that litigation, the free use of the Delaware County building for private depositions.  

Ellen Coccoma was sued in the same lawsuit, among other things, for fraud and fraud upon the court in concealing the death of her client and continuing litigation, including making false statements on behalf of her dead client, misleading the previous judge, misleading her opponent and leading her opponent to incur unnecessary costs in litigation.

Specifically, Ellen Coccoma:

•  failed to disclose the death of her client to Judge Lambert (when a client dies, jurisdiction of the court stops - until the Estate of the dead party is put into the litigation instead of the party, through (1) doing the estate in the probate court;  (2) making a motion in the Supreme Court), 
• made a motion on behalf of that dead client, 
• won that motion, and then 
• tried, on behalf of a dead client to conduct depositions (for free to her, using her pedigree as a judge's wife, in three public buildings - she tried the Delaware County Court, Delhi Town Court and Delaware County building), made a statement that the standing of her remaining three clients are based on a VALID power of attorney, indicating that her dead client is alive (because that is the condition for a power of attorney from him to be valid).

Ellen Coccoma's conduct was clearly frivolous and fraudulent.  There is case law where other attorneys - not as blue blood as Ellen Coccoma - were punished for such behavior.

Not Ellen Coccoma.  Not by Judge Kevin Dowd who is close in age to mandatory retirement at 70, and there is an appearance that Kevin Dowd is making every favor possible to Ellen Coccoma in order to obtain authorization for post-retirement perks from Ellen Coccoma's husband, Chief Administrative Judge Michael V. Coccoma (whose subordinate self-servingly assigns Kevin Dowd to actions litigated by Ellen Coccoma).

Recently, I found yet another evidence of Kevin Dowd pandering for Ellen Coccoma in litigation - Kevin Dowd ruled against a 62-year-old widow of a Vietnam Veteran who has lost her home to a taxpayer auction in Otsego County, where the County appeared to be in multiple violations in how it handled the tax sale, and where the County unnecessarily cost taxpayers, reportedly, $250,000 in litigation costs alone (not to count costs of handling the tax auction by a private auction firm) - even though the homeowner, and three other homeowners in the same position as the widow, offered to pay off the tax debt to the County long before the scheduled auction - thus making auction expenses and litigation expenses, funded by taxpayers, unnecessary.

The fact that Kevin Dowd was assigned to the action litigated by the Otsego County, where Ellen Coccoma is the County attorney that has an obligation to litigate on the County's behalf, is not surprising.

Kevin Dowd is stuck like glue to cases where he is working off his future post-retirement perks from Ellen Coccoma's husband.

By the way, it is interesting to learn how Ellen Coccoma was litigating, as a private attorney for private clients, in the case where Kevin Dowd gave her a gift of free lease on the Delaware County building for her private depositions - while Ellen Coccoma was also a full-time Otsego County employee.

What is surprising is that Ellen Coccoma, Otsego County Treasurer Dan Cowell and the members of the Otsego County Board of Supervisor who gave Dan Cowell - and Ellen Coccoma - a free reign as to how to handle tax sales, which so far has cost Otsego County taxpayers, unnecessarily, hundreds of thousands of dollars, are not impeached yet and are not investigated for self-dealing by the New York State authorities.

Kevin Dowd ruled against the Vietnam war veteran's widow and in favor of Ellen Coccoma's client (as I said earlier, with an appearance that he is working hard to win a post-retirement benefit from Ellen Coccoma's husband) despite the fact that tax foreclosure - as any other foreclosure - is an equitable action, and equity (fairness) must be the rule of such actions.  

If the homeowner, especially a senior homeowner, a widow of a war veteran, offers to pay the back taxes in order to keep her home, long before the scheduled sale, I do not believe that the County had a right to turn her down, sell the property anyway and plunge the county into hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation costs.

I want the readers to read the hand-written letter of the Vietnam war widow Maria Ajello to the Otsego County Board asking for copies of public records.

That was a FOIL request that the County had to respond to within 5 business days, Public Officers Law 87.

The County arrogantly refused to provide the public records Maria Ajello requested claiming "litigation privilege".

That claim was made with knowledge of the County's legal counsel Ellen Coccoma and on her advise and shows just how arrogant in defiance of the laws this woman is - obviously because she believes that, based on her pedigree, on prior rulings of Kevin Dowd (and Appellate Division whose judges are similarly, many if not most of them, close to retirement age and, as it appears, are looking into the hand of Ellen Coccoma's husband for post-retirement favors), and on her prior membership in the Appellate Division 3rd Department's "Committee for Professional Conduct", she will never be brought up for discipline.

Especially when her husband, after the lawsuit against him for fraud, misconduct and violations of constitutional rights, where his own insurance company refused to provide legal representation because of the issues of fraud involved was dismissed by a judge whose son was employed by Michael Coccoma's attorney, the New York State Attorney General, was elevated by NYS Chief Judge Lippman, buddy of the former NYS Speaker Silver who is currently being prosecuted by the fed for corruption, to the position of the Chief Administrative judge in charge of fiduciary issues.

From a lawsuit for fraud (dismissed without reaching the merits, so issues whether Judge Coccoma was involved in a conspiracy to commit fraud upon the courts and to violate constitutional rights of an individual remain) - to an appointment as a Chief Fiduciary judge.  Nice.  Now Michael Coccoma is in charge of even more perks to give out to attorneys and judges.  Now favoring Ellen Coccoma in litigation has become even more valuable for judges close to retirement, including Kevin Dowd.

Ellen Coccoma or the County had absolutely no right to respond to a FOIL request by claiming "litigation privilege", since FOIL is not linked to litigation, it is a separate statutory right of any individual to make a Freedom of Information request, and it is a separate statutory duty for the County to respond to it within 5 business days, even if public records provided in that response will affect the County's position in litigation.

If I were Ms. Ajello's attorney, I would, of course, move to disqualify Kevin Dowd from the case.

Moreover, it appears that Otsego County, led by County Attorney Ellen Coccoma, engaged in misconduct by unlawfully refusing to provide copies of documents to Maria Ajello on her FOIL request in order to obtain an advantage in litigation.

I do not know whether Maria Ajello raised the issue of County's misconduct in stonewalling her legitimate FOIL request before Judge Dowd.

I would also like my readers to read the letter by, seemingly, the only Otsego County Board Representative who cared for transparency and appearance of impropriety in the tax sales handled by the County - Rep. Betty Anne Shrewd.

Rep. Shrewd's letter is, similarly to Maria Ajello's letter, is a request for copies of public records.  The County had to respond to that request, with copies of those records, within 5 business days, as required by statute.

Instead of those copies of public records, the County gives Ms. Shrewd a run-around with claims of good faith not supported by documents, which in itself, puts the County's good faith in doubt.

Rep. Shrewd told news reporters that the current composition of the County Board is the most self-serving Board she has ever seen.

As to Maria Ajello, whether she did or did not raise issues in litigation regarding the County stonewalling her FOIL request, there were enough points in the case in her favor - and Judge Dowd still ruled against her, under circumstances that appear to be an act of self-service of the judge.

So - were the law and the rights of a widow of a Vietnam war veteran, Maria Ajello, sacrificed for the future (or present - who knows) benefits of Judge Kevin Dowd from Ellen Coccoma's high-ranking husband?

On the one side of the scale - self-serving interests of various well-paid public officials.

On the other side of the scale - rights of Bob Force, a disabled Vietnam war veteran who, similarly to Maria Ajello, a Vietnam veteran's widow, lost his home because of the County's self-dealing tricks, under the cover of Ellen Coccoma, an unsinkable attorney allowed to anything she wants because of her husband's position.

While I will continue my investigation of this matter and will post my results, please, read about and listen to Bob Force, his wife Donna Force and Maria Ajello here, as reported by WKTV.com.

Because, as Maria Ajello reportedly said at the Board meeting (which did not find its way into the meeting's minutes, by the way - begging the question as to completeness and correctness of ANY minutes of meetings of this Board, and the Board does not have as an excuse that the secretary could not write as fast as people speak, for that there is an audio recorder and a transcription afterwards, it is easy to do, and if not done, is not done for a self-serving purpose).

Once again, this is what Maria Ajello said to the Otsego Board which Otsego Board refused to put into the minutes of the meeting:

"I am the human face of parcel 53. Me. I'm not a nothing. I'm not a nobody. I'm not a number. I am a human being pleading for my home.”

Maria Ajello, Bob and Donna Force and other homeowners stripped of their homes because of self-serving interests of County officials and a State judge, deserve better.

They are not nothings.

They are human beings.

They sacrificed a lot for this country.

They deserve to at least keep a roof over their heads.

Is judicial candidate, Delaware County DA Richard Northrup, going to knowingly introduce false evidence at an upcoming criminal trial? Looks that way.

I have come into possession of documentary evidence supplied by Delaware County District Attorney's office in pretrial discovery in a criminal case.

I also have come into possession of another piece of documentary evidence that the other piece of documentary evidence was falsified to match the evidence to the elements of the crime charged.

There is no doubt in my mind, after comparing two pieces of documentary evidence, that Richard Northrup knows that the contents of the second-in-time documentary piece was falsified.

When a piece of evidence is provided in discovery, especially in a criminal case, more than likely it is going to be introduced at trial.

Moreover, without the falsified evidence, the trial in question cannot be won, as otherwise evidence is insufficient for conviction, and it is apparent that DA Northrup knew it from the very beginning, when he sought the indictment and when he vigorously prosecuted it.

I will be closely watching the course of the criminal trial in question.

As you know, evidence introduced during criminal trial constitutes public record.  Moreover, I already have a copy of that evidence in my possession, as released by DA Northrup in discovery, as well as proof that it was fabricated in order to secure a wrongful conviction.

In the event Richard Northrup introduces the fabricated evidence, I will petition state and federal authorities for his investigation and prosecution for a felony, as well as his immediate disbarment.

I will similarly petition state and federal authorities to investigate, prosecute, take off the bench and disbar the presiding judge if he allows introduction of the clearly falsified evidence in order to convict the criminal defendant that the judge has a clear bias against, but has so far failed to step down.

If Northrup wants the Duke LaCross prosecutor's fame, he'll get it.

Stay tuned.

More on Kim Davis as a front shield for judges breaking the same law

The circus with the "born-again-Christian" thrice-divorced and 4-times-married Kentucky clerk with children born out of wedlock, who, on Christian God's authority, refuses to issue marriage licenses to gay couple in her secular job continues in full rage.

Now the jailed clerk, through her attorney, sent the world a message that marriage licenses issued during her incarceration by her deputies, against her will, are legally void - in her opinion.

The clerk's "Godly" position as a secular public official is well illustrated by this picture circulating on Facebook:




It is apparent that, be the Kentucky clerk a wiccan (witch), a voodoo, a shaman, or any other more mainstream religion other than Christian, such as Muslim, Judaism, Centrism, Buddhism or anything else - and if such a clerk would be requiring people to abide his or her religious beliefs as a condition of her doing her job as a public official, that clerk would have been impeached and thrown out of office without pension in a wink's moment.   

Legislatures would be holding special sessions to impeach her.

Government-backed organizations will be spreading hate messages against her - in other words, the overall reaction of mainstream political players would be diametrically opposite to what we are seeing today with Kim Davis.

Even though she has been jailed for contempt of court - and stubbornly refuses to release herself from jail by abiding by the court order - and many people ask, why wasn't she fired yet, she cannot be fired, because she is an elected public official.  Moreover, she is a dynastically elected public official, a local royalty whose mother occupied the same position before her for 27 years, while Kim Davis was her mother's assistant and was elected in her mother's stead once her mother retired.

The commentators note that the impeachment of Kim Davis - for breaching her Constitutional oath of office no less - is unlikely because of "conservative" legislatures who basically take her side in breaching the law.

Yet, Kim Davis, a local royalty that she is, is a small fish, as compared to more powerful members of state governments who similarly refuse to abide by the law - judges.  

Let's name the "heroes".

No.	The oathbreaching judge’s name	Name of Court	State	What did the judge do	Were disciplinary or other enforcement proceedings started against judge
1	Jeffrey M. Atherton	Hamilton County Court	Tennessee	Refused to grant divorce to a straight couple, after a full trial	No public announcements
2	Vance Day	Marion County Circuit Court	Oregon	Announced his decision not to perform same-sex marriages (he did not perform them since 2011), even though on May 19, 2014 the gay marriage was legalized by a federal court order	Yes, an ethics investigation is under way
3	Wes Allen	Pike County probate court	Alabama	Closed bureau in his court that issued gay marriage licenses
4	Fred Hamic	Geneva County probate court	Alabama	Same as Wes Allen above. Reasoning: "This decision is not based on me being a homophobic, people can do whatever they want in private," Hamic said. "It is based strictly on my Christian beliefs."  Also reportedly said he cannot lead people to sin, and his Bible tells him he will if he performs gay weddings.
5	W. Hardy McCollum	Tuscaloosa Probate Court	Alabama	Will not issue same sex licenses for 21 days
6	David Money	Henry County Probate Court	Alabama	Closed to make sure “they have necessary forms in place”
7	Roy Moore	Chief Judge	State of Alabama	Defied the decision and publicly called upon other state judges to do the same, previously sent a letter to state judges encouraging them to defy gay marriage, In an interview equaled the decision to allow gay marriage with Holocaust, killing people, and stated that it is worse than racial segregation

The list is incomplete, as not all names of all defying judges were reported yet.

Yet, what I also did not find reported is disciplinary proceedings against judges for defying a court order of the highest court of the country - with the exception of Vance Day of Oregon.

And I did not find a single report of criminal investigations or prosecutions of such court-order-defying judges by the feds.

It would be an interesting question to federal prosecutors as to why they are not bringing these judges in for criminal contempt of court and are to asking to jail them.   

The answer to the question is quite simple - federal prosecutors operating in a certain state must be licensed attorneys in that state, and licensing is within exclusive control of judges.  

So, federal prosecutors' job performance is controlled and conditioned by the very same people they are supposed, in this situation, to investigate a prosecute.

A nice conflict of interest, isn't it?  That's conflict of interest # 1 where state judges are breaking the law.

Conflict of interest # 2 is that federal judges themselves are required to be state-licensed attorneys.  Revocation of their state law licenses will instantly result in their removal from office.  How quickly that can be done is demonstrated by what is being done now to a State elected official, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who was turned into a disciplinary proceeding immediately as she started to make headway in court in a case claiming misconduct and corruption of the "ol' boys' club" - the entrenched prosecutors she was pursuing as part of her job.

A suggestion came from an Alabama Senator to resolve the situation of judicial defiance.

You know what the suggestion was?

Not to jail judges who are breaching the law - as those same judges would have done to any ordinary person in contempt of court, like, for example, parents who cannot pay their child support.

TO CHANGE THE LAW that judges announced they will not abide by - to take marriage licensing out of the hands of public officials, so that no public official will be faced with an allegedly existing dilemma: to violate the U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment (that every one of them is sworn to abide by and uphold) - the language prohibiting them from establishing religion under the color of state law.

The bill to cancel licensing of marriage first passed Alabama State Senate in May of 2015, before the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, but after Alabama Chief Judge Roy Moore publicly announced his own defiance of the prospect of legalizing the gay marriage - and encouraged his subordinates, other state judges, to do the same.

Now the proposed legislation is listed as "pending" in the Alabama House Judiciary Committee.



The idea to take entering into (and dissolution) of marriage, in itself, is not bad because if marriage is likened (in legal theory) to an economic partnership, it should be a contractual relationship not regulated by the state.

But, the proposal is, first, one-sided, it concerns only entering into a marriage and not marriage dissolution, and the legislation was proposed not to advance the right of people to be free in their private family lives from the horrible multi-billion divorce industry that holds them in the death grip and sucks out their livelihood, but to protect from jail lawbreaking judges (see "Divorce Corp" on Netflix).

Yet, we must understand, as one nation, that until judges, the ultimate authority in this country, stop behaving as if they do not have to abide by the laws that everybody else has to abide by, we cannot consider that we are a nation governed by the rule of law.

We are governed by the rule of lawbreaking judges, and we need to change that, soon, before people took to the streets (like they do to protest police misconduct) and chaos erupts, because there are no effective remedies to control lawbreaking PUBLIC OFFICIALS - our (public) servants, ladies and gentlemen.

Until judges are held in this country to the same standard as the judged - there is no rule of law.

And that has to be changed.  Soon.

I encourage citizens of states where judges defy gay marriage court order, to pressure federal authorities to conduct criminal investigations and prosecutions of such judges, making sure that judges are held to the same laws for contempt of court as everybody else in this country.

Judges DO NOT have immunity from criminal prosecution.

Nobody is entitled to violate the U.S. Constitution - especially where judges take their office through an oath swearing to uphold and protect it.

This is the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that the oathbreaking judges listed above have sworn to protect, AS A CONDITION of becoming judges:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

That text equally applies to state governmental officials, including judges.

They may not establish religion, which will always be one in discrimination of others, or of no religion at all - and for that reason, all efforts of public officials to establish SOME religion, are constitutionally prohibited.

Which judges who defy the U.S. Supreme Court decision, made on constitutional grounds, seem to forget, pounding, as Fred Hamic did, on his religious beliefs first - and his constitutional oath of office second.

An idea that has been very strongly expressed by public opinion in social media is - you want to put your religious beliefs above your oath of office to those who elected you, let your religion feed you.

I wholeheartedly agree.

And let me conclude with what I started - the poster that, more than anything else, explains why what the judges are doing has nothing to do with their "sincere beliefs" in "religious equality", and has everything to do with their religious zealotry and fighting to establish domination of one single religion (their own) as a rule of law in the country.

We do not honor achievements of workers on Labor Day if a single child goes hungry on the Labor Day weekend because of public holidays

The U.S. Labor Department described the history of Labor Day, in short, as:

         "a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated
         to the social and economic achievements of American
         workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the 
         contributions workers have made to the strength, 
         prosperity, and well-being of our country."


It will do us well to remember that all legislation that benefited working people was introduced not because of the government, but despite the government, over great resistance from the government, lobbied by opponents of pro-workers' legislation.

It will also do us well to remember that on this public holiday, a long public weekend allegedly commemorating "contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country", there are people across the country, little people, who suffer because the government made this weekend a no-work day.

As an individual who is self-employed or employed by private entities, I never understood the concept of "national holidays" in terms of required leisure and required closure of governmental offices.

It always looked, to me, as a self-conferred benefit by the government that struggling low-paid workers who constitute larger and larger share of the U.S. economy, really do not need.

If you do not work certain days in private business or as a self-employed worker, you do not get paid.

It is an open secret that, of all governmental agencies, public schools have long become places where poor families get free daycare for their children, at least for a large portion of the day, with free transportation to and from home, and, in many cases, where their children are fed.

Often, the meal children of the poor working class people get in public schools are the only meal they will get during the day.

So, for many children in this country, a 3-day Labor Day weekend, commemorating (allegedly) contributions of their working parents to the economy, will go hungry these three days, because the government decided to give themselves a 3-day holiday to commemorate those contributions that the government usually fights tooth and claw because of lobbying efforts of private interests.

It will do us well to remember that - and at least try to change that.

The circus with the defiant Kentucky clerk - and the silence of the masses as to the similarly defiant courts and attorney disciplinary committees

The whole country - and the world (I read news from foreign news agencies, too) - is monitoring the developments in the case of the defiant "born-again-Christian" married-four-times-with-children-out-of wedlock Kentucky clerk, an elected public official who went to jail while asserting her God's authority to defy court orders and deny gay couples marriage licenses.

Yet, the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court legitimizing the gay marriage was issued in June of 2015 and affects a comparatively small group of people.

Yet, in February of 2015 the same U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision affecting the entire country, affecting how 1/3 of American jobs are regulated, whether new jobs will be able to be created in the struggling American economy, whether private interest groups will be able to remove good judges and prosecutors (elected public officials) while keeping bad judges and prosecutors in power to further private issues, and it has been defied by state governments since then.

All the country knows the name of the defiant Kentucky clerk.

A media circus and a circus of demonstrators was outside the courthouse where Kim Davis' contempt case was heard.

A small plane was flying over the courthouse with a suspended banner saying "Kim Stand Firm".

Yet, at the very same time, 7 months after the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court declaring that 1/3 of American jobs are governed by anticompetitive private groups, thus stifling the economy and preventing people from earning a livelihood, on the one hand, and obtaining diverse and affordable services, on the other:

• the names of
• legislators;
• judges;
• attorneys of the disciplinary committees

who continue to defy the February 25, 2015 order of the U.S. Supreme Court are not known to the public, and the public is seemingly unaware of the significance of that case and is not actively trying to make their states enforce that court order.

It is not as entertaining as the issue of gay marriage has become?

No suspended banners saying:

"Judge XYZ stay firm - your brothers will never jail you"

I guess, such suspended banners are not needed.

Judges will simply defy the law - and other judges will simply endorse them.

By the way, there is one defiant judge who might, after all, get publicity on par with Kim Davis - a Tennessee judge who refused to divorce a straight couple because, in the judge's opionion, the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing the gay marriage made the judge unable to grasp what constitutes divorce.

I will hold my breath as to whether that judge will be jailed. 

Comedians as legal authorities running judicial decisions

On June 26, 2015, the Texas Supreme Court, in striking down the regulation of "eyebrow threading", referenced on page 22 of its decision, Jon Stewart's The Daily Show, stating in Footnote 90 that "A few yeas ago, Jon Stewart's The Daily Show lampooned state efforts to regulate hair braiding.  See The Daily Show (Comedy Central television broadcast June 3, 2004), available at Http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/adygsa/the-braidy-bill".

Here is the piece from Jon Stewart's show referenced by the court.

On August 26, 2015 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has cited to John Oliver's "Last Week Tonight" on page 6 of its decision, bottom of footnote 2, as a support for the court's ultimate decision to declare that Guam violated taxpayers' constitutional rights by refusing to provide to them tax refunds based on the long-criticized claim that citizens of the U.S. territories are not entitled to the same constitutional protections as citizens of U.S. states.

The 9th Circuit went against the U.S. Supreme court precedent providing that the newly acquired territories were populated by "alien races" that do not understand that "principles of the Anglo-Saxon laws" and, therefore, the U.S. Constitution, the Constitution of the country that acquired the territories, does not have to apply to those territories.  

Here is the list of cases, all of them decided 114 years ago, that the 9th Circuit rejected.

• De Lima v Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1 (1901)
• Goetze v. United States, 182 U.S. 221 (1901)
• Dooley v. United States, 182 U.S. 222 (1901)
• Armstrong v. United States, 182 U.S. 243 (1901)
• Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)
• Huus v. New York and Porto Rico Steamship Co., 182 U.S. 392 (1901)

Here is the piece by John Oliver's show that was referenced by the court.

And here is a decision of another Circuit court, of June 6, 2015, that upheld the 1901 theories of the U.S. Supreme Court about "insular cases - alien races".

Here is the names of justices that were serving on the U.S. Supreme Court at the time of the 1901 "insular cases - alien races" decisions:

• Melville Fuller  - a white dynastic judge, he was 68 at the time of the decisions;
• David Josiah Brewer - a white son of a religious minister, classmate of Supreme Court Justice Henry Billings Brown, was 63 at the time of the decisions;
• Henry Billings Brown - classmate of U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Josiah Brewer, joined the court one year after Justice Brewer, was 65 at the time of the decisions, is "famous" as being on the majority opinion in Plessy v Ferguson that upheld racial segregation in public facilities;
• Goerge Shiras, Jr. - son of a wealthy white brewer, another member of the majority in Plessy v Ferguson, 69 y.o. at the time of the "insular cases - alien races" decision;
• Howell Edmunds Jackson - son of a doctor and a daughter of a Baptist minister, white, his father was elected into the Legislature of the State of Tennessee, was later a mayor of Jackson, Tennessee, was 69 at the time of the 1901 decisions;
• Edward Douglas White - son of the former governor of the State of Louisiana, grandson of a doctor & U.S. Representative & a judge, upheld racial segregation in public facilities in Plessy, 56 y.o. in 1901;
• Rufus Wheeler Peckham - his father was a lawyer, then judge, then a Congressman; was 63 y.o. at the time of the 1901 decisions;
• Joseph McKenna - son of Irish immigrants, was 58 y.o. at the time of the 1901 decisions.

So, the decisions of a bunch of racists from the turn of 20th century, who were predominantly "sons of the American nobility", rich privileged elderly uppity white males, continue to deprive people of their constitutional rights 115 years down the road, out of their graves.

If you think that the 9th Circuit case was some kind of a cave relic, think again.  At the same time as the Guam case was litigated, this year of 2015, the Obama administration was fighting the lawsuit of residents of the American Samoa that denies babies born there American citizenship on the same "insular cases - alien races" theory.

And in the D.C. Circuit case, the court has actually upheld the "insular cases - alien races" theory against people who are born in the American territory owned by the United States, but denying people living their American citizenship or protection of the U.S. Constitution. 

At least one out of two appellate court agreed that racism is umconstotutional, and John Oliver clearly helped clear the court's perspective.  The other, a D.C. Circuit court no less, is still playing games around the issue. 

 Judging by the "deterrent effect" of comedians as to at least some courts, seeing that courts are guarding themselves against being made into the laughing stock of the entire world, there is hope that the reform of the corrupt American system is possible.  Through comedians. More power to and more work for John Oliver.

And - let's run more comedy shows on idiotic court theories, because John Oliver will not be able to address the "pearls of wisdom" of American courts in several lifetimes.