- In even the largest reference libraries, there are almost
no books stating the true history of America's highest tribunal, the U.S.
Supreme Court. The same is true of law libraries and those of law schools.
-
-
- Early in the 19th Century, for upwards of 35 years, the
Chief Justice of the high court was John Marshall. Portraits of him, in
gold edged frames, hang in many law schools. In Chicago, a law school is
named after him.
-
-
- From the beginning of this nation, one of the greatest
crimes against the inhabitants here, was the huge land swindles. With the
formation of the United States of America, formed from the 13 colonies,
only the State Courts, not the Federal Courts, were equipped and inclined
to combat terrible offenses committed by the plutocrats of that era.
-
-
- Chief Justice Marshall, issuing a ruling of his court
with flowery language, in so many words, arrogantly proclaimed that the
federals are the dominant force and that the State Judges, are, in effect,
mere vassals, handcuffed, powerless peons. Law students, starry eyed from
consuming perfumed windbags of idealistic law, are forever mouthing off
that supposedly "wonderful" decision, Marbury versus Madison.
-
-
- The Chief Justice's own brother was one of the great
land swindlers whose case ended up in the high court. The Chief Justice
did NOT disqualify himself. Guess who won in his crooked Court? Nowadays,
as we have dared point out, the banker-judges sitting in high tribunals,
likewise do not disqualify themselves when their own financial interests
are the subject matter before their Court.
-
-
- So, state court remedies against big land pirates, were
snuffed out by the Chief Justice and his well-disguised pronouncements.
-
-
- As set forth in this website series, since the War of
1812, when the British invaded this nation and burned down the Capitol,
the British have repeatedly vowed to overthrow the American Republic, reverting
this land to British rule, with Americans becoming mere subjects of a London
Monarchy, rather than citizens and residents of a duly formed Republic
operating here.
-
-
- For the benefit of British rulers, three U.S. Presidents
were assassinated, Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, and William McKinley,
all of whom opposed British interference with the American industrial development.
In its true significance, the American Civil War, also known as the War
Between the States, was in great part, instigated by the British. They
added to the natural and historical friction between the industrial North,
and the agricultural, non-industrial, slave-owning South. British ships
ran the Northern blockade to supply the Confederacy with weapons made in
England.
-
-
- In preparation for civil war, the pro-British Chief Justice
of the U.S. Supreme Court, Roger Taney, a devout Catholic (not really a
contradiction), in 1856 added to the North-South agitation. He ruled in
the Dred Scott case, that black slaves in America were mere chattel, mere
baggage, that could be moved from place to place without any restraints
of law. And get this, by the 21st Century, the Dred Scott decision has
not been excised from the law books.
-
- [As to the concealed Catholic issue in American history,
see the heavily documented opus, "The Rulers of Evil" by F. Tupper
Saussy.]
-
-
- In Persian Gulf War One, 1990-91, Daddy Bush, as President,
sent great numbers of black GIs to fight for the backward Monarchies
of Saudi and Kuwait. Yet, that late in the 20th Century, those two dictatorships
had large numbers of black chattel slaves. I was about the only one to
raise the issue at the time that it was unconstitutional for an American
ruler to send black soldiers to fight for the benefit and protection of
black slave owners. [Visit part 30, of this website series.]
-
-
- Published early in the 20th Century was a heavily-documented
book, dealing with the U.S. Supreme Court as well as the legal history
of America, "Supreme Court", by Gustavus Myers. The book is so
much as banned, not to be usually found in even the largest law libraries.
-
-
- As to the post-Civil War era, see the book entitled simply
"1876" by Gore Vidal. Published in 1976, it deals with how the
1876 Presidential election was stolen by corruption of Congress and the
high court. Was it a mere concidence that the book was re-issued in paperback
in the Spring of the year 2000, ahead of the presidential election? A key
part of the theft of the presidency revolved in 1876---get this---on election
ballot finagling in Florida. Samuel Tilden was the duly elected President
but was blocked, apparently by federal troops, from approaching the Inauguation
stands in 1877. In that year, like occurred in 2001 with George W. Bush,
Rutherford Hayes became the "fictitious" president. Gore, like
Tilden, was the duly elected President BUT NOT INAUGURATED. A result was
many called him Rutherfraud. We see fit to call the present occupant, Bushfraud.
<mailto:k@ameritech.net>
-
-
- Rutherford Hayes and his gang made corrupt deals, including
with the U.S. Supreme Court. The result, a group of cases with the ominous
title called "The Slaughter House" cases. In 1883, the high court
arbitrarily nullified the federal civil rights laws of 1871, which had
granted to blacks and others the right to bring their demand for remedies
of injustice into the federal courts such as against nightriders of the
Ku Klux Klan. The poisonous and corrupt high court ruling of
1883 was not corrected until almost 80 years later in the U.S. Supreme
Court ruling in Monroe versus Pape, granting blacks the right to be in
federal court Chicago to sue corrupt Chicago police who had a system of
beating blacks until they admitted to something, in the meantime, arbitrarily
shooting blacks in Chicago without established reasons or provocation,
such as while the blacks were in their own apartment asleep.
-
-
- In 1970, was formed a subcommittee to consider the possible
impeachment of U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, for his links,
while on the bench, in business with known gangsters, the Albert Parvin
Foundation matter. Part of the subcommittee came to Chicago and met in
my residence to hear and write down my testimony. The details about me,
Chief Judge Campbell and high court Judge Douglas, became part of a U.S.
government printed report. Most of the subcommittee agreed with me. The
two judges involved, however, hired lobbyists with suitcases of money who
apparently leaned on the subcommittee and Justice William O. Douglas was
not made subject to impeachment.
-
-
- At a later date, I and my colleagues dug up data
showing that Chief Judge Campbell was secretly the owner of several tall
downtown Chicago buildings, all in the maiden name of his wife. Campbell
used his judicial clout to compel several federal agencies to lease space
in his skyscrapers, despite the fact that it was not appropriate to their
work and was way overcharged per square foot. Judge Campbell moreover got
into a ruckus with some of his former business partners who sued Campbell's
cronies. My testimony succeeded in wrecking the Chief Judge's extortion
attempt against his former business partners.
-
-
- In the 1930s, to the great injury and damage to ordinary
Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court, packed with banker-judges, arbitrarily
ruled in the gold clause cases that ordinary Americans cannot insist on
gold to support contracts and other dealings. In1937, President Franklin
D. Roosevelt, the greatest counter-revolutionary in modern history, tried
to get an arm-lock on the banker-judges by his own "court-packing"
scheme, to fill up the court with more judges than previously by law provided
for. The FDR trick failed, and the banker-judges succeeded in smashing
down laws of Congress designed to alleviate the suffering of workers in
the Great Depression.
-
-
- In 1967, I brought as a Chicago voter, on behalf of myself
and all other Chicago voters similarly situated, a class action federal
suit (Skolnick versus Mayor & City Council of Chicago, U.S.
District Court, Chicago.) I sought to remedy the situation wherein
Chicago's 50 election districts for City Council, called Wards, were grossly
gerrymandered. That did not comply with the re-apportionment provisions
of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, requiring districts,
wards, of equal population. Further, the ward boundary lines were so abitrarily
drawn, that it prevented blacks and latinos from having proper representatives
in the city government tribunal. The case was assigned to Chief District
Judge William Campbell; despite me being self-educated in law,
he ordered a lawyer to speak for me. I told the lawyer, who I did not authorize
to speak for me, that if he did claim to speak for me, that I would sue
him for malpractice in another court. In a stand-off, the Chief Judge relented,
and I was allowed to speak for myself as well as the class of Chicago voters.
I proceeded with my suit under the "one man, one vote" doctrine.
[Eventually, my litigation succeeded in getting more complete representation
in the City Council for latinos and blacks.]
-
-
- I filed a motion to remove Chief Judge Campbell from
the case. As i showed, without challenge or dispute, the Chief Judge, while
on the bench, was also the director of a gangster-operated money laundry,
called the Albert Parvin Foundation, named for a Chicago hoodlum who moved
to Nevada. Get this: while on the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court, the
President of the Albert Parvin Foundation was U.S. Supreme Court Justice
William O. Douglas, a supposed liberal who in his spare time was a mountain-climber.
-
-
- My city council case generated lots of mentions in the
monopoly press, such as for 40 seconds or so on the radio or tv. So I came
one day to the courtroom of Chief Judge Campbell to present my motion to
remove him from the case. I asked that he disqualify himself in that I
and the Chicago voters could not be assured of a fair hearing and adjudication
at his hands, he being in business with known gangsters, and thus subject
to blackmail and corrupt manipulation.
-
-
- Having heard of the expected hearing, eighteen reporters
showed up, sitting right behind me as I silently waited my turn to present
my motion to the Chief Judge. Without provocation, suddenly two of the
Chief Judge's court bailiffs grabbed hold of my wheelchair and began to
turn me upside down. All of the reporters were witnesses to this outrage.
None of their reports or comments appeared in print, on the radio, or on
the tv.
-
-
- Chief Judge Campbell released a statement, that he heard
from certain unspecified sources, that I was there, not to present any
court papers, but rather to shoot him. He offered no details from my long
public career to support such ridiculous contentions that I was anti-social
and would use violence.
-
-
- I brought a damage suit against his two court bailiffs,
contending that I was the son of orthodox Jews and that I obeyed my parents
orders never to handle or carry weapons. (Skolnick versus Guadno, et al.,
Chicago U.S. District Court.) My case ended up before the banker-judges
in Chicago's federal appeals court. They ruled, in a law book published
decision, that I was not entitled to any remedy. There was no dispute or
challenge to the facts that I was there to seek to remove Chief Judge Campbell
because of his undisputed position, while a judge, as a Director of a hoodlum
Foundation. The judges ruled that despite the fact that I am a defenseless
cripple silently sitting in a wheelchair in the courtroom, that the bailiffs
were immune from being sued despite the undisputed facts that they perpetrated,
in full view of 18 witnesses, an assault and battery upon me, without cause
or provocation.
-
-
- In 1971, I had won a successful verdict against the U.S.
government spying on anti-war activists, like myself, while they pretended
to be a news media service. (Skolnick versus 113th Military Intelligence
Group, pretending to be Midwest Audio-Visual News, Chicago U.S. District
Court.) In 1971, William Rehnquist was the top U.S. Justice Department
official heading a secret unit, arranging through ulterior means to
block verdicts in federal court against spying by the U.S. Military against
anti-war activists.A few years later, when being ratified as a new Associate
Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, Rehnquist sought to conceal this role
from the U.S. Senate ratifying committee.
-
-
- Later, Justice Rehnquist was the key judge on the high
court in a ruling favoring Military Intelligence Units sued for illegal
spying on anti-war activists. He did not disqualify himself and his rotten
ruling destroyed the validity of my court verdict against U.S. government
spying.In plain lingo, Justice Rehnquist had committed a fraud upon his
own court.
-
-
- In 1986, he was appointed Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme
Court, requiring him to be again before a U.S. Senate ratifying committee.
He sought to conceal his role, before becoming a federal official, that
he was a lawyer in the Southwest. Witnesses were available to prove that
there were a line of blacks and latinos, waiting to register to vote. Rehnquist
assaulted and harassed them, stating in so many words, "Hey, get out
of here. You have no right to vote!"
-
-
- In his book, "The Myth of Democracy", Ferdinand
Lundberg set forth the true basis for the supposed de-segregation decision
of the high court in 1954, Brown vs. Board of Education. Namely, that at
the time in Africa, British and French colonies were breaking away from
the mother country to become independent nations run by blacks.
-
-
- American foreign policy in Africa was being ridiculed
and discredited by actions within the U.S. by hundreds of years of mistreatment
of blacks in America. Such as the continuing lynching of blacks, by hanging
them from trees, while whites nearby were amused as they sat watching and
eating their picnic lunch. Lundberg in his classic book of 1968, "The
Rich and the Super-Rich", pointed out that the very wealthy are some
of the most stupid persons in the world and continue to abuse and beat
down common people until one day, there is a revolution where the heads
of the rulers and top clergy are chopped off.
-
-
- According to witnesses, just as the results of the year
2000 Presidential Election were coming in, Chief Justice William Rehnquist
and Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, were heard each separately commenting
that if Albert Gore, Jr., were to become President, that they could not
carry out their plan, based on their advanced age and suffering from illinesses,
to retire from the high court.
-
-
- Justice Clarence Thomas' wife was a key figure in a group
operating with GOP money to promote Bush. Justice Antonin Scalia's son
was the lawyer participating with presenting the litigation to the high
court, Bush versus Gore. These plus one other, made up the Military-Style
Junta, called by some "The Gang of Five" that installed George
W. Bush as the occupant and resident of the White House. Recall the details
of comparisons between the 1876 corrupt installation of Hayes as the occupant
and resident of the White House and that of George W. Bush. Both, revolved
in part on corruption of Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court, and finagling
with the election authorities in Florida. [For more details, visit our
website stories about the 2000 President Election.]
-
-
- To meet a deadline in December, 2000, the high court
released their arbitrary ruling just before midnight. Justice Scalia scornfully
announced that Americans did NOT have the right to vote for President,
only the very limited right to vote for Electors, that antiquated appendage
called the Electoral College (that became the basis for the corruption
in Florida, and the bribery of top DEMOCRATS in southern Florida to stop
the recount of the Gore ballots).
-
-
- Acknowledging the arbitrary nature of the Bush vs Gore
ruling, the Gang of Five put in their decision that it was NOT to be used
as a precedent in any other election case or similar controversy. Thus,
they admitted it was tainted, and should not be used, as is otherwise
customary, in some other litigation as a prior binding precedent decision.
-
-
- Justice Antonin Scalia and two Chicago federal appeals
judges, were together law professors at Rockefeller's University of Chicago
Law School. [That is 7th Circuit appeals judges Richard A. Posner (312)
435-5806 and his shadow and side-kick, Frank H. Easterbrook (312) 435-5808
]. A third Judge on the 7th Circuit federal appeals court is Judge Diane
P. Wood (312) 435-5521. She was Dean of the Law School. Together these
four judges, while on the bench, also represent the multi-billion dollar
stock and bond portfolio of Rockefeller's University of Chicago.
-
-
- These four judges are required to file an annual mandatory
federal judicial financial disclosure form. They did NOT disclose their
financial links, as required, to the Rockefellers.. Further, these forms
require their signatures making them liable to federal criminal prosecution
for perjury if they falsified or omitted any required details.And they
did so omit and falsify.
-
-
- So three federal appeals judges, one step below the high
court, and their crony on the high court, have committed a fraud upon their
own court. Also, they have committed a fraud upon the American common people
and committed blatant injustices against them. How many ordinary litigants
were rejected by these judges in fronting for the Rockefellers and depriving
Americans of Equal Justice under Law? These judges have failed to disqualify
themselves in numerous cas es involving the financial ownership and
interests of the Rockefellers.
-
-
- So, Americans are being plundered by the scoundrels over
the years occupying the U.S. Supreme Court. In violation of the social
compact underlying our organic law, namely the U.S. Constitution and the
Bill of Rights, we are NOT governed by rulers with our consent. The high
court judges are not for the common people, but represent the interests
and mandates of The Establishment, "the powers that be", the
Ruling Class, in others words THEM.
-
-
- The failure to prosecute such Judges for high crimes
or to remove them from office by impeachment trial, convinces some commentators
that the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights are a dead letter.
-
-
- More coming....Stay tuned..
-
- =======================================
- Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court reformer and
since 1963, Founder/Chairman, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts.
Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, Moderator/Producer of "Broadsides",
a one hour, taped, weekly program, cablecast WITHIN CHICAGO to upwards
of 400,000 viewers each Monday evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21 Cable TV. Portions
of some of our tv shows can be seen anytime,anywhere, through videostreaming
on our website.
-
-
- Office, 8 a.m. to midnight, most 7 days (773) 375-5741
BUT DO NOT BOMBARD THIS LISTED PHONE, please, WITH "JUST ROUTINE'
CALLS, such as what is my address which appears on the bottom of each story.
-
-
- For updates of our work, on a recorded phone message,
NOT an expensive call: (773) 731-1100.
-
-
- For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send $5.00
[ U.S. funds only] plus a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope
[ #10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9-1/2 ] WITH THREE FIRST CLASS U.S. STAMPS on it,
to Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts, Sherman H. Skolnick, Chairman,
9800 So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL 60617-4870.
-
-
- WEBSITE: <http://www.skolnicksreport.com/>http://www.skolnicksreport.com/
[NOTE "s" after name]
- E-Mail: skolnick@ameritech.net
|
