United States Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on the Validity of the Constitution

Breitbart

ATLANTA, Nov. 13, 2010  /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution.  The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather.  The decision should be rendered by the end of the year. Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

The Questions Presented to The Supreme Court by Grandfather Windsor are:

1. Will The Supreme Court declare that the Constitution and its amendments may be voided by federal judges?
2. Should federal judges be stopped from committing illegal and corrupt acts to obstruct justice and inflict bias on litigants?  
3. Will The Supreme Court be afraid to disclose the corruption in the federal courts?

These questions are presented in three separate Petitions for Writ of Mandamus filed with The United States Supreme Court the first week of November 2010 (appeal numbers to-be-assigned).

Windsor has been involved in legal action in the federal courts in Atlanta since 2006.  Windsor was named a defendant in a lawsuit (1:06-CV-0714-ODE) in which Christopher Glynn of Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls, swore under oath that Windsor did a variety of things including the crimes of theft and bribery.  Windsor stated under oath that Christopher Glynn made it all up and lied about absolutely everything that he swore. 

Windsor then obtained deposition testimony from Glynn and the other managers of the Maid of the Mist boat ride in Niagara Falls, and they admitted, under oath, that charges against Windsor were not true.

Despite this undeniable proof, federal Judge Orinda D. Evans declared that the grandfather of three should not have fought the lawsuit, and she forced him to pay over $400,000 in legal fees.  Windsor appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, but federal judges Dubina, Hull, and Fay rubber-stamped Judge Evans' ruling. Windsor then took his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court where the justices said the appeal was not worthy of their consideration (cert denied).

Windsor believes that the federal courts and nine federal judges violated the Constitution, the Due Process Clause, and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.

Windsor says: "I have discovered that, at least in Atlanta, Georgia, the federal courts operate like a police state in which the judges are all-powerful, committing criminal acts from their benches and violating the Constitutional rights of parties who have the misfortune of appearing in their courts."

Windsor has now tossed the hot potato right square in the laps of the justices of the Supreme Court.

By filing mandamus petitions rather than an appeal, The Supreme Court is forced to deal with Windsor's allegations of corruption in the federal courts. Grandfather Windsor hopes for the best but fears for the worst: "I hope The Supreme Court is decent, honest, and cares about the Constitution and the citizens of the United States. However, I am sorry to say that at this point, I suspect the corruption goes all the way to the top.  My charges have been totally ignored by the United States Attorney's Office, the FBI, and Congress.  I have said to The Supreme Court that the issues can all be boiled down to one question: Is The United States Supreme Court prepared to stop the federal judges in Atlanta, Georgia from functioning like common criminals?"

Windsor says: "If The Supreme Court fails to act against these federal judges, the citizens of the United States need to know that there is not a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts.  Corruption has consumed the federal court system, and we now live in a police state.  Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want.  Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books."

The Supreme Court may render its decision before the end of the year.  It's one retired grandpa against the United States government. 

For more information, see www.LawlessAmerica.com.

SOURCE William M. Windsor

Copyright 2010 PR Newswire. All Rights Reserved.

[Steven G. Elliott]

We all know that the court system is corrupt. With the appointments of clinton and obama, we know that the Supreme Court is communist. We all should realize that we are living in a police state.

[Lawrence Yarborough]

We need to start weeding out some of these comunist bastards and start holding elections instead of appionting
some of these anti American Idiots.

[GIT-R-DONE!]

Will they invalidate the Constitution? Maybe(?)

[Joyce Romano]

They will if they want to start another Revolutionary War.

[3IDGrunt (Scott)]

This administration is utterly corrupt and has nurtured an atmosphere that the Constitution is nothing but a moldy old, out of date and behind the times document. We have Federal Judges trying to tell the military how to run their business, clearly an overstep of their authority. We have and Attorney General, and I use that term VERY LOOSELY, turning his back on clear white voter intimidation by the Black Panthers. It seems that with this "administration", it's time to right all those wrongs perpetrated by whitey, and let black criminals get away with anything. We have criminals letting criminals get away with flagrant violations of the law.

Our Republic is founded on the precepts of the US Constitution and its Amendments. It's time we get back to what the document means and toss all these liberal, agenda driven, corrupt Federal Judges off the bench.

[Sandra Lee Smith]

Well, we know there will be 2 votes against him, from Sotomayer and Kagan, up front; that leaves 7 justices to do the right thing or not, and sadly, I'm NOT going to hold my breath about them doing the right thing; they're going to have to show me! Thus far for the past 2 years they've been abdicating their responsibility toward the Constitution right and left; not dealing with the issues about Obama's eligibility; not handling cases in which states are the parties involved as the Constitution requires, but passing those off to lower courts that have no legal jurisdiction in such cases, etc.

[Shane S.]

For the most part the SCOTUS at this time leans to the Conservative/Constitutionalists side of issues. That being said it would not be hard for Congress to set in motion an impeachment of one of the SCOTUS members so that Big Eared Barry and company could stack the deck. At that point then something like this suit could make it passed them. They should all be elected just as any other member of the Gooberment and made help accountable to the people.

[Joyce Romano]

watch this Newt Gingrich video at the link below...at about the 5 minute mark he starts to discuss what can be done about these Federal judges, based on what was done in the past: The Jeffersonians passed the Judiciary Act of 1802 which abolished 18 out of 35 Federal judges. Not impeached...abolished.
https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qtjfMjjce2Y starts about the 5 minute mark.

[Shane S.]

Thank you Joyce. I can see where that might be a needed use, but we still need three SEPARATE BUT EQUAL branches to the Federal Government. They are no longer either, but that is what we are working too.

[Sandra Lee Smith]

Those weren't SCOTUS , they were Federal judges, more like 9th circuit that's hearing {unlawfully} the charges against AZ with respect to SB 1070 and that idiot hearing about DADT, also unlawfully!