By Larry Klayman

WND

November 9, 2019

 

I am a risk taker. Not being content to just file Freedom of Information Act requests, which can never be lost since documents will always be produced, I have always tried to use creative court cases with real clients to try to bring about justice and further the rule of law and respect for our Constitution. In so doing, I frequently encounter federal judges in particular who use their considerable power and unaccountability to play God and decide whether a case that is a "hot potato" can proceed beyond the initial pleading stage to discovery and trial before a jury.

Incredibly, by using Supreme Court dicta — which is not a ruling, but just a statement by justices — to the effect that federal judges can dismiss complaints if the judge finds the allegations lack plausibility, federal judges frequently subvert "We the People's" constitutional right to a jury trial decided by one's peers. The SCOTUS opinion used to justify allowing any federal judge to think he or she is "holier than thou" is Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twomby, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) ("Twomby").

 

See also: MORE Federal Judge Outrages! Sessions Rides Again!




Click to Watch Video