Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

STANLEY HILTON AND 911 VICTIMS LAWSUIT DROPPED BECAUSE OF "DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY"

Expand Messages
  • w r
    http://www.suetheterrorists.net/ http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s103.htm Federal sovereign immunity is a defense to liability rather than a right to be free from
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 16, 2005
      http://www.suetheterrorists.net/

      http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s103.htm


      Federal sovereign immunity

      is a defense to liability

      rather than a right to be free from trial.

      The Supreme Court has ruled that

      in a case involving the government's sovereign
      immunity

      the statute in question must be strictly construed in
      favor of the sovereign

      and may not be enlarged beyond the waiver its language
      expressly requires.

      See United States v. Nordic Village, Inc., 503 U.S.
      30, 33-35 (1992).

      *

      http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=wrx&pg=aq&aqmode=s&aqa=%22sovereign+immunity%22+bush+9%2F11&aqp=&aqo=&aqn=&aqb=&kgs=1&kls=0&dt=tmperiod&d2=0&dfr%5Bd%5D=1&dfr%5Bm%5D=1&dfr%5By%5D=1980&dto%5Bd%5D=16&dto%5Bm%5D=1&dto%5By%5D=2005&filetype=&rc=dmn&swd=&lh=&nbq=40

      "sovereign immunity" bush 9/11


      Levey. Info. AFTER 9/11: WILL THE VICTIMS EVER BE
      FULLY COMPENSATED? Copyright 2002. All rights
      reserved, Mark G. Levey.

      More than a year after 9/11, the initial questions
      about 9/11 still remain unanswered. ... recovery
      against foreign entities claiming sovereign immunity.
      Until recent years ...

      http://www.levey.info/9-11%20Civil%20litigation.htm

      ^

      Democratic Underground Forums. ,,,Graham Eyeing
      Evidence That Bush Blew 9/11.

      Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. ... and he can't
      be touched legally for declassifying information. He
      has sovereign immunity when publicizing information.
      ...

      http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=1080&forum=DCForumID71&archive=yes

      ^

      CNN.com - FindLaw Forum: Can 9/11 victims' families
      sue the federal government over the attacks? - May 22,
      2002

      ... FindLaw Forum: Can 9/11 victims' families sue the
      ... Meanwhile, President Bush and his advisors have
      adopted a ... Republic adopted this doctrine, called
      "sovereign immunity," in 1776 ...

      http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/05/columns/fl.sebok.911.suits.05.22

      ^

      International Business Commercial Law Attorneys Perles
      Law Firm Washington District Of Columbia D.C. DC
      Lawyers ...

      The attorneys of Perles Law Firm in Washington, DC
      focus on the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund
      2001, international law, business law, commerical law,
      litigation, and appeals. ... sovereign immunity in
      1812, when it stated that states enjoy "exclusive and
      absolute" jurisdiction over their own territory. The
      Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon, 11 ...

      http://perleslaw.lawoffice.com/Articles_8.shtml

      >

      From: "Milo" <shining@...>

      Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:55:20 -0500

      Subject: [apfn-1] STANLEY HILTON AND 911 VICTIMS
      LAWSUIT DROPPED BECAUSE OF "DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN
      IMMUNITY"

      http://www.suetheterrorists.net/

      Stanley Hilton Preparing Appeal To The Ninth Circuit
      Appellate Court

      1/9/2005 Abel Ashes (Hull Simmons)

      The $7 billion federal class action lawsuit against
      top Bush Administration officials for, among other
      things, their roles in engineering and orchestrating
      the 911 attacks has been dismissed by Judge Illston.

      Attorney for the plaintiffs, Stanley Hilton is
      preparing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of
      Appeals and hopes to reverse the judge's ruling.

      Mr. Hilton will be making the fifteen page ruling
      dismissing the suit available to the public.

      As soon as SueTheTerrorists.Net webmaster, Abel Ashes
      (Hull Simmons) receives the document

      it will be online for all to read and understand the
      judge's given reasons for dismissing the suit.

      Mr. Ashes spoke with Stanley Hilton earlier today and
      Mr. Hilton informed him that the judge's ruling was
      based on the "Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity".

      In other words, the suit was not dismissed because of
      lack of evidence,

      but rather because the judge reasoned that U.S.
      Citizens do not have the right to hold a sitting
      President accountable for anything,

      even if the charges include premeditated mass murder
      and premeditated acts of high treason.

      Mr. Hilton and his plaintiffs disagree and so are
      filing an appeal.

      If the Ninth Circuit reverses the U.S. District Court
      of Northern California's decision, the suit will be
      amended and new plaintiffs and allegations will be
      added.



      ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the
      filed documents once without charge.

      To avoid later charges, download a copy of each
      document during this first viewing.

      U.S. District Court
      Northern District of California
      Notice of Electronic Filing or Other Case Activity

      NOTE: Please read this entire notice before calling
      the Help Desk. If you have questions, please email the
      Help Desk by replying to this message; include your
      question or comment along with the original text.

      Please note that these Notices are sent for all cases
      in the system when any case activity occurs,
      regardless of whether the case is designated for
      e-filing or not, or whether the activity is the filing
      of an electronic document or not.

      If there are two hyperlinks below, the first will lead
      to the docket and the second will lead to an e-filed
      document.

      If there is no second hyperlink, there is no
      electronic document available .

      See the FAQ posting 'I have a Notice of Electronic
      Filing that was e-mailed to me but there's no
      hyperlink...'

      on the ECF home page

      at https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov


      The following transaction was received from ts, COURT
      STAFF on 1/3/2005 at 12:13 PM PST

      Case Name: Taxpayers of United States of America et
      al v. Bush et al
      Case Number: 3:03-cv-3927
      Filer:
      Document Number: 45

      Docket Text:
      ORDER by Judge Illston granting [35] Motion to Dismiss
      (ts, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2005)

      **************************************

      Here is the definition

      of "Sovereign Immunity" from

      http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s103.htm.

      SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY - A doctrine precluding the
      institution of a suit against the sovereign
      [government] without its consent.

      Though commonly believed to be rooted in English law,
      it is actually rooted in the inherent nature of power
      and the ability of those who hold power to shield
      themselves.

      In England it was predicated on the concept that "the
      sovereign can do no wrong", a concept developed and
      enforced by - guess who?

      However, since the American revolution explictedly
      rejected this interesting idea, the American rulers
      had to come up with another rationale to protect their
      power.

      One they came up with is that

      the "sovereign is exempt from suit [on the] practical
      ground that there can be no legal right against the
      authority that makes the law on which the right
      depends." 205 U.S. 349, 353.

      "[S]tatutes waiving the sovereign immunity of the
      United States must be`construed strictly in favor of
      the sovereign." McMahon v. United States, 342 U.S. 25,
      27 (1951).

      11 U.S.C. S 106, "Waiver of Sovereign Immunity,"
      provides:

      (a) A governmental unit is deemed to have waived
      sovereign immunity

      with respect to any claim against such governmental
      unit that is property of the estate

      and that arose out of the same transaction or
      occurrence out of which such governmental unit's claim
      arose.

      The interest served by federal sovereign immunity (the
      United States' freedom from paying damages without
      Congressional consent)

      Federal sovereign immunity

      is readily distinguishable from the states' immunity
      under the Eleventh Amendment

      and foreign governments' immunity

      under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

      The latter two doctrines allow one sovereign entity

      the right to avoid, altogether,

      being subjected to litigation in another sovereign's
      courts. Pullman Constr., 23 F.3d at 1169.

      Similar sovereignty concerns are not implicated by the
      maintenance of suit against the United States in
      federal court.

      Federal sovereign immunity has had such broad
      exceptions carved out of it that, as Pullman
      Construction concluded,

      "Congress, on behalf of the United States, has
      surrendered any comparable right not to be a litigant
      in its own courts." Id.

      In the present day,

      federal sovereign immunity serves merely to channel
      litigation into the appropriate avenue for redress,

      ensuring that

      "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in
      Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." Pullman
      Constr. at 1168 (quoting Art. I, section 9, cl. 7).

      Federal sovereign immunity

      is a defense to liability

      rather than a right to be free from trial.

      The Supreme Court has ruled that

      in a case involving the government's sovereign
      immunity the statute in question must be strictly
      construed in favor of the sovereign and may not be
      enlarged beyond the waiver its language expressly
      requires.

      See United States v. Nordic Village, Inc., 503 U.S.
      30, 33-35 (1992).
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.