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

judicial immunity

Expand Messages
  • stonekutteral
    Hi Bear and friends- found this stuff on Judicial immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it... Cheers ! Al Brief and Memorandum
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment

       
       Hi Bear and friends- found this stuff on Judicial immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it...   Cheers !  Al 


       
      Brief and Memorandum regarding Judicial Immunity- (or more appropriately, the lack thereof)

       

       

      “[T]he judicially fashioned doctrine of official immunity does not reach so far as to immunize criminal conduct proscribed by an Act of Congress.” See SUING JUDGES, A Study of Judicial Immunity, Abimbola Olowofoyeku, Clarendon Press Oxford, at page 77. “Absolute immunity from criminal liability involves immunity even in cases of alleged malice and negligence. Fraud, corruption, and other inherently criminal acts…. are not covered.SUING JUDGES, id supra at page 78. See also, United States v. Hastings, 681 F. 2d 706 at 711, n.17 (11th Cir. 1982), Oshea v. Littleton, 38 L.ed 2d. 674 at 688 (1974), and Cooke v. Bangs, 31 F. 640 (US Cir. Ct. Minnesota, (1887) at page 642.
      “ No man in this country is so high that he is above the law.” No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it. It is only supreme power in our system of government, and every man, who, by accepting office, participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives. See INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194 U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609. But immunity from suit is a high attribute of sovereignty – a prerogative of the State itself – which cannot be availed of by public agents when sued for their own torts. The Eleventh Amendment was not intended to afford them freedom from liability in any case where, under color of their office, they have injured one of the State’s citizens. To grant them such immunity would be to create a privileged class free from liability from wrongs inflicted or injuries threatened. Public agents must be liable to the law, unless they are to be put above the law. See OLD COLONY TRUST COMPANY v. CITY SEATTLE ET AL. (06/01/26) 271 U.S. 426, 46 S.Ct. 552, 70 L. Ed at page 431. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. See United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 and Burton v. united States, 202U.S. 344.
      “The objection is that, as the real party cannot be brought before the court, a suit cannot be sustained against the agents of that party; and cases have been cited to show that a court of chancery will not make a decree unless all those who are substantially interested be made parties to the suit. This is certainly true where it is in the power of the plaintiff to make them parties; but if the person who is the real principle, the person who is the true source of the mischief, by whose power and for whose advantage it is done, be himself above the law, be exempt from all judicial process, it would be subversive of the best established principles to say that the laws could not afford the same remedies against the agent employed in doing the wrong which they would afford against him could his principle be joined in the suit.” See IN RE AYERS.; IN RE SCOTT.; IN RE McCABE. 123 U.S. 443, 31 L.Ed. 216, 8 S.Ct at page 512.
      The liability of state judicial officials and all official participants in state judicial proceedings under § 2 was explicitly and repeatedly affirmed. The notion of immunity for such officials was thoroughly discredited. The Senate sponsor of the Act deemed the idea “akin to the maxim of the English law that the King can do no wrong. It places officials above the law. It places officials above the law. It is the very doctrine out of which the rebellion [the Civil War] was hatched.” Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 1758 (18660 (Sen. Trumble). Thuse, § 2 was “aimed directly at the State judiciary.” Id., at 1155 (Rep. Eldridge). See also id. At 1778 (Sen. Johnson, member of the Senate Judiciary Committee).There was “no difference in the principle involved” between a civil remedy and a criminal sanction. Ibid. See BRISCOE ET AL. V. LAHUE ET AL. (03/07/83) 460 U.S. 3325, 103 S. Ct. 1108, 75 L.Ed. 2d 96, 51 U.S.L.W. at page 359.
      The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that “not every action by a judge is in the exercise of his judicial function. … it is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse. When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges’ orders are void, of no legal force or effect.”
      The United States Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner volative of the Federal constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of the Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. A judge’s private, prior agreement to decide in favor of one party is not a judicial act. Although a party conniving with a judge to predetermine the outcome of a judicial proceeding may deal with him in his “judicial capacity,” the other party’s expectation of judicial impartiality is actively frustrated by the scheme. It is the antithesis of the “principled and fearless decision-making” that judicial immunity exists to protect. Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1980) cert. DENIED, 451 U.S. 939, 101 S. Ct. 2020, (1981), Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 554, 87S. Ct. 1213 (1967), and Gregory v. Thompson, 500 F. 2d 59 (9th Cir. 1974).

       


    • vivus_spartacus
      Re: Hi Bear and friends- found this (`)stuff( ) on Judicial immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it... Cheers ! Al … No man in
      Message 2 of 3 , Jun 7, 2012
      • 0 Attachment

        Re: "Hi Bear and friends- found this (`)stuff(') on Judicial immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it... Cheers ! Al" …

        " " No man in this country is so high that he is above the law." No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it. It is only supreme power in our system of government, and every man, who, by accepting office, participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives. See INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194 U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609."

        UNLESS One intends to be a life-long member from the School of `How to Snatch Defeat From The Jaws of Victory', then remember to do your OWN due diligence, and give only cursory credence to what is "found" and put "on the web" by anyone else.

        A Basic and Primary Rule in Winning 101, is NEVER Cite or Quote from the DISSENTING (i.e. Minority) Opinion found in the dicta of even a U.S. Supreme Court decision, or your Adversary will quickly point out the fact, and subsequently you will undoubtedly LOSE!

        Ergo, ALWAYS Cite/Quote from the Actual Source Found in the Majority Opinion!

        TO WIT:

        United States v. Lee - 106 U.S. 196 (1882)

        http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/106/196/case.html

        Page 106 U. S. 220

        "No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives."

        United States v. Lee - 106 U.S. 196 at 220

        (furthermore, continuing on )

        "Courts of justice are established not only to decide upon the controverted rights of the citizens as against each other, but also upon rights in controversy between them and the government, and the docket of this Court is crowded with controversies of the latter class.

        Shall it be said, in the face of all this and of the acknowledged right of the judiciary to decide in proper cases statutes which have been passed by both branches of Congress and approved by the President to be unconstitutional, that the

        Page 106 U. S. 221

        courts cannot give remedy when the citizen has been deprived of his property by force, his estate seized and converted to the use of the government without any lawful authority, without any process of law, and without any compensation, because the President has ordered it and his officers are in possession?

        If such be the law of this country, it sanctions a tyranny which has no existence in the monarchies of Europe nor in any other government which has a just claim to well regulated liberty and the protection of personal rights."

        United States v. Lee - 106 U.S. 196 at 220, 221

        We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
        Benjamin Franklin

        "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance and people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." James Madison

        "Ignorance of fact excuses; Ignorance of the law excuses not. Every man must be
        taken to be cognizant of the law; otherwise there is no saying to what extent
        the excuse of ignorance may not be carried."
        Black's Law Dictionary Sixth Edition Centennial Edition (1891-1991)page 747

        Leviticus 19:36; Deuteronomy 25:15-16
        Proverbs 20:10;23
        I John 4:6

        Wisdom is the principal thing; Therefore get wisdom. And in all your
        getting, Get understanding. Proverbs 4:7

        "vivus spartacus"
        All Rights Reserved

        It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a
        prey to the active. The condition upon which (G-d) hath given liberty
        to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude
        is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his
        guilt. John Philpot Curran (1750-1817)

        If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.

        This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

        Frederick Douglass, "If There Is No Struggle, There Is No Progress"


        --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, stonekutteral <stonekutteral@...> wrote:

        > Hi Bear and friends- found this stuff on Judicial immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it... Cheers ! Al

        Brief and Memorandum regarding Judicial Immunity- (or more appropriately, the lack thereof)
        <Snipped> 

        > " No man in this country is so high that he is above the law." No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it. It is only supreme power in our system of government, and every man, who, by accepting office, participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives. See INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194 U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609. <Snipped>
      • vivus_spartacus
        For the benefit of Those who have contacted me off board indicating a difficulty in discerning whereby the quote from INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v.
        Message 3 of 3 , Jun 9, 2012
        • 0 Attachment

          For the benefit of Those who have contacted me off board indicating a difficulty in discerning whereby the quote from INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194 U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609.is actually from the Minority dissenting Opinion, and why such should always be avoided, especially when such can actually be quoted within the Majority / Holding Opinion, undoubtedly Bear will allow me to clear up the matter herein, as this is an all too common, and fatal mistake made by countless patriots attempting to protect their Rights, albeit without any proper training of even the basic fundamentals in Law.

          The following is merely a cut & paste snippet found on the web:

          " " No man in this country is so high that he is above the law." No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it. It is only supreme power in our system of government, and every man, who, by accepting office, participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives. See INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194 U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609."

          The actual Case & Quote can be found here:

          http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/194/601/case.html

          or later by simply Googling 194 U.S. 601 and clicking on an appropriate link

          [Note: ALWAYS make sure that One is actually reading from the Case and Not merely from the Syllabus]

          Now simply scroll down to the top of 194 U.S. (Page) 605 and One sees:

          "MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court." (i.e. the Majority opinion)

          and halfway down Page 606 is where the Majority Opinion's decision actually appears.

          To Wit: "The question is answered in the negative, and it will be so certified."

          Immediately below which is Where minority / dissenting opinions Always appear. In this particular Case, Justice Harlan's dissent, with Justice Peckham's concurring with the dissent at the very bottom

          (i.e. only Two Justices, ergo in the Minority, disagreeing with the Court's ruling)

          Now, since the INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE Court's ruling opinion is found on Page 606, and the snippet found on the web is thus clearly and merely quoting from a minority dissention found on Page 609, exactly how long could One actually expect it to take for a skilled adversary to catch that snafu, and use that fact against One in Court?

          Answer: About as long as it takes for any naïve individual to have their head spinned off and handed to them in Court.

          Therefore it would be WISE to simply, directly quote right from the Proper Source where it originally appeared AND in the Majority / Holding Opinion as delivered by Justice Miller, and since Chief Justice Waite; Justice Gray; Justice Bradley and Justice Woods were also in the Minority Opinion in the United States v. Lee Court, therefore their dissenting opinion/s appearing at Page 223 also notwithstanding,

          Ergo CITE PROPERLY via the actual "winnning" QUOTE:

          United States v. Lee - 106 U.S. 196 (1882)

          http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/106/196/case.html

          Page 106 U. S. 220

          "No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives."

          United States v. Lee - 106 U.S. 196 at 220

          Furthermore, as far too many patriots have been at this struggle for YEARS and still do not have a clue as to the weakness of countless arguments and/or positions, so it also would be WISE, (plus Save a lot of Time as well as Grief), to go to any Campus Bookstore at a College or University with a Law School and simply buy even a used set of 1st Year Law books (Who knows, maybe they belonged to a top notch student who kept excellent notes in the margins) for a mere pittance.

          Or for Those with spare Time, simply go AUDIT some classes therein FOR FREE at ANY State College or State University Law School, For Crying Out Loud, since a State Citizen only has to pay if they are actually seeking to get "credit"/ transcript and/ or diploma, whereas the knowledge simply imparted therein is already being paid for by One's Property Taxes!

          Ergo:

          "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."!

          By simply investing the time and a few measly bux, One can PROPERLY learn the basic fundamentals thereby enabling One to have a solid foundation and principles of Law upon which to build worthwhile Knowledge and avoid making Errors and Mistakes, or otherwise Wasting a whole lot of time getting absolutely nowhere.

          By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.
          Benjamin Franklin

          We are ALL born ignorant, but one must work HARD to remain stupid.
          Benjamin Franklin

          "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance and people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." James Madison

          "Ignorance of fact excuses; Ignorance of the law excuses not. Every man must be
          taken to be cognizant of the law; otherwise there is no saying to what extent
          the excuse of ignorance may not be carried."
          Black's Law Dictionary Sixth Edition Centennial Edition (1891-1991)page 747

          Leviticus 19:36; Deuteronomy 25:15-16
          Proverbs 20:10;23
          I John 4:6

          Wisdom is the principal thing; Therefore get wisdom. And in all your
          getting, Get understanding. Proverbs 4:7

          "vivus spartacus"
          All Rights Reserved

          It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a
          prey to the active. The condition upon which (G-d) hath given liberty
          to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude
          is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his
          guilt. John Philpot Curran (1750-1817)

          If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.

          This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

          Frederick Douglass, "If There Is No Struggle, There Is No Progress"


          --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "vivus_spartacus" <vivus_spartacus@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Re: "Hi Bear and friends- found this (`)stuff(') on Judicial
          > immunity on the web... anyone wanting a link can email me for it...
          > Cheers ! Al" …
          >
          > " " No man in this country is so high that he is above the
          > law." No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with
          > impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the
          > lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it. It is only
          > supreme power in our system of government, and every man, who, by
          > accepting office, participates in its functions, is only the more
          > strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the
          > limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it
          > gives. See INTERNATONAL POSTAL SUPPLY COMPANY v. BRUCE(05/31/04) 194
          > U.S. 601, 48 L.Ed. 1134, 24 S. Ct. at page 609."
          >
          > UNLESS One intends to be a life-long member from the School of `How
          > to Snatch Defeat From The Jaws of Victory', then remember to do your
          > OWN due diligence, and give only cursory credence to what is
          > "found" and put "on the web" by anyone else.
          <Snipped>
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.