J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California                                        December 7, 2005
______________________________________________________
www.SouthDakotaJudicialAccountability.org
Send support for the South Dakota campaign to:
SDJA,  P.O. Box 412, Tea, S.D.  57064
Office:  (605) 231-1418
 
The Target For J.A.I.L. Is The Abuse of
Judicial Immunity For Whomever It Is Applied
(Response from Barbie to Bill Shipley, Kansas JIC)
 
----- Original Message -----
From: wshipley
To: VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 4:19 PM
Subject: Verification.

I am writing my letter to the Editor of the Madison, S.D newspaper and I have a question.

 

Quote:  "but it covers all persons shielded by judicial immunity...meaning every school board, city council, county commission, professional licensing board, in fact every citizen board in the state exercising quasi-judicial powers."

 

Barbie, is this true?  I think it's a great idea, but I didn't realize it was that far-reaching.

 

I'll hold my letter until I hear from you

 

Bill Shipley

Kansas JIC

wshipley@kc.rr.com



Dear Bill:
 
Ron told me about your excellent question and it made me want to weigh in on it too. Thank you very much for this question. It provides an opportunity for me to respond for the benefit of everyone who may be wondering the same thing.
 
As we know, the focus of J.A.I.L. is judicial accountability, and the practice that prevents judicial accountability is judicial immunity, and more particularly its abuse in application by judges. And we know (or at least most of us do) that judges rule by edict, not by law-- and that is because they have shielded themselves from liability for their violations of law by abusing their own doctrine of judicial immunity. That's the cause of the whole problem of the judicial system as it operates today. And that's what J.A.I.L. aims at eliminating. It is the abuse of judges arbitrarily applying judicial immunity that prevents the granting of a judicial remedy (or administrative remedy through abuse by the judiciary in subsequent proceedings)-- thus violating the People's inherent right of redress of grievances. The People can no longer afford to allow this continued abuse by the judiciary go on without doing whatever is necessary to stop it. See JNJ 12/8/03 "The Case Made for J.A.I.L."
http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2003/2003-12-08.html discussing judicial immunity blocking the right of redress. See also JNJ 3/28/04 "Would Existing Judicial Immunity Laws Thwart J.A.I.L.?"
http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2004/2004-03-28.html
 
Remember-- it's ABUSE that the People, through J.A.I.L., will be attacking, and more specifically and directly, JUDICIAL abuse because it is the judiciary that is ultimately responsible for the conduct of government 
against the rights of the People. The U.S. Supreme Court has even acknowledged in several published decisions that the federal court is the guardian of People's rights. I don't have exact citations at my fingertips, but enough of you who have delved into legal research know that to be fact. 
That statement is made regarding the obligation of the federal court to provide a remedy to individuals when one isn't available in state court (basically dealing with the obligation to offer injunctive relief under 1983). The federal court is supposed to be the final watchdog for guarding the rights of the People. I've cited those cases until I was "blue in the face" and yet, no remedy was forthcoming from any court. Invariably when suing the judges denying us a remedy, our cases were routinely dismissed as "frivolous" because of the judiciary's arbitrary and unfounded claim of the old stand-by, "judicial immunity."  Clearly, when the judiciary fails to provide a judicial remedy for alleged wrongdoing, and then fails to accept liability for that lack of a remedy by simply claiming "judicial immunity" at all levels --without making any findings of fact and conclusions of law to justify that claim-- it is an ABUSE of judicial power, and it has become routine!
 
Regarding your question Bill, is it true that:
"but it covers all persons shielded by judicial immunity...meaning every school board, city council, county commission, professional licensing board, in fact every citizen board in the state exercising quasi-judicial powers." ?
 
The criterion under J.A.I.L. is not what a person's title is --it can be a janitor, a clown in a circus, --anything. The criterion under J.A.I.L. is if a person, regardless of title or position, who allegedly violates the law as specified in the Initiative, has been deemed by the judiciary to be shielded by judicial 
immunity. Such person in that event is a "judge" within the meaning of the J.A.I.L. Initiative, to wit, "...and every person shielded by judicial immunity."
 
If any of the administrative officers, such as named above, are not held liable for violations of law in the administrative arena because of "quasi-judicial immunity," the matter must then be taken to court under administrative mandamus or some other appropriate court remedy. If no remedy is provided by the judiciary after exhausting all judicial remedies at least through the state supreme court, then the matter is brought before the SGJ alleging certain misconduct by all judges involved in the cover-up by upholding "quasi-judicial immunity" for the alleged violations of law.
 
The bottom line as far as the J.A.I.L. process is concerned is, the lack of a judicial remedy whether it results from an administrative proceeding which graduates to the judicial process, or from a court proceeding itself-- it is a matter to be reviewed by the SGJ after the judicial system has been given full opportunity to operate according to law, i.e., an opportunity for the system to correct itself anywhere along the line.
 
Liability has to extend from the beginning participants, including administrative officials in an administrative case, through the final participants-- participating state supreme court justices (or U.S. Supreme Court justices if taken there). Courts involved in an administrative case, such as administrative mandamus, are all part of the administrative process; but it will be the judges in that process that will hold the key to liability of all administrative participants under J.A.I.L. Likewise, the U.S. Supreme Court, when acting in a subsequent process from a state court proceeding (Note: I did not say a state court "decision") where a remedy is lacking, is part of the state court process, as distinguished from a federal court process-- thus, part of the exhaustion of a state court remedy.
 
So Bill, the answer to your question is "Yes" it is true. J.A.I.L. will be that far-reaching because J.A.I.L. doesn't get involved until all judicial remedies have been exhausted-- and in an administrative proceeding, all administrative remedies have to be exhausted before the judicial remedy is sought. It's a long process, to be sure, but J.A.I.L. does not interfere with that process by the system. J.A.I.L. operates only when the system fails, all the way through.
 
I wanted to go through this in detail to make it clear why and how J.A.I.L. will work, and to what extent it will reach. It is the judges who hold the key to providing a judicial remedy for an administrative proceeding or a court proceeding. If a judge or judges uphold judicial or quasi-judicial immunity, thus blocking a remedy for an injured party having the right of redress of grievances, the People have the DUTY to act, to see to it that such right is protected and honored by our courts.
 
-Barbie
victoryusa@jail4judges.org


J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash,
http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at
JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To be added or removed, write to VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
Your help is needed: www.sd-jail4judges.org
 
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
 
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

Return To JNJ 2005

To JNJ Library Index for All Years