Jim White
@jim-at-usareset.bsky.social
Former believer in honest, high integrity judges. Now that I've had to take the State of Michigan to court I know better. Judges are into POWER, right and rule of law are irrelevant to many of them.
TRUBLICAN, PLEASE GET THE SPELLING CORRECT!
November 26, 2025 at 4:58 PM
TRUBLICAN, PLEASE GET THE SPELLING CORRECT!
@dananessel.bsky.social why not get YOUR OWN bunch in order. Your people say 2+2=3, false & false = true, "however" means "ignore this sentence, not whatever it overturns above," etc. For more on the FAILURES of the State of Michigan see usareset.net/forum/viewto...
My Case(s) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
November 25, 2025 at 4:14 PM
@dananessel.bsky.social why not get YOUR OWN bunch in order. Your people say 2+2=3, false & false = true, "however" means "ignore this sentence, not whatever it overturns above," etc. For more on the FAILURES of the State of Michigan see usareset.net/forum/viewto...
Please be more specific, such as quote the relevant law.
Neither the DC statutes nor the Supreme Court can change (or override) the Constitution. See Article V regarding Constitutional amendment and Article VI Section 2 regarding Constitutional supremacy.
Neither the DC statutes nor the Supreme Court can change (or override) the Constitution. See Article V regarding Constitutional amendment and Article VI Section 2 regarding Constitutional supremacy.
November 18, 2025 at 2:19 PM
Please be more specific, such as quote the relevant law.
Neither the DC statutes nor the Supreme Court can change (or override) the Constitution. See Article V regarding Constitutional amendment and Article VI Section 2 regarding Constitutional supremacy.
Neither the DC statutes nor the Supreme Court can change (or override) the Constitution. See Article V regarding Constitutional amendment and Article VI Section 2 regarding Constitutional supremacy.
I gave the correct answer. The problem is it is far too nuanced for American lawyers. They cannot understand the Constitution so they default to "well, whatever SCOTUS says" (no matter that it contradicts the plain Constitution words or whatever SCOTUS said before).
November 17, 2025 at 1:48 PM
I gave the correct answer. The problem is it is far too nuanced for American lawyers. They cannot understand the Constitution so they default to "well, whatever SCOTUS says" (no matter that it contradicts the plain Constitution words or whatever SCOTUS said before).
"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability" Amendment XIV Section 3
But SCOTUS
"responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States"
WHICH IS BACKWARDS
The SCOTUS intent, usurp Congress
But SCOTUS
"responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States"
WHICH IS BACKWARDS
The SCOTUS intent, usurp Congress
November 16, 2025 at 7:13 PM
"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability" Amendment XIV Section 3
But SCOTUS
"responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States"
WHICH IS BACKWARDS
The SCOTUS intent, usurp Congress
But SCOTUS
"responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States"
WHICH IS BACKWARDS
The SCOTUS intent, usurp Congress
Congress can impeach Justices and it can convict and remove them. Lots of checks available to Congress that are not available to other branches. Read the Constitution PLEASE. It is obvious that MOST (NEAR ALL) lawyers have not studied it enough to know what it really says and how it works.
November 15, 2025 at 6:16 PM
Congress can impeach Justices and it can convict and remove them. Lots of checks available to Congress that are not available to other branches. Read the Constitution PLEASE. It is obvious that MOST (NEAR ALL) lawyers have not studied it enough to know what it really says and how it works.
PLEASE, please, please QUIT calling the Government branches co-equal. THEY ARE NOT. CONGRESS by INTENT OF THE FOUNDERS is MORE-EQUAL. President can veto but Congress can override the veto. Congress can declare war, not the President. ...
November 15, 2025 at 6:16 PM
PLEASE, please, please QUIT calling the Government branches co-equal. THEY ARE NOT. CONGRESS by INTENT OF THE FOUNDERS is MORE-EQUAL. President can veto but Congress can override the veto. Congress can declare war, not the President. ...
Why not discuss that the courts no longer have integrity? Michigan can get away with incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, and misreading the law and Constitution and SCOTUS says OK! See usareset.net/forum/viewto... and follow he links for evidence. $5,000 reward for conclusively proving me wrong.
My Case(s) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
November 15, 2025 at 5:15 PM
Why not discuss that the courts no longer have integrity? Michigan can get away with incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, and misreading the law and Constitution and SCOTUS says OK! See usareset.net/forum/viewto... and follow he links for evidence. $5,000 reward for conclusively proving me wrong.
"Separation of powers" is a MYTH!!! The Constitution was totally developed to include checks and balances: Congress makes laws, the President can veto them, the Congress can override that, the Justices can match the laws against the Constitution and declare invalid and Congress can impeach Justices.
November 14, 2025 at 2:12 PM
"Separation of powers" is a MYTH!!! The Constitution was totally developed to include checks and balances: Congress makes laws, the President can veto them, the Congress can override that, the Justices can match the laws against the Constitution and declare invalid and Congress can impeach Justices.
13 SCOTUS Justices is a BAND-AID. I suggest 45 and that most cases before SCOTUS be decided by 3 Justice panels. See more about why and how, particularly the last paragraph at usareset.net/forum/viewto... Thanks
Donald J. Trump v. Norma Anderson, et al. - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
November 9, 2025 at 9:13 PM
13 SCOTUS Justices is a BAND-AID. I suggest 45 and that most cases before SCOTUS be decided by 3 Justice panels. See more about why and how, particularly the last paragraph at usareset.net/forum/viewto... Thanks
So is SCOTUS making Amendment XI one that REMOVES the right of a Citizen of a State to take the State to SCOTUS for "original Jurisdiction." WRONG. Hans v. Louisiana merely agreed with Amendment X, States rights to control their own financial obligations. See usareset.net/forum/viewto...
Hans v. Louisiana (Sue a State Constitutionally) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
November 6, 2025 at 4:22 PM
So is SCOTUS making Amendment XI one that REMOVES the right of a Citizen of a State to take the State to SCOTUS for "original Jurisdiction." WRONG. Hans v. Louisiana merely agreed with Amendment X, States rights to control their own financial obligations. See usareset.net/forum/viewto...
Congress can impeach Justices and it can convict and remove them. Lots of checks available to Congress that are not available to other branches. Read the Constitution PLEASE. It is obvious that MOST (NEAR ALL) lawyers have not studied it enough to know what it really says and how it works.
November 6, 2025 at 2:53 PM
Congress can impeach Justices and it can convict and remove them. Lots of checks available to Congress that are not available to other branches. Read the Constitution PLEASE. It is obvious that MOST (NEAR ALL) lawyers have not studied it enough to know what it really says and how it works.
PLEASE, please, please QUIT calling the Government branches co-equal. THEY ARE NOT. CONGRESS by INTENT OF THE FOUNDERS is MORE-EQUAL. President can veto but Congress can override the veto. Congress can declare war, not the President. ...
November 6, 2025 at 2:53 PM
PLEASE, please, please QUIT calling the Government branches co-equal. THEY ARE NOT. CONGRESS by INTENT OF THE FOUNDERS is MORE-EQUAL. President can veto but Congress can override the veto. Congress can declare war, not the President. ...
He's trying to deal with the fact that SCOTUS has INTENTIONALLY and WRONGLY cited Hans v. Louisiana as making Amend. XI forbid Citizen of a State v. Their State "original Jurisdiction" SCOTUS cases. IT DOESN'T. See usareset.net/forum/viewto.... It's an Amend. X States Rights case--financial control.
Hans v. Louisiana (Sue a State Constitutionally) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
November 6, 2025 at 1:15 PM
He's trying to deal with the fact that SCOTUS has INTENTIONALLY and WRONGLY cited Hans v. Louisiana as making Amend. XI forbid Citizen of a State v. Their State "original Jurisdiction" SCOTUS cases. IT DOESN'T. See usareset.net/forum/viewto.... It's an Amend. X States Rights case--financial control.
I wouldn't vote for Whitmer as President because as Governor she's proven that Michigan agencies can define their own (erroneous) arithmetic, ignore Michigan law, and Michigan courts can ignore such wrongs. And she won't do anything about it! See usareset.net/forum/viewto...
My Case(s) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
October 31, 2025 at 8:22 PM
I wouldn't vote for Whitmer as President because as Governor she's proven that Michigan agencies can define their own (erroneous) arithmetic, ignore Michigan law, and Michigan courts can ignore such wrongs. And she won't do anything about it! See usareset.net/forum/viewto...
Hi Leah, what has he (or you for that matter) done to insure that Amendment IX and Amendment VII are honored by State (say Michigan) Courts and Federal Courts? Are correct arithmetic, valid logic, and understanding law in plain English rights or not? Inquiring minds want to know.
October 23, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Hi Leah, what has he (or you for that matter) done to insure that Amendment IX and Amendment VII are honored by State (say Michigan) Courts and Federal Courts? Are correct arithmetic, valid logic, and understanding law in plain English rights or not? Inquiring minds want to know.
They are contributing to things causing a slow shift in the thinking of the typical MAGA thus dropping Trump's polling numbers and moving politics toward more Democrat wins (AKA Republican losses) in 2026 and beyond. Voting Republicans out of the House and Senate in 2026 can help "We the People."
October 21, 2025 at 7:59 PM
They are contributing to things causing a slow shift in the thinking of the typical MAGA thus dropping Trump's polling numbers and moving politics toward more Democrat wins (AKA Republican losses) in 2026 and beyond. Voting Republicans out of the House and Senate in 2026 can help "We the People."
Too much emphasis on "government" issues at SCOTUS. What about "little guy" emphasis, something non-SCOTUS followers can understand. E.g., Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, Understanding law in plain English (all per Amendment IX and brought in from English Common Law). My 22-387 case is an example.
October 17, 2025 at 4:21 PM
Too much emphasis on "government" issues at SCOTUS. What about "little guy" emphasis, something non-SCOTUS followers can understand. E.g., Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, Understanding law in plain English (all per Amendment IX and brought in from English Common Law). My 22-387 case is an example.
Agreed. SCOTUS has already enshrined incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, misreading plain English, and discarding at least Amendments VII and IX as VALID LAW when done (at least) by a State. See usareset.net/forum/viewto... for one example. You lost already but YOU can lose MORE if you don't act.
My Case(s) - USAreset.net/forum
usareset.net
October 11, 2025 at 5:56 PM
Agreed. SCOTUS has already enshrined incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, misreading plain English, and discarding at least Amendments VII and IX as VALID LAW when done (at least) by a State. See usareset.net/forum/viewto... for one example. You lost already but YOU can lose MORE if you don't act.
FALSE! Judges and Justices don't even have to find something unConstitutional. They can AND DO simply ignore whatever they want such as incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, the clear words understood in English of statute or Constitution ...
"But Congress may ..."
Past the point of disgusting!
"But Congress may ..."
Past the point of disgusting!
October 10, 2025 at 12:50 PM
FALSE! Judges and Justices don't even have to find something unConstitutional. They can AND DO simply ignore whatever they want such as incorrect arithmetic, invalid logic, the clear words understood in English of statute or Constitution ...
"But Congress may ..."
Past the point of disgusting!
"But Congress may ..."
Past the point of disgusting!
Excellent article. I've looked at most of the cases and my take is early Justices not only missed the Petition Clause, they ignored Amendment IX which incorporated the other rights of Englishmen. The early Justices just flat got the Constitution wrong (or they simply were grabbing POWER). Thanks
October 9, 2025 at 3:23 PM
Excellent article. I've looked at most of the cases and my take is early Justices not only missed the Petition Clause, they ignored Amendment IX which incorporated the other rights of Englishmen. The early Justices just flat got the Constitution wrong (or they simply were grabbing POWER). Thanks
Buy the book. Read it. Sure, the author has a bias -- but that doesn't mean the facts are wrong. They are well detailed. Bottom line, Representatives SHOULD impeach several Justices and the Senate should convict them. Ignoring the Constitution IS BAD BEHAVIOR, i.e., not "good Behaviour."
October 9, 2025 at 2:12 PM
Buy the book. Read it. Sure, the author has a bias -- but that doesn't mean the facts are wrong. They are well detailed. Bottom line, Representatives SHOULD impeach several Justices and the Senate should convict them. Ignoring the Constitution IS BAD BEHAVIOR, i.e., not "good Behaviour."
2/2 Your document is useful too (thanks) but difficult to use behind the SCRIBD nonsense which is why I posted my documents to the usareset.net forum (usareset.net/forum/) which dispenses with the nonsense. I only sign up for things I want to participate in and that don't have ridiculous nonsense.
USA Reset 2024 (or 2026)
Suggestions and reasoning for 'the People' to regain control of the United States Government and particularly the courts including the Supreme Court.
usareset.net
October 8, 2025 at 3:47 PM
2/2 Your document is useful too (thanks) but difficult to use behind the SCRIBD nonsense which is why I posted my documents to the usareset.net forum (usareset.net/forum/) which dispenses with the nonsense. I only sign up for things I want to participate in and that don't have ridiculous nonsense.
1/2 I have 30 days yet in which to file. I find givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/R... (Sovereign Immunity and the Right to Petition: Toward a First Amendment Right to Pursue Judicial Claims Against the Government by James E. Pfander, Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 3) very useful.
givemeliberty.org
October 8, 2025 at 3:47 PM
1/2 I have 30 days yet in which to file. I find givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/R... (Sovereign Immunity and the Right to Petition: Toward a First Amendment Right to Pursue Judicial Claims Against the Government by James E. Pfander, Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 3) very useful.