Supreme Court Fiddling While Rome Burns

[solutions]

.
Supreme Court Fiddling While Rome Burns - America’s Apartheid “Justice” System


---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Supreme Court Fiddling While Rome Burns
From: Solutions
Date: Wed, January 5, 2011 10:47 am PST
To: John Karls
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re your Q&A-22, what was the Question for Review presented in the Supreme Court appeal petition in Karls v. Goldman Sachs?


---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Fiddling While Rome Burns
From: John Karls
Date: Thu, January 6, 2011 9:56 pm GMT+1
To: Solutions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Question for Review was –

Are the lives of 10 million California inner-city children being destroyed by the use of unpublished and un-citable legal opinions to achieve the objective of giving the 10 million California inner-city children “separate and inherently unequal” substantive results which are diametrically opposed to well-settled law and which are, therefore, Unconstitutional Denials Of Due Process of Law and Equal Protection Of The Law because, as unpublished and un-citable, they do not affect the law enjoyed by other citizens?

Since such a Holocaust involving the destruction of the lives of 10 million Americans (vs. only 6 million lives destroyed in the World War II Holocaust) would presumably merit the review of the Supreme Court IF THERE WERE A SUFFICIENTLY-NOVEL CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE INVOLVED (WHICH, OF COURSE, THERE WAS), it would be interesting to know –

(A) whether the summary of the Appeal Petition prepared by the sole recent law school graduate among the pooled Supreme Court Clerks (which was the only thing the Supreme Court Justices would ever see) described the Question Presented in such a way as to guarantee a rejection of the Review Petition, or

(B) whether the Supreme Court Justices rejected the Appeal Petition because it had not been submitted by “a member of the club” – one of the handful of attorneys who regularly appear before the Supreme Court (such as John Roberts before he became Chief Justice, and such as David Boies and Theodore Olson who were opposing counsel in Bush v. Gore but are now co-counsel representing the plaintiffs in the gay-rights litigation currently pending before the Ninth Circuit), all of whom require 7-figure retainers up front.

****************************
Solution’s Editorial Note:

The reason for the subject of this posting (Supreme Court Fiddling While Rome Burns – America’s Apartheid “Justice” System) is that none of the Appeal Petitions selected by the Supreme Court instead of Karls v. Goldman Sachs, et. al., involves a social issue that holds a candle in importance to a Holocaust that is destroying the lives of 10 million American inner-city children, or involves a legal issue that holds a candle in importance to the burning “separate and inherently unequal” Constitutional issue of America’s Apartheid judiciary seizing on the relatively-recent practice of refusing to publish, or permit the citation of, “leper decisions” to provide a toilet down which “separate and demonstrably unequal” decisions involving African Americans can be flushed.