Challenge the Judge's Authority

[Bob Hurt]

You Can Challenge a Judge’s Authority and Win

 

Read this document:

 

http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Lear/ChallengeOfAuthority-9-04.PDF

 

On page 2 you will find reference to Ryder v. US, 115 S.Ct. 2031, 132 L.Ed.2d 136, 515 U.S. 177, which you can read here:

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=U10250

 

According to that ruling, if you challenge any official’s authority, that official has the obligation to prove that authority. 

 

In similar cases of challenge, judges who had been appointed had moved to other districts to take the place of a sick judge, but the Supremes held that those judges’ rulings were valid because they really had been appointed.  However, in the Ryder case, one of the judges had flawed credentials of qualification, so they were not “de facto” officers.

 

“The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886). "The de facto doctrine springs from the fear of the chaos that would result from multiple and repetitious suits challenging every action taken by every official whose claim to office could be open to question, and seeks to protect the public by insuring the orderly functioning of the government despite technical defects in title to office." 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees 578, pp. 1080-1081 (1984) (footnote omitted). The doctrine has been relied upon by this Court in several cases involving challenges by criminal defendants to the authority of a judge who participated in some part of the proceedings leading to their conviction and sentence.”  Ryder v. US, 115 S.Ct. 2031, 132 L.Ed.2d 136, 515 U.S. 177

 

I see it this way:  I should not have to run to the state capitol and beg various departments to give me a judge’s oaths and appointment or election credentials.  The judge should provide them to me upon request or challenge, and until the judge provides them, my challenge has validity and the judge cannot rule.

 

Now, if, regardless of how obtained, I discover a serious flaw in those credentials, I can challenge authority of that judge in court and before the Judicial Qualifications Commission.  If one of those bodies agrees that the judge had deficient credentials, then all of his rulings have no force or effect since the time the credentials enjoyed validity.

 

If we face a corrupt judge or prosecutor, we might be wise to demand their credentials, ALL of the credentials from the time they first took office.  For a Circuit Court judge, those might include:

 

1. Proof of status as an elector (all Florida judges must be electors before they can qualify as candidates)
2. Proof of having sworn the elector’s oath of loyalty to the Constitutions of the US and the State.
3. Proof of status as a bar member for the required number of contiguous years prior to election or appointment as judge (Florida Circuit Court judges must have been bar members for 5 years)
4.  Proof of having sworn the lawyer’s oath administered by the Bar Examiner (in Florida, the Bar Examiner will not hand over a copy of a oath except to the person who swore it, and upon receipt of a $30 fee).
5. Proof of having sworn the judge’s oath for each successive term of office, especially the current term.
6. Proof of having been a candidate for office.
7. Proof of election by the people of the Circuit or appointment by the Governor or Supreme Court in accordance with law.
8. Proof of having accepted the elected position or the appointment in writing.
9. Proof of having submitted a personal financial report and affidavit to the Division of Elections of the State Department of the State each year in office on or before the due date.
10. Proof of having submitted a campaign finances report and affidavit for each of the terms of elected office.
11. Certification by an independent auditor that the financial reports reveal no violations of law.
12. Certification by a notary that each and every oath is sufficient and legally valid, including the signature of the person who swore the oath and the signature or jurat of the official witness.

 

 

If you want to request the oaths or other election documents and financial statements in Florida, contact this person:

 

Brenda Milton

bmi...@mail.dos.state.fl.us

(850) 245-6256

Commission Issuance Section

Florida Bureau of Election Records

107 West Gaines Street, Room L66

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

 

 

I believe the above principles apply to:

 

• Any magistrate, judge, or justice of any court from the lowest in a municipality to the highest in the nation.
• Any State or U.S. Attorney or Assistant State or U.S. Attorney
• Any County or Circuit Clerk
• Any Sheriff

 

See below for additional related rulings.

 

I am not an attorney, I do not give legal advice, and the above does not constitute legal advice.

 

Bob Hurt

 

 

 

 

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. v. U1~TfTED STATES, 113 F2d 284 (5^th  Cir.1940):

“Public officers are merely the agents of the public, whose powers and authority are defined and limited by law. Any act without the scope of the authority so defined does not bind the principal and all persons dealing with such agents are charged with knowledge of the extent of their authority.”

TRUAX v. CORRIGAN, 275 U.S. 312, 332 (1921):

“Thus the guarantee was intended to secure equality of protection not only for all but against all similarly situated.  Indeed, protection is not protection unless it does so. Immunity granted to a class however limited. having the effect to deprive another class however limited of a personal or property right. is last as clearly a denial of equal protection of the laws to the latter class as if the immunity were in favor of, or the deprivation of right permitted worked against, a Larger class.”

"It, of course, tends to secure equality of law in the sense that it makes a required minimum of protection for everyone's right to life, liberty, and property, which the Congress or the Legislature may not withhold Our whole system of law is predicated on the general fundamental principle of equality of application of the law. ‘All men are equal before the law,’ ‘This is a government of laws and not of men,’ ‘No man is above the law,’ are all maxims showing the spirit in which Legislatures, executives and courts are expected to make, execute and apply laws.

VEDERAL CORP INSURANCE v. MERRILL, 332 U.S. 380:

"Whatever the form in which the government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes a risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of the limitations upon his authority."

FROST & FROST TRUCKING CO. v. RAILROAD COMMON OF CALIFORNIA, 271 U.S. 583 the court ruled:

“It has long been established that a State may not impose a penalty upon those who exercise a right guaranteed by the Constitution.”

 

HARMAN v. FORSSENIIIS, 380 U.S. 528, 540 (1965):

"...constitutional deprivations may not be justified by some remote administrative benefit to the State.” Pp. 542-544.

 

Internal Revenue Manual:

“Decisions made at various levels of the court systems are considered to be interpretations of tax laws and may be used by either examiners or taxpayers to support a position.^”

“Certain court cases lend more weight to a position than others. A case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court becomes the law of the land and takes precedence over decisions of tower courts. The internal Revenue Service must follow Supreme Court decisions. For examiners, Supreme Court decisions have the same weight as the Code.”

# # #