Shawn Edward White Notice of People S Assembly and Notice of Corrective Wisdom From The Supreme Court 6040944476589083412

Sew

Uploaded by

shawnwhit33757

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

7 views2 pages

Shawn Edward White Notice of People S Assembly and Notice of Corrective Wisdom From The Supreme Court 6040944476589083412

Sew

Uploaded by

shawnwhit33757

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 2

To:

From: Shawn Edward White

Notice of People’s Assembly and Notice of Corrective Wisdom From The Supreme Court

Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal and Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

Shawn Edward White

I, ______________________ one of the People (as seen in the 50 state constitutions), Sui
Juris, do present you with this notice that you may provide immediate due care;

Please take notice that the people have assembled and realized that agencies were being
given faux authority to take liberty, property, and rights from the People, without the
constitutionally required due process with courts of record and trials by jury. The People have
come together to put the Supreme Court and Federal Legislature on notice, who in return have
openly spoken about the violation of rights and problems with the unlawful practices that have
been run by attorneys who have not understood the law (please see evidence from Justice
Gorsuch communication in a recent court case below):

Discussion in Case :
SEC v. Jarkesy
Docket Number: 22-859
Date Argued: 11/29/23

JUSTICE GORSUCH: So, Mr. Fletcher, with respect to your argument that
Congress can move something from courts into agencies and the Seventh
Amendment doesn't speak to that because it's not a suit, I think Noel Webster
described a suit as any action or process for the recovery of a right or a claim
before any tribunal, which would seem to be a problem. That's a pretty
contemporaneous definition. And then Justice Brennan in Granfinanciera I
think addressed your argument pretty squarely when he said Congress cannot
eliminate a party's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial merely by
relabeling the cause of action and placing jurisdiction in an administrative
agency. Thoughts?
MR. FLETCHER: Yeah. So I -- I guess I think that's still inconsistent with what
the Court has said in Granfinanciera.
JUSTICE GORSUCH: I just quoted from Granfinanciera.
MR. FLETCHER: I -- I'm sorry. I -- I misspoke. I don't think that's what the
Court held in Granfinanciera. It's inconsistent with what the Court said.
JUSTICE GORSUCH: Are you saying I misread it, Mr. Fletcher?
MR. FLETCHER: No, Justice Gorsuch. I'm saying --
JUSTICE GORSUCH: You said -- you said that that's a purely taxonomic
change.
MR. FLETCHER: Yes.
JUSTICE GORSUCH: And that that's not enough to render it no longer a suit
for purposes of the Seventh Amendment, right?
MR. FLETCHER: Yes. I think, in context, Granfinanciera is talking about a
proceeding that was in a bankruptcy court in the Article III setting. I think the
Court's subsequent cases, including Oil States, have Heritage Reporting
Corporation said, if you're permissibly in an Article III tribunal, then the
Seventh Amendment doesn't have independent work to do. I apologize for
misidentifying the case I was relying on.
JUSTICE GORSUCH: All right. But it -- it would seem strange. And we don't
usually say the government can avoid a constitutional mandate merely by
relabeling or moving things around. It's -- it's as much a violation to do
something indirectly as it is directly we usually say, right?

Maxim: Maxim of Law 4b. He who does a thing by another is considered as

doing it himself [i.e., the acts of an agent are the acts of the principal.] Broom,
Max. 817, 818, et seq.;A Collection Maxims of Law by Charles A. Weisman

Please take notice that as agency workers, state judges, presiding judges, state legislators,
etc… that you are bound by the Constitutions that you have all sworn to uphold, and from this
time forward please be advised that taking children, cars, houses, weapons, rights, property,
etc.. without a trial by jury in a court of record following the course of the common law is
unlawful. Please also take further notice that attorneys, who don’t have their name on the line,
as they are not in positions of service and contract with the people, presenting you with the idea
that it’s acceptable to trample the people’s rights by device or artifice does not in any way
remove your responsibility for your wrongdoings. Furthermore, there is another element of
wrong being committed when you are working in a federal program and make money outside of
your normal salary for carrying out the functions of that program, leaving one with unclean
hands on top of taking property or rights from the people without right! All past cases that
bypassed the common law are unlawful. Therefore, it is my immediate demand, wish, and order
that you restore all that has been unlawfully taken without constitutionally mandated due
process, and notify all those who were harmed, or you agree that any wrong that is done in this
regard in the future, or that has not been corrected from past trespasses, is done purposely,
with full knowledge, intent and malice, and will be recognized as such by the People, whom you
swore to serve and protect. This notice is sent to you in the peace and love of Jesus Christ, that
you may repent and do works worthy of the same.