Source: http://www.endorganizedcrimeuniverse.com/law.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 15:37:21+00:00

Document:
No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance, with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it.
It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who, by accepting office, participates in its function, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives.
Courts of justice are established not only to decide upon the controversial rights of the citizens as against each other, but also upon rights in controversy between them and the Government, and the docket of this court is crowded with controversies of the latter class.
Shall it be said, in the face of all this, and of the acknowledged right of the judiciary to decide in proper cases, statutes which have been passed by both branches of Congress and approved by the President, to be unconstitutional, that the courts cannot give remedy when the citizen has been deprived of his property by force, his estate seized and converted to the use of the Government without any lawful authority, without any process of law and without any compensation, because the President has ordered it and his officers are in possession?
While by the Constitution the judicial department is recognized as one of the three great branches among which all the powers and functions of the Government are distributed, it is inherently the weakest of them all.
Dependent as its courts are for the enforcement of their judgments, upon officers appointed by the Executive and removable at his pleasure, with no patronage and no control of purse or sword, their power and influence rest solely upon the public sense of a tribunal to which all may appeal for the assertion and protection of rights guaranteed by the Constitution and by the laws of the land, and on the confidence reposed in the soundness of their decisions and the purity of their motives. [106 U.S. at 223] United States v. Lee (1882), 106 U.S. 196, 27 L.Ed. 171, 182, 1 S.Ct. 240.
"No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it." United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. at 220, 27 L.Ed. 171, 1 S.Ct. 240.
“No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it.' United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. [196,] 220, [27 L.Ed. 171, 1 S.Ct. 240] [(1882)]." 438 US, at 506, 57 L Ed 2d 895, 98 S CT 2894.
4. According to SHEPARD'S UNITED STATES CITATIONS: UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT REPORTS, LAWYERS' EDITION, 1994, 1996 Supp., 1998 Supp., 2000 Supp., none of the three cases has been reversed, vacated, or overruled.
Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen.
In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious.
If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law, it invites every man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy.
6. Amendment VIII: “Nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.
1. THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS OF 1866.1870, 42 U.S.C. 1981.
2. THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS OF 42 U.S.C. 1983.
3. THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS OF 1871 42 U.S.C 1985 AND 1986.
4. THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS OF 1866, 1870, 42 U.S.C. 1988.
"The rule of equality... requires the same means and methods to be applied impartially to all the constituents of each class, so that the law shall operate equally and uniformly upon all persons in similar circumstances".
"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. But the framers and adopters of the (Fourteenth) Amendment were not content to depend... upon the spirit of equality which might not be insisted on by local public opinion. They therefore embodied that spirit in a specific guaranty."
Justice Bradley, "It may be that it is the obnoxious thing in its mildest form; but illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way; namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. This can only be obviated by adhering to the rule that constitutional provisions for the security of persons and property should be liberally construed. A close and literal construction deprives them of half their efficacy, and leads to gradual depreciation of the right, as if it consisted more in sound than in substance. It is the duty of the Courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. Their motto should be Obsta Principiis.
"It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside supreme law finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this Court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violations of the principles of the Constitution."
Robb v. Connolly, 111 U. S. 624, 637, 28 L. ed. 542, 4 S. Ct. 544.
Upon the state courts, equally with the courts of the United States, rests the obligation to guard and enforce every right secured by that Constitution [of the United States].
Cooper v. Aaron (1958), 358 U.S. 1, 18, 3 L.Ed.2d 5, 17, 78 S.Ct. 1401.
Every state legislator and executive and judicial officer is solemnly committed by oath taken pursuant to Art 6, cl 3, "to support this Constitution." Chief Justice Taney, speaking for a unanimous Court in 1859, said that this requirement reflected the framers' "anxiety to preserve it [the Constitution] in full force, in all its powers, and to guard against resistance to or evasion of its authority, on the part of a State. . . ." Ableman v Booth (US) 21 How 506, 524, 16 L ed 169, 176.
No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.
Ex parte Virginia, 100 US 339, 346-347, 25 L Ed 676 (1880).
Even Congress itself appeared to acknowledge, at least until recent years, that Government-created and -controlled corporations were part of the Government.
The Government Corporation Control Act of 1945, discussed above, which brought to an end an era of uncontrolled growth of Government corporations, provided that, without explicit congressional authorization, no corporation should be acquired or created by "any officer or agency of the Federal Government or by any Governmental corporation for the purpose of acting as an agency or instrumentality of the United States ...." sec 304(a), 59 Stat, at 602 (emphasis added).
Any court, government or government officer who acts in violation of, in opposition or contradiction to the foregoing, by his own actions, commits treason and invokes the self-executing Sections 3 and 4 of the 14th Amendment and vacates his office. It is the duty of every American Citizen to oppose all enemies of this Nation, foreign and DOMESTIC.
Lorenson v. Superior Court (1950), 35 Cal.2d 49, 59-60, 216 P.2d 859.
A conspiracy with or among public officials not to perform their official duty to enforce criminal laws is an obstruction of justice and an indictable offense at common law.
Ex Parte Young, 209 US 123.
"No change in ancient procedure can be made which disrupts those fundamental principles . . . which . . . protect the citizen in his private right and guard him against the arbitrary action of the government."
A judge is not such at all times, and for all purposes, when he acts he must be clothed with jurisdiction and acting without this, he is but an individual assuming an authority he does not possess.
Blincoe v. Head, 44 SW 374, (1898); Reed v Taylor, 78 SW 892, (1904) judges . . . who step outside of the circle of duty thus drawn by the letter of the statute, they must answer in damages to such individuals as may suffer from such unauthorized acts.
McDonald v. Goodman et al, 239 SW2d 97, (1951)e is . a conspiracy is a corrupt or unlawful combination or assuming an authority he does not possess.
Title 18 USC SECTION 241, CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS.
"All law (rules and practices) which are repugnant to the Constitution are VOID". Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states "NO State (Jurisdiction) shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights, privileges, or immunities of citizens of the United States nor deprive any citizens of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, ... or equal protection under the law", this renders judicial immunity unconstitutional.
Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984); 104 S. Ct. 1781, 1980, 1981, and 1985.
By law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person). When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the Judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges' orders are not voidable, but VOID, and of no legal force or effect.
THE BELOW ARE FEDERAL LAW SUITS I HAVE FILED AND THE LAWS WERE CRIMINALLY DISREGARDED. BUT GOD!
SOUTHERN DISTRICT FEDERAL COURT DISREGARD OF HATE CRIMES IN SNYDER VS. YONKERS PUBLIC SCHOO BOARD, SOUTHERN DISTRICT COURT 03 CIV 0263 AND O3 9857.
SEE THE HEMPSTEAD HATE CRIME SETTLEMENT USED AS LAW TO CONTINUE HATE CRIME ADMINISTRATION. SEE BELOW.
RELEASOR, RELEASOR'S heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns ever had, now have or hereafter can, shall or may, have for, upon, or by reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever from the beginning of the world to the day of the date of this RELEASE.
(1) Violation of 42 U.S.C. 1964,) 198I, 1983, 1985 and 2000(d)(e); (2) Violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 13th, 14th, and 19th Constitutional Amendments; (3) Violation of 18 U.S.C. 241, 201, 209; (4) Violation of the Racketeer Influenced a Corrupt organizations Act (RlCO); (5) Defamation; 6. Libel; (7) Constitutional Tort; (8) Breach of contract; (9) Coercion; (10) Attempted Murder; (11) Slavery; (12) Violation of U.S. Black Codes; (13) Breach of Duty of Fair Representation; (14) Violation of Federal Law and/or any state law; (15) And all other claims or causes of action included therein.
Whenever the text hereof requires, the use of singular number shall include the appropriate plural number as the text of the within instrument may require.
personally came Miriam Snyder, to me known, and known to me to be the individual described in, and who executed the foregoing RELEASE, and duly acknowledged to me that she executed the same.
Notary Public, State of New York No.
THE ABOVE IS A HATE CRIME ADMINISTRATION SETTLEMENT WHERE MONEY WAS USED AS LAW TO CONTINUE, EXCUSE AND ESCALATE DOCUMENTED HATE CRIME ADMINSTRATIONS. THE DOCUMENTATION IS WORTH MORE THAN THE MONEY.
PLEASE NOTE THE HEMPSTEAD PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ASSOCIATION LAWYER, DANIEL GALLINSON, HELPED NEGOTIATE THIS HATE CRIME SETTLEMENT. DURING THE LAW SUIT/ SETTLEMENT TIME, HE WAS MIRACULOUSLY AND TIMELY, INFLICTED WITH CANCER. IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER, HE WAS KILLED VIA INDUCED CANCER AND HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATION. HE IS DEAD, SERIAL KILER BOYDEN GRAY STYLE, OVER THIS LAW SUIT! SEE THE NYS BOYDEN SECTION TO SEE HOW THESE KILLINGS WORK.
DURING THIS SAME TIME, MR, KEEFE THE UNION PRESIDENT ALSO, MIRACULOUSLY AND TIMELY, BECAME INFECTED WITH CANCER OVER THE ABOVE LAW SUIT. ALSO, PLEASE NOTE, DURING THIS TIME, MY MOTHER TOO WAS INFLICTED WITH CANCER. WE HAVE THREE DEADLY AND TIMELY NEWLY ERUPTED CANCERS OVER THIS ONE LAW SUIT. THIS PATTERN IS CONSISTENT WITH SERIAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY STERILIZATION AND INDUCED CANCER SCIENTIFIC OBSTRUCTIONS BACKGROUND. SEE THE BOYDEN NYS AND BOYDEN JUDGE KILL SECTIONS.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 Art 6
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.