Source: http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2013_09_22_archive.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 14:55:51+00:00

Document:
"A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is a country in which nobody is ever truly safe."
You only think you have RIGHTS. Hopefully you will never need them, because, you have NO RIGHTS. Your asserted liberty / freedoms have no protection. The Black Robed Royalist Judiciary has usurped "an excess of power." They are hoping you will NOT discover their malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid  cover up.
We hold a "4-Year-Old Can Be Sued." We can bail out the automaker's to the tune of $75-$120+ billion. We can spend $1.3 trillions and rising on an attempt at nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can make-work to stimulate the economy with $787 billion. We can bail out the Banks to the tune of $2.5 Trillion. We hold parents responsible for the suicides of the victims of bullying perpetrated by their minor children.
But we cannot AFFORD to even consider the possibility of malice, corruption, dishonesty, "sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" of "our chief justice (judges), our officials (prosecutors), or any of our servants (law enforcement)" and compensate their victims?
We live in a lawless society where anyone from your spouse, to a traffic cop, to a would be judge, to a court house of state judges, to a federal magistrate judge, to an Article III Federal Judge to the Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court can take your inalienable rights and you can not even talk about it, much less bring the issue to a public hearing!!!!!!! They all have immunity!!!!!!
The Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011, asserted "a"stringent standard of fault," lest municipal liability under §1983 collapse into respondeat superior."
· My QUESTION is how did the liability for "property in rights" get reduced from the Revolutionary War's, Civil War's, Constitution's and "the statute's (§1983) raisons d'etre" ???
· What good are rights if the "property in rights" is not protected???
· Why have a constitution, much less statute law; if they can be disregarded as disposable property in the hands of those who are commissioned to provide the protection of the "property in rights"???
The Article III, Black Robed Royalist, Supreme Court, a delegated authority, acting under a sworn to constitutional commission has awarded themselves and others "absolute immunity" from their constitutional commission to "do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid" i.e., the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America?" by DENYING the constitutional assurance of governmental accountability with 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, law and equity?
If the United States mean to obtain or deserve the full praise due to wise and just governments, they will equally respect the rights of property and the property in rights: they will rival the government that most sacredly guards the former; and by repelling its example in violating the latter, will make themselves a pattern to that and all other governments."
"It is difficult to conceive how, in society where rights and duties are relative and mutual, there can be tolerated those who are privileged to do injury legibus soluti, and still more difficult to imagine how such a privilege could be instituted or tolerated upon the principles of social good." (White v. Nicholls, 44 U.S. (3 How) 287 (1845)).
"Many seem to be unconscious of the facts or unwilling to recognize them. Some seem to think we are standing just where we stood when the Constitution was framed and when nobody but patriots took part in public affairs (If such was ever the case?). Such men worship the past with idolatrous devotion and grow hoarse in pleading for the Constitution as it was, but are blind to whatever is near or around them."
The intention of We the People was to give value to the "property in rights" of the newly emancipated citizens. This was clearly the intent of the law. The Law was clearly a constitutionally authorized ex industria congressional power to enforce the recently enacted 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, "Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
"This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly" (Scott v. Stansfield, L.R. 3 Ex. 220, 223 (1868), quoted in Bradley v. Fisher (1871), supra, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350.).
We the People have forgotten the "property in rights" asserted by James Madison in 1792. We the People have to RELEARN to "equally respect the rights of property and the property in rights" ("Property" James Madison Essays for the National Gazette 1791- 1792).
"Immunity is given to crime, and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence of effective redress." "The courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity." I say it NOW, Thursday, September 26, 2013!!! Justice William O. Douglas said it in 1961 and 1967.  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said respectively said it originally in 1871 at the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985).
 Legibus solutus is a Latin phrase which can be translated with the phrase "not subject to the law . "

References: v. 
 §1983
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1983