Talk:Federal Judicial Center

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States courts and judges

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Science Policy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Judicial Center is a waste of taxpayer money!

The problem with our Judiciary today is that the people have lost faith in it.

I say this from experience. From the day Constitution was written the people were told by the framers and the preparers of the Federalist papers, as well as Thomas Jefferson and others t hat our govt was to be limited and any act contrary to the Constitution was VOID and any reviewing judge of an unauthorized act had to declare it void.

But t he corruption in our courts today have made a mockery of founders and the Constitution. One judge simply wont enforce the Constitution, pecedent of the Supreme Court, or any law if it has a negative effect on the judge that made the erroneous and illegal ruling.

Judges have literally changed the terms of contract and changed the terms disclosed under federal law to cover the butt of a lower court judge. When sued for impairing a contract and thereby denying the right to enforce that same contract, each judged admitted the illegal acts. But the federal court simply dismissed the case and refused to declare their acts VOID. So the ruling stands inspite of our Supreme Court having ruled any such act that violates the Constitution is "void on its face".

The Supreme Court is just a guilty. When the case was presented to them, they refused to accept it.

In fact each court (fed. trial court, court of appeals and SC all either dismissed the case without comment, denied the appeal without comment, or denied review without comment. Thus the "Black Hole" of the judiciary is still at work.

Obviously our Congress wont review a court or a judges actions. It wont impeach or investigate the illegal acts of our courts. Sen. Feinsteins office informed me that because the Judiciary is a equal and separate branch of govt, the Congress had no jurisdiction to review the acts of judges.

Funny, our founders told us that the Judiciary was the third and weakest branch of govt and they wouldnt dare violate the Constitution of laws of this nation for they would be impeached and removed immediately. Thus Congress has always had the right and DUTY to oversee the acts of every federal judge - it simply wont do it delegated duties>

It is my belief that we must amend the Constitution so the people can directly remove any judge for illegal acts. This is necessary because Congress "has no authority to do so" according to Sen. Feinstein or Rep. Woolsey.

Judicial Councils, Judicial Center, etc are no more than wastes of taxpayer money we can no longer afford.

Ask yourself, how can an impairment of a legal contract go through 4 reviewing courts and be dismissed when the judges admitted they had impaired the contract and the Constitution prohibits that act???

Who does one complain to when the courts and congress wont abide by the Constitution? We rid ourselves of a King the last time the people werent listen to. Perhaps it is that time again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zumabtrancas (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]