Brunson VS. Adams.

[Lastamender]

The Brunson case makes it perfectly clear that any dipshit willing to pay the $325 filing fee for a review by the Supreme Court can get the Supreme Court to look at their claims.

Worried? Is it your money?

 

[Skylar]

Worried? Is it your money?

Jun 26 2023

Petition DENIED.

Aug 21 2023

Rehearing DENIED.

Supreme Court Docket Number No. 22-1028 (Loy Arlan Brunson, Petitioner v. Alma S. Adams, et al.)

Laughing.....nope.

Anyone who pays the filing fee gets a docket number.

 

[Skylar]

All Three Liberal Supreme Court Justices Recuse Themselves in Lawsuit Over 2020 Election Fraud Case​

In the unorthodox lawsuit, Mr. Brunson argued that avoiding an investigation “of how Biden won the election, is an act of treason and an act of levying war against the U.S. Constitution which violated Brunson’s unfettered right to vote in an honest and fair election and as such it wrongfully invalidated his vote.”


In that appeal, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari, or review, in an unsigned order on Jan. 9, 2023. No justices dissented. No reason was provided for the decision. At least four of the nine justices have to vote to approve a petition for certiorari for it to advance to the oral argument stage.


The court denied a petition for rehearing on Feb. 21, 2023, in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented.


This week, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari in Brunson v. Sotomayor in an unsigned order without providing a reason. No justices dissented, but Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson did not participate in the ruling.
The petition had been docketed with the high court on March 29, with Mr. Brunson serving as his own counsel.

All Three Liberal Supreme Court Justices Recuse Themselves in Lawsuit Over 2020 Election Fraud Case - 🔔 The Liberty Daily

If you love the news, check out The Liberty Daily's homepage. (The Epoch Times)—In a rare move, all three liberal Supreme Court justices recused themselves on May 28 from a case involving a lawsuit filed against them for rejecting a previous lawsuit that sought to overturn the results of the...

thelibertydaily.com

Another one who will get the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Trump. Remember Congress voted not to investigate the election and that makes them traitors. And don't the American people deserve a reason this case was denied?

Of course they recused. They were the subject of the petition and thus party to the precedings. This from the SCOTUS website.

"Petition DENIED. Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. See 28 U. S. C. §455(b)(5)(i) and Code of Conduct for Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, Canon 3B(2)(d)(i) (party to the proceeding)."

And what traitors? Again, you've got jackshit that there was any fraud that could have changed the outcome of the election. Its a story you tell....but can't back up.

 

[BackAgain]

I previously reviewed the pleadings and the claims made.

I have only stopped laughing at them because I long ago forgot about this silly case.

 

[PeterPilot]

The Brunson case makes it perfectly clear that any dipshit willing to pay the $325 filing fee for a review by the Supreme Court can get the Supreme Court to look at their claims.

At what step in the process does the court deny cert? Does that cost $325 too?

 

[WorldWatcher]

At what step in the process does the court deny cert? Does that cost $325 too?

The filing fee would be (I assume the amount is correct) paid - when filed. You don't pay another $325 when the case is denied.

So SCOTUS has two types of jurisdiction: Original and Appellate.

• If the filing falls under appellate jurisdiction and it is not a case coming to the court on appeal of a lower court, then the cert is denied based on improper filing with the SCOTUS when it should have been filed with a lower court.
• If the filing is made directly to the SCOTUS based on an original jurisdiction claim, then cert isn't automatically denied. In such case the court will review the original jursidiction claim, * * IF * * the Justices determine (Rule of 4*) it really isn't an original jurisdiction case, cert is denied. If the Justices determine that it * * IS * * an original jurisdiction argument then the Justices review the case based on the merits to decide to proceed or not. Again the Rule of 4* applies.

WW

*** Rule of 4: When the SCOTUS Justices are reviewing cases it takes 4 of 9 Justices to vote to proceed with the case.

 

[Skylar]

At what step in the process does the court deny cert? Does that cost $325 too?

At conference. That's what your paying for with the $325 filing fee: for the SCOTUS to look at your case in conference. Its the first time that the court actually looks at the case.

And the stage where Brunson was tossed out on its ass.

Any dipshit could get the same for $325 filing fee. Even you could.

 

[Lastamender]

At conference. That's what your paying for with the $325 filing fee: for the SCOTUS to look at your case in conference. Its the first time that the court actually looks at the case.

And the stage where Brunson was tossed out on its ass.

Any dipshit could get the same for $325 filing fee. Even you could.

It has not been tossed.

 

[WorldWatcher]

It has not been tossed.

 

[Skylar]

It has not been tossed.

It has been tossed, on its ass, twice.

Jun 26 2023

Petition DENIED.

Aug 21 2023

Rehearing DENIED.

Supreme Court Docket Number No. 22-1028 (Loy Arlan Brunson, Petitioner v. Alma S. Adams, et al.)

The case was tossed out in June of last year with the cert denied. The filers asked for a rehearing. It was denied in August of last year.

I can not stress this point strongly enough, but you have NO idea what the fuck you're talking about. You're delusionally and agressively ignorant about any issue related to the law.

 

[Lastamender]

View attachment 1027515

Those were denied. Not all of the cases have been. this is now a direct violation of te 6th amendment. Do you understand that? That is why the case could still be heard.

 

[Skylar]

Those were denied. Not all of the cases have been. this is now a direct violation of te 6th amendment. Do you understand that? That is why the case could still be heard.

Brunson v. Adams was tossed. That's the case we're discussing. Its in the title of the thread.

And your babble about the 6th amendment is just you offering us the same meaningless pseudo-legal gibberish you always do.

The case was denied. Twice. Brunson v. Adams will not be heard. There is no legal recourse that supersedes the Supreme Court on the issues of granting writs of certiorari. There is no one to appeal the case to.

Again, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're just some dude, raging into the void about legal processes you don't understand, and starkly refusing to do the slightest bit of your own research.

 

[Lastamender]

Brunson v. Adams was tossed. That's the case we're discussing. Its in the title of the thread.

And your babble about the 6th amendment is just you offering us the same meaningless pseudo-legal gibberish you always do.

The case was denied. Twice. Brunson v. Adams will not be heard. There is no legal recourse that supersedes the Supreme Court on the issues of granting writs of certiorari. There is no one to appeal the case to.

Again, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're just some dude, raging into the void about legal processes you don't understand, and starkly refusing to do the slightest bit of your own research.

Watch post 318, troll.

 

[Skylar]

Watch post 318, troll.

Dude. Your 'legal authority' on matter....is Brunson himself, representing himself. A man with a PERFECT record of failure on this issue.

He filed his petition for writ. He was denied by SCOTUS. He filed for a rehearing. He was denied by SCOTUS. He filed a lawsuit against 3 of the female justices. He was denied by SCOTUS..

Now he's filing an emergency petition for what the Supreme Court has ALREADY denied him. To the Supreme Court.

Brunson can ignore every answer he gets from the Supreme Court and literally continue to file indefinitely. The Supreme Court has already given its ruling. The case is done.

You cling to this case because you're indoctrinated, delusional and insane. And as the perfect record of failure for your EVERY Big Lie case demonstrates elegantly, your delusions of legal merit have no connection to reality.

 

[Lastamender]

Dude. Your 'legal authority' on matter....is Brunson himself, representing himself. A man with a PERFECT record of failure on this issue.

He filed his petition for writ. He was denied by SCOTUS. He filed for a rehearing. He was denied by SCOTUS. He filed a lawsuit against 3 of the female justices. He was denied by SCOTUS..

Now he's filing an emergency petition for what the Supreme Court has ALREADY denied him. To the Supreme Court.

Brunson can ignore every answer he gets from the Supreme Court and literally continue to file indefinitely. The Supreme Court has already given its ruling. The case is done.

You cling to this case because you're indoctrinated, delusional and insane. And as the perfect record of failure for your EVERY Big Lie case demonstrates elegantly, your delusions of legal merit have no connection to reality.

OK troll. We have your opinion. Go repeat your stupid ass somewhere else. Thanks.

 

[Skylar]

OK troll. We have your opinion. Go repeat your stupid ass somewhere else. Thanks.

You're confused. I'm not offering my opinion.

I'm offering the ACTUAL denial of petition from the Supreme Court on this issue. Twice.

You're offering us your delusional nonsense, where the Supreme Court is somehow going to overrule itself.....because some dude on the internet -representing himself- paid a $325 filing fee again.

There's a reason why your ilk have a perfect record of failure in court.

 

[Lastamender]

You're confused. I'm not offering my opinion.

I'm offering the ACTUAL denial of petition from the Supreme Court on this issue. Twice.

You're offering us your delusional nonsense, where the Supreme Court is somehow going to overrule itself.....because some dude on the internet paid a $325 filing fee again.

There's a reason why your ilk have a perfect record of failure in court.

 

[PeterPilot]

At conference. That's what your paying for with the $325 filing fee: for the SCOTUS to look at your case in conference. Its the first time that the court actually looks at the case.

And the stage where Brunson was tossed out on its ass.

Any dipshit could get the same for $325 filing fee. Even you could.

SCOTUS refused cert on Brunson just as numerous judges around the country denied review without an evidentiary hearing regarding the mountains of evidence showing the election of 2020 to be highly irregular. Yes, from highest to lowest, most courts in this country today simply support the political status quo.

 

[Skylar]

SCOTUS refused cert on Brunson just as numerous judges around the country denied review without an evidentiary hearing regarding the mountains of evidence showing the election of 2020 to be highly irregular. Yes, from highest to lowest, most courts in this country today simply support the political status quo.

SCOTUS denied the petition for cert the first opportunity they had. And denied the petition for a rehearing at the first opportunity they had.

That's what a $325 filing fee will get you.

 

[Brick Layer]