Dear John

SUING JOHN ROBERTS: TIME & MATTER? LOLLOLOL2! I talk to John Roberts like he's my next door neighbor. Recently the court tried to divest itself of knowledge. They attempted to use the law in their defense. If you're the Supreme Court and you are using the law against me then you know: We are a nation of unjust men not of law. My last letter to SCOTUS as time's arrow always does fly forward, toward more awareness not less:

John Roberts and SCOTUS:

 The Justices and clerks of the Supreme Court may not cite Article 3 of the Constitution as a reason to commit what is a crime. No law, US case law, precedent, code, rule, or legal policy exists to protect the employees of the Supreme Court and/or grant them blanket immunity nor does the Supreme Court have a fully vested interest or right to invoke the law as weapon in its defense. By its very nature if the Supreme Court of the United States is now in a position whereby it must use the Constitution to defend itself it is admitting it has committed criminal acts as there is no other reason this Court would ever need to invoke Article 3. It is being invoked to avoid what is a duty and to avoid accepting responsibility for past actions; it is being invoked against me and so against the law and not in support of the law or it’s spirit. Three times the Supreme Court had an opportunity to obey the law and to preserve it; all three times the Supreme Court instead chose to do the one thing John Marshall said the Supreme Court could never, ever do or else this nation would then be an unjust, lawless and dead nation: Deny a living person redress.

 SCOTUS may cite Article 3 in any other case save my own as I am unique and have received unique treatment not in accordance with any legal action undertaken in the US since our founding. SCOTUS treated me uniquely and there is zero reason for it other than what is false, manufactured, discriminatory, sexist, prejudiced and meant to protect employees of SCOTUS at the expense of this nation. It is now creating a brand new impossible standard: In order for a person who is not qualified to hold the office of Executive to be of the ability to then purchase the office of the Executive money and favor had to trade hands over and over from the lone citizens up to the Executive thus all offices under it are already sold. If a lower court existed in accordance with federal law the breach would not have occurred, as it would not be possible. I cannot go to a court that does not exist. You do recall SCOTUS did not exist for any woman arguing her own case or injury, nonlawyer, ethical citizen or my one person until I my own self created it by suing for breach?

 This Court may be of the mistaken belief that John Marshall’s application of US law is that it may act upon the knowledge contained in an emergency application that is a breach of contract suit for liability but then not file the suit itself. This Court, by acting on 11/20/08 to circumvent the Solicitor General aka the people and so enter the suit directly but never file it then: 1, Admitted the emergency exists; 2, Acknowledged the litigant made her case; 3; Committed what is coup; 4, Acted against the person who is the legal authority while protecting those in violation of the law, or, chose personal interest that our not our law; 5, Did nothing to stop crimes already in progress. The Supreme Court acted as if the law did not apply to its own persons nor did Marbury V Madison, that is, it acted as if in the case of Susan Herbert alone, it could ignore the Declaration, Constitution, Marbury and the rules. If it does apply to Susan than it does apply to SCOTUS; if it does not apply to Susan it does not apply to SCOTUS. It’s RECIPROCAL not arbitrary. If you want to be able to cite the Constitution you cannot violate it.

 John Marshall clearly said: If the day ever dawns whereby a litigant who is a voter or natural born citizen makes it to the office of Chief Justice seeking redress for the violation of fully vested protected rights but is denied entry in person the US has become a nation of unjust men and not a nation of law.

Unless treason and overthrow has already occurred under no other conditions would the Supreme Court be invoking Article 3 against any citizen who has a pro se case of constitutional authority in which the sitting but not legal President and Chief Justice is named so then the Supreme Court is acting to stand down this authority and strip all legal power and moral authority from this person in a treasonous manner. TREASONOUS as: all clerks owned the knowledge since early 2007 .

 Nothing grants the Supreme Court legal power other than their one vote, a vote the employees of this court willingly, knowingly and deliberately gave away as we know they all voted in this last election when it was being held against the law, when it constituted treason and after this Court refused to obey, uphold and enforce the law of the US and further not only violated Marbury but breached both governing contracts in order to deny a living person, me, redress of rights that had fully vested and are constitutionally protected. At the time I first pressed suit treason had not occurred. This court cannot now claim it did not know as I am pro se. My petitions or first person testimony is fact not allegation and not hearsay. I informed this court that a coup is papery or bloody and that it was acting to support this coup that was then underway. I informed this court if it allowed my unique and not legal treatment to continue w/o redress in person and then the 08 election to go forward then a situation would, as fact, develop that might become one that was beyond the control of myself or this Court; that is if what I knew to be happening was not checked the Supreme Court might find itself in a situation whereby it could do nothing other than to witness this nation implode.

 Unfortunately for myself and for the citizens who did not participate in this atrocious, outrageous and unconscionable behavior the worst case scenario has arrived. I, at one time, told this Court that it may no longer cite any lesser authority than Marbury; I was being generous by allowing it to cite Marbury as I truly believed this court could not know something. My belief has changed as conditions have changed. I will make an attempt to reason with you but apparently SCOTUS is not willing as David Souter proves so that I now believe the court has no intention of ever obeying the law or Marbury in my case and that is a problem as my case is the Declaration and Constitution:

 SCOTUS threw its own rules out in my case as I made my legal argument. They did exactly what I said they had to do: Start rejecting me or returning documents or injuring me based upon the Constitution as this a constitutional authority case. I’m the authority not you as all you cite is code, rule or policy that does not apply and never did in my case. This letter is SCOTUS saying: Argue this – Art. 3 – against Congress when you come back. I argue it and Congress will win. The Supreme Court MAY NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT OR ARGUE AGAINST ME FOR WHAT IT CAUSED: LAWLESSNESS.

 Congress cited Resolution 511 as law by turning rule into law w/o anybody knowing. HOW? It sent 511 to the House Judiciary Committee who UPHELD IT AS LAW, AS LEGAL, MAKING OBAMA  PRESIDENT VIA A DIRECT ACT OF CONGRESS IN VIOLATION OF THE RIGHTS OF EVERY SINGLE ETHICAL CITIZEN ALIVE! It especially harms women and exactly me.  IT MADE A LAW THAT APPLIES TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ONLY AS IN ONLY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS MAY BREAK THE LAW AND ONLY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS MAY BECOME PRESIDENT. BUT IT MADE IT A LAW BY NOT TAKING A VOTE BUT INSTEAD SENDING IT TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WHO MADE NO OBJECTION!!!! THUS IT NOW IS LAW VIA A DIRECT VOTE OF THE PEOPLE NOT A 3/4 VOTE OF CONGRESS. Now –

 If Congress took that ¾ vote would any sane American give ALL POWER to CONGRESS and ZERO POWER TO THE PEOPLE, TO THE EXECUTIVE OR TO THE JUDICIARY??? Would women or any citizen vote for a law that effectively makes it IMPOSSIBLE for any person to become the President ever unless she is a member of Congress, a Democrat or a Republican, a crook and unless she waits for him to drop dead as she can only get to VP and no higher as CONGRESS is a male majority??? And now always will be??? Just as SCOTUS will be? SCOTUS has been effectively killed; it is now dead in the water. CONGRESS controls it. Nothing it now decides is actually SCOTUS acting independently but CONGRESS acting though SCOTUS. Obama’s first appointment is the stake in SCOTUS’ heart. Rulings out of SCOTUS are arbitrarily obeyed or ignored. Now? As Souter has perfect timing? Too perfect? Anytime Congress or any private interest wants to act it merely uses the House Judiciary Committee instead of the actual, legal process.

 Congress glass ceiling’ed all of us even John Roberts with nasty lawyer tricks and I’m the only one who did not buy it. House committees have RULE not law. This effectively made a House Ruling a LAW.

 This letter proves my claim: The law has been over thrown as it no longer exists as it no longer applies to MEN who are not members of Congress. MOB RULE IS NOW THE ‘LAW’ WITH THE MOB BEING CONGRESS.

 SCOTUS could not adequately defend itself against Congress as the law no longer exists for them as men who are ethical as when the Solicitor General of the US waived the right of all citizens even the clerks and Justices of this court as no objection was made as that objection takes the form of setting that woman or possible recipient’s case for oral argument.  I never asked for a purple heart but I got one, didn’t I? I sacrificed myself on the altar known as SCOTUS as you were supposed to get a clue: In the bible? The man never kills the woman or the baby; he stops at the last second as God is trying to get him over an emotional hurdle: to do God’s will not his own.  You kept on slaughtering us. Seriously, it is like being at Tenochtitlan in 1500. I’m waiting for the SCOTUS steps to turn red. I told you: Only God can kill the innocent as an act of God is just that and not an act of SCOTUS. Why am I being asked to repeat it? To die, survive, die and survive again? BECAUSE YOU MISTAKENLY BELIEVE I CANNOT. And now that I have? Another woman can steal my argument.

If there’s no process and no protection Marshall said: Come to SCOTUS directly. I believe you do not personally like it that a girl made it here first. ONLY A GIRL CAN MAKE THIS CASE! Not may but can. Did a single citizen ever tell a soldier: You are frivolous and delusional as we are not at war and never were here or abroad? Pay an unjust tax and/or tribute and violate the honor bond or else DENIED AND DISMISSED! No soldier and no Commander ever suffered that as that is insanity.

I’m not insane.

 I can argue Article 3 but if I do? Congress wins and is rewarded for its unconscionable actions as Congress finally found a way around SCOTUS and the it seems as if it is permanent. As SCOTUS is now aiding and abetting them, against its own self. Didn’t I ask you WHO harms his own self?

 WHO does a clerk or Justice complain to if their rights are violated, a criminal act is committed against them or if it is made impossible for them to secure justice for their own person or a family member? There is only one person: The sitting President or the people. Congress eliminated those two options. The Justice Department can do nothing. The AG can do nothing. A US attorney can do nothing. The law or the US case law i.e. precedent would have to exist and it does not as of 11/20/08 nor does the vested interest or right as of April 2008. You refused to hear the case, remember? RECIPROCAL MEANS YOU PROTECT ME & I PROTECT YOU; YOU HARM ME & I’LL GET A PACK OF CITIZENS TO HARM YOU. They’ll volunteer as always to march on DC. People charged with the duty to uphold the law cannot by its very nature be in violation of it on their way into office. It causes actual mobs to form. I predict pitchforks, torches ’n all.

This would be WHY mob rule is bad and not good. A mob is a mob is a mob. You can call it Congress; i know a mob when I see, hear and feel one.

 I have changed my mind: A Chief Justice may not act but refuse to file the paper and fail to hear the case orally or in person only as it contains details about him and other criminal activity afoot in the federal government. Why, that would make our chief a crook! John Marshall said if we ever got to the point where even one American citizen, a voter, was denied their right of redress at this level, Chief Justice, then we were a nation of unjust men and not of law. We now know the nation is run by unjust men. The only reason not to file that case? So that people would never know I went up against John Roberts and won. If you best the Chief Justice that makes you President. All that matters is me owning the knowledge and acting upon it. Other people will soon own it too. Or so I told NY.

 I leveraged NY against PA as NY cannot enter a contract with PA unless PA informs it and gets consent. The judge refused to call NY. How can PA then make NY a party? I told NY: “To prove whom actually unselfishly loved these kids? And that the states are guilty as well as the individuals? When these third parties threatened to murder me and my children and told me that they would hound me until I dropped dead of old age if nothing else I invoked the wisdom of Solomon. I let them go. I told my PA attorney to tell their attorney that I wanted to cut my children in half. I said, “Ask them to keep legal action in PA but the kids in NY as we all know they never lived a day in PA after November of 1998. They left PA and went into NY; Cate Austin’s own father even said visits began around December of 1998 and that’s in the court record so they lied to the NY state police and Albany County Court in MAY JUNE and JULY of 1999, a full five moths later. Ask to divide custody as in one state has legal custody but another has physical custody as that then is a federal case. What kind of judge pretends he can’t count to 12 and agrees to cut a living child in half and what mother goes along with it?” The Austins, PA & NY, that’s who. And they made it a contract that became an order of the PA court. Did NY agree or did PA order this without NY’s permission and w/o NY knowing? Did PA call NY and ask NY “Can we, PA, split custody two ways so you get the kids physically but we get them legally?” ? Can NY be made to enter a contract against its will and w/o knowing if CATE AND DAVID AUSTIN, CHARLES & DAPHNE HERBERT & A LAWYER NAMED ARNOLD WEINSTEIN WHO HOLDS A PA LICENSE DO THE NEGOTIATING ON NY’S BEHALF AND THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT POWER AS NOBODY ELECTED THEM, THREE OF THEM ARE NOT RESIDENTS OR NY VOTERS, NOBODY INVOLVED AT THAT TIME HOLDS A NY LICENSE AS CATE FAILED HER TEST TWICE AND IT IS NAMED NOWHERE IN NY’S CONSTITUTION OR IN THE US CONSTITUTION? Nope. Seems to me NY may have an ax to grind against PA and Linda Griffin as my attorney argued this contract as invalid, on the Austin’s part as it never occurred to her PA cannot make NY a party w/o informing NY and getting NY’s consent as in calling Albany County and asking Albany County for consent on NY’s behalf because Albany already said NY DOES NOT CONSENT. I asked the judge to call NY. He said No, he could read but FIVE judges then came and went in only a few months as Susan was on to them in PA. BTW: In Griffin’s own court they said that my kids moved to NY in MAY so in JULY of 1999 they lied under oath to the Albany Court and lied to state police who I sent to their home to prove my kids were living in NY not in PA. CAN THE THIRD DISTRICT APPELLATE COUNT TO 12? AS MAY ALWAYS COMES BEFORE JULY. HOW THEN IS IT TRUTH AND FACT TO TELL NY IN JULY THAT MY KIDS DO NOT LIVE IN NY BUT THEN TELL LINDA GRIFFIN THEY DID LIVE IN NY THEN, AS THEY CAME IN MAY? IF THEY DID NOT TELL THIS LIE WHY THEN DID THE STATE POLICE NOT REMOVE THEM? THEY TOLD THE STATE POLICE MY KIDS WERE VISITING NY BUT DID LIVE IN PA THUS JURISDICTION WAS PA NOT NY, THE SAME LIE THEY TOLD ALBANY COUNTY. So how then did NY come to be involved? PA made or forced NY to be a party; the third parties then committed crimes to enforce it. Hell, I would have told NY in October of 2005: NY, PA violated the Constitution, both yours and the US’ if somebody did not find Greg Rinckey and ask him or otherwise assign him to my case…Now, Is agreeing to cut a child in half no matter how you do it enough proof of injury, proof of harm and proof of death for the third district???”

 It is a matter of time before this directly harms you, as I do not control that. THE GOD controls physics. I only define it for you. God or this universe is always on the side of truth and righteousness. A Court and its Chief not filing the case only as a girl beat them is not what God wants as an all male universe cannot exist at some future point. See what happened to an all male government? It imploded. I know you feel as if, you believe you control the universe, but you do not. The decsions you make each day? God is not suprised by any of them and can counter them. I told you: A sort of homeostasis goes on. The universe respires exactly like a person; it thinks. An intelligent designer can plan for you. These days I know when SCOTUS is up to no good in my case: Actual chains start rattling.

Then the mailman knocks.

 Susan.