American Citizens' Petition to Chief Justice Roberts

PETITION FOR REMEDY BY WRIT OF CERTERIORI to CHIEF JUSTICE PRESIDING IN SENATE

We the people, undersigned citizens, of the United States of America, respectfully petition the Honorable Chief Justice John Roberts to issue an immediate writ of certeriori to review the present Senate rules of impeachment in order to preserve the integrity of our elections, due process and equal protection under the Law, and prevent, in this rarely precedented instance of Executive branch impeachment, this present interpretation of "trial" by the Senate in the Constitution as requirement to function as both Judge and Jury.

We citizens invoke standing for this petition, afforded us by this new technology unforeseen by the Founders, in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison (1803), which established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional—as the precedent for this action by the presiding Judge in the Senate trial designated by the Constitution.

The core issue threatening imminent wrong to our Republic by the conflict between the politically defined procedures and the legislative role of the Senate is of national importance. This urgent Petition for Remedy should be adjudicated while presiding by the Chief Justice, according to Justice Benjamin Cardozo's prescription in:
Helvering v. Davis, 301 US 619 (1937) " the present nation-wide calamity is unsolvable without a concerted Federal effort."

We respectfully petition the Honorable Chief Justice to make the following determinations in view of your knowledge – of the Constitution, of subsequent writings by the Founders; of case precedents in subsequent impeachment trials and opinions; and of the body of work by scholars:

1. What does the legal term "preside" require any Judge to do or refrain from doing, when s/he presides over any impeachment trial? What in the Constitution would limit these duties, rights, and limitations, when the Chief Justice "shall preside" over the impeachment trial concerning the executive branch in the Senate?

2. What are the duties, rights, and limitations of any Jury and in what ways are they expanded or limited in impeachment trials concerning the separate but equal branches of government? In impeachment, is a record of Jury deliberations ever made available to the public aggrieved by its servant and administrative helpers?

3. In impeachment case history, does the presiding judge alone always determine whether witnesses and documents shall be made available, and if not, who or what other body may make this determination?

4. Does the judge instruct the jury regarding the law and require them to uphold it in their decision?
Does the Presiding Judge determine the sentence by assessing the evidence or must s/he abide by the recommendations of the Senate to determine the sentence regardless of political considerations or of the gravity of the offense defined by the Constitution?

5. What is the legal definition of "bribery" and of "quid pro quo"?

Respectfully submitted by the undersigned citizens of the United States of America,