Dear Honorable Judge or Lawmakers:
Please, Sign if you thinks Courts shoukd be more involed in protecting Civil Rights than in tossing out valid cases. The address is US Court of Appeal, One Courthouse, Way Boston MA-Feel free to copy and paste this letterand mail it to the court.
Dear Honorable Judges:
I am writing to tell you that I am aware of Judiciary practice's which clears dockets. Only its at the cost of failing to protect American Constitutional right of the poor of all races. I want to add my two cents that all matters of public interest, should receive " a complete evidentiary trail", the first time around. Not ejected out of courts System Based upon some non existing technicality, often wholly made up, plus illusionary rule of Court Procedure.
I write in particular to the non-lawyer case Filed In Re: Jan LightfootLane case 08-8039
This is a civil rights matter with a decision from the US Supreme Court Saying Citizens has the right to aid others without Unconstitutional laws or governmental Acts. This is of interest to the public, because unless told otherwise citizen believe their government to be acting within the realms of the law.
Yes I am told Jan is saying as a person doing social service type work, the government has no right to make her legitimate work of housing the homeless more difficult if not down right impossible. She claims a personal injury of Having to work harder and longer when a client of hers is denied aid for which if laws were applied as the legislatures intended they would qualify.
The first time she tried to draft a complaint illustrating her injury the US District Court in Bangor, decided she was a lousy writer, who lacked standing. The when Jan further tried to state the injury as her and any social service who has their client lied to by towns applying reinvented laws according to how meek the person in front of them appears. They have to do additional "casework" when General Assistance is WRONGFULLY denied. Often the resources just are not out there. Then Jan ends up telling the client how to beg at the supermarket. That is not part of her job description. But prior restraints of Towns acts Injures both her client and her right, to see the system work as advertised. As people believe, towns will use their limited discretion with wisdom and compassion.
The Court Said the the second complaint of hopefully more clarity that Regardless of Constitutional limits upon the the government acting beyond their legal scope, without arbitrarily making the work of social service type worker work harder than if laws were applied in accordance with the intent of lawmakers. What the Court said was illogical and unreasonable, to the effect of the government has the right to waste citizens time.
This case illustrates lost of right due to unenforceablity in the America courts. Its time to set aside Clearing dockets for instilling JUSTICE the first time through any of this nations state or federal Courts.
Sincerely
Name
Address City & Country
