|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Report Comment
"Redress of grievances against the Supreme Court?
By what procedure does one redress grievances against the Court itself, without appeal of a lower court case? When the Court makes a series of god-awful bad calls, which damage tens of thousands of innocent lives, particularly military families, and cost hundreds of millions of dollars in waste and abuse, and lead to Jim-Crow-like laws against a significant minority of people who will never be a realistic threat to anyone or become criminal, how does one ask the Court to review its own decisions?
The 1983 Barefoot v. Estelle decision in particular raised psychiatrists up to a near-infallible priesthood and set up a moral hazard for the subsequent insurance scams by psychiatric hospitals that did all of that. All to kill just one prisoner. Witness the 1990s "Profitable Addictions" series by the Houston Chronicle, and other sources.
When no lawyer will take on such a case, how does one Pro se, in forma pauperis petitioner get the Court to take responsibility for the bad and perhaps unintended consequences of its own actions and decisions? If the only answer is a terse "follow the Rules", then one gets the idea that the Court has abandoned any pretense of justice and accountability. That it simply does not care what kind of hell it wreaks upon the rest of us.
Getting such a petition thrown back in one's face certainly makes that point. This problem has festered for decades up to this day. Did the Founding Fathers and their Constitution really intend for a Court to be so haughty and arbitrary that no one can ever ask it directly to reconsider the horrendous results of its own bad decisions, in the face of such continuing suffering and injustice?"
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
