The Michigan Supreme Court and SCOTUS remind us how judges and Justices simply ignore the Constitution by NOT making decisions. See my case 22-387 for one example. Correct arithmetic, valid logic, and understanding law in plain English are NO LONGER GUARANTEED by the U.S. Constitution.

Dan Deacon @dtdeacon.bsky.social & I just uploaded a new/revised version of our paper “Legalistic Noncompliance.” It’s about the Trump admin’s noncompliance with court orders - and how they’re using legal arguments to paper that over and conceal their defiance papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Visit congress.gov daily and demand all your Congresspeople RESCIND the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) recently unveiled "Merit Hiring Plan" otherwise you will be very likely to become a victim of an incompetent but POWER hungry government "employee" (AKA dictator loyalist).

This is absolutely essential reading in case you’re wondering what the wholesale dismantling of civil service work has to do with you. data4democracy.substack.com/p/how-to-dis...

Friends!!! I have a ton of ARCs of my next novel to give away! Like and repost this to enter. I’ll pick a winner tonight (Thurs May 29) at 9 pm Eastern. US only sorry ❤️

Thank you @algreen.house.gov for your critical remarks on the floor of the House of Representatives this evening!! We must impeach, convict, and remove Trump immediately. #Impeach47 impeachtrumpagain.org @fsfp.bsky.social youtu.be/05S_2DLsK8M?...

In olden times this same trick was done with a "white elephant," rare -- yes, but expensive to keep. Or even just an elephant or any wild animal for which care and maintenance would be beyond the reach of the recipient.

NO, NO, NO! Vote EVERY Congressperson who DOES NOT take active PUBLIC steps to IMPEACH Trump or use Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 18 against Trump OUT OF OFFICE. Congress MUST ALSO impeach 9 "Justices" that IGNORED the Constitution's "But Congress may..." "supreme Law of the Land."

He, and 8 other (so called) "Justices" completely ignored "But Congress may..." on March 4, 2024 thus totally overriding the Plain English Understanding of Amendment XIV. Astute people in Colorado, Maine, Illinois and elsewhere were clearly doing their Constitutional duty and SCOTUS said "hell no."

Stay current on what Congress is doing. Frequently let ALL your Congresspeople know what you want (congress.gov). Make it clear that BOTH Democrats and Republicans that continue to abandon their responsibilities to "the People" will be voted OUT ASAP. Then, maybe, they will start to think and act.

"But Congress may..." ignored by SCOTUS, all 9 "Justices." "In all Cases...in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." SCOTUS totally ignores. Under appeal to Brett Kavanaugh: usareset.net/forum/viewto.... Hans DID NOT overturn the Constitution! Discussion?

Layoff saga continued: The first image shows my SCOTUS 22-387 Rehearing questions which 1. seems to be Amendment IX to me and 2. seems to involve the whole Federal United States State/Federal structure and the Supreme Court's obligation to support it as the Justices' oaths require. But denied again.

1/ Layoff saga continued: The first image shows my first question in my petition for certiorari to SCOTUS. The particularly important items are h, i, and j. But all appear equally valid to me. The second image is the SCOTUS case 22-387 docket where the 2022 Nov. 10 & Dec. 01 Michigan NONRESPONSES. +

Layoff saga continued: The first image shows the Michigan Supreme Court's Order regarding the Reconsideration request. Again, "not persuaded." No review whatsoever of the "However..." sentence. The second image shows the relevant MI Constitution change for 1963 vs the 1908 version. "Reason" ignored!

Layoff saga continued: The first three images below are the entire argument I presented when requesting a Reconsideration by the Michigan Supreme Court. The 4th image is a NOT ALLOWED by the rules UIA Reply and their first addressing of the MCL 421.48(2) "However..." sentence. Appalling on its face!

Layoff saga continued: OK, since the Michigan (MI) Court of Appeals denied without any evidence of reading I tried simplified questions in the first below image on the MI Supreme Court. They, disregarding the MI Constitution, said "we are not persuaded" (that is NOT a MI Constitution "reason").

Layoff saga continued: First image is part of my request to the Michigan Court of Appeals for Reconsideration of the initial denial. It shows that the Michigan Constitution clearly mandates that both law and facts be reviewed by the court. Below that I show the ignored law. Image 2 shows 2nd denial.

Layoff saga continued: Below image is the full Michigan Appeals Court response. No effort whatsoever to even at least de novo review the relevant law. Useless and an apparent abuse of power. (But you'll notice it was real easy to do!)

Layoff saga continued: Images show questions appealed. Quoted: MCL 421.48 (particularly "However..." of (2)), relation to MCL 421.27(c), MCL 421.38, MI Const. Art. VI Sec. 28, MCL 421.34(7) (particularly "Unless..."), MCL 408.471, CBA Art. 21, MCR 7.116(G), CBA Art. 10, MCL 24.306, Code R 792.11432

Tell your Representatives to vote No on NORRA. Justice in one place should be the same in others. NORRA's intent (www.congress.gov/bill/119th-c...) is to let the Executive branch pre-prepare many Constitutionally defiant efforts and release them all simultaneously to overwhelm the justice system!!!

What’s the remedy for a supermajority SCOTUS whose rulings betray the US Constitution?

@dananessel.bsky.social I was at the MI capitol Saturday and heard your speech. Yes, you took an oath to the Constitution. I'm not sure why you'd enforce it against Trump administrators but not Michigan administrators. Michigan (and YOU) support Incorrect Math, Invalid Logic, and Ignoring MI Law!

Layoff saga continued: This is the entire Court Reconsideration Order/Denial. Note that it is NOT even for the correct case, the correct case number is simply written in. It is for a related Superintending Control case. The Judge fails to recognize that the MCAC/UIAC cannot declare a case "final." +

Layoff saga continued: Selected text from my Request for Reconsideration. I could have done a better job but at the time I was still operating under the belief that the law actually meant something and that the prior submitted evidence would be read and taken into consideration. Silly me!

Funny thing though. The Constitution also gives SCOTUS ZERO power to alter the Constitution such as taking Amendment XIV, Sec. 3 "But Congress may..." and grabbing that Congressional POWER unto themselves unanimously (9) and overriding at least Colorado, Maine, and Illinois' Constitutional adherence

Layoff saga continued: Images have complete text of Court DENIAL. I've highlighted the main issues. In the second image reopen was considered but the also available rehearing was ignored. The Michigan Constitution's mandate of review of "authorized by law" ignored the bsky.app/profile/jim-... +

Layoff saga continued: Excerpts from my Brief to the 30th Circuit Court. In the 1st image the highlighted part is my plain English understanding of the "However" sentence of MCL 421.48(2). For both "contrary to law" and "evidence" (2nd image) the law, evidence, and text are clearly in my favor.

SCOTUS **claims** they removed Article III, Section 2, Clause 2's "In all Cases ... in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction" from the Constitution via Hans v. Louisiana, 134 US 1 - Supreme Court 1890. Let me know if YOU agree usareset.net/forum/viewto...

Layoff saga continued: The first image shows the MCAC (now reidentified as UIAC) denial of rehearing due to no "good cause" but doesn't mention the under 30 day appeal MCL 421.34(7) also allowed and still ignores .48(2) "However" sentence. Second image shows the over 1-year late Notice of Request.

Layoff saga continued: Having not heard back (except for fax machine OK confirmations) from the MCAC for 8+ months I sent a status query (first image) but didn't hear back from that either so filed a Superintending Control Complaint in the 30th Circuit Court. Filed twice because Court Clerk wanted +

Layoff saga continued: The first, second, and top of the third images show my reconsideration request to the MCAC and the bottom of the third image and the fourth image show the additional request for presenting argument. Do you think the MCAC will pay any attention?

Layoff saga continued: Look particularly at the last sentence in (7), "Unless..." which clearly leaves both appeal to MCAC and judicial review open as are explicitly codified in the second image R792.11432(1). But if you look back at the denial, MCAC ignores the rule and pushes judicial review only.

Layoff saga continued: The first image is the MCAC first denial. Observe that nowhere in it is the MCL 421.48(2) "However..." sentence re vested vacation noted. The top part of the second image is a union attorney* request for rehearing and below that is the MCAC second denial. No "However" mention.

Layoff saga continued: Observe the next to last and last paragraph the first image, the ALJ response: rehearing denied but no mention whatsoever of reconsideration of the second sentence of MCL 421.48(2) re vested vacation earnings. The second image shows I timely appealed.

Why the Republicans are so enamored of Trump and Musk is beyond me and I've been a Republican voter in general for over 50 years. Killing our country for a despotic dictatorship is NOT in our interests. Shut down the government, bring Congress back into full session, and get a real CR or budget!

Accepting a budget that does not meet the needs of the country just to avoid some negatives is NOT in our best interests. Then STAY IN SESSION AND GET THE HOUSE OF REPS BACK IN SESSION. Use your Art. I POWERS. Read them all again, particularly Sec. 8, Cl. 15 & 18. BE PRODUCTIVE. Sent to my Senators

Hey everyone don't just read, watch, or listen. Let's work within the law and on all our Congresspeople NOW. Visit congress.gov and let all your Congresspeople (even, if not especially, Republicans) know what you want. Amendment XXV, impeachment, Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 15 & 18 are all available NOW.

More on the layoff saga. Below are two images showing the text of my response to the ALJ. It's all important but the highlights are on the most important parts. If you see anything wrong with my reasoning or facts, please let me know.

The Supreme Court of the United States is FAILING and therefore CONGRESS is FAILING to do its part to properly "check" the Supreme Court's violations of the Constitution. SCOTUS has rejected my suit against the State of Michigan which is denying Amend. VII (Jury) rights. usareset.net/forum/viewto...

"The charismatic leader, both left and right, after all, lives against an artificial background. As George Kennan put it, "He creates [the background] for himself; but he believes in it implicitly and in part he generally succeeds in making it seem real to others as well. And his role, as he plays +

Executive Power is limited to what the Founders intended. See illinoislawreview.org/wp-content/i... for lots of clear info. Essentially the Power to execute the Legislature's laws, not undo. Additionally the Powers in Article II, Sec. 2. Tell your congress.gov (scroll down, select state) to ACT.

Hello Patriots, Please use congress.gov, scroll down to where you can select your State or area, select then follow through contacting all of your Congresspeople, even Republicans. Pass the below image on or send them to usareset.net/forum/viewto... to get a PDF. Thanks! And don't hesitate to repost

Hello Patriots, Please use congress.gov, scroll down to where you can select your State or area, select then follow through contacting all of your Congresspeople, even Republicans. Pass the below image on or send them to usareset.net/forum/viewto... to get a PDF. Thanks! And don't hesitate to repost

Congress is FAILING. Contact YOUR Congresspeople via congress.gov and let them know what you want. Amendment XXV, impeachment, and Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 15 (Congress has the power to call forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union and suppress Insurrections) are all available to save the USA.

The first image shows the result of another employee in a similar position, prior earned vacation payout, but was eligible and did correctly receive the monthly UIA benefit. The second image boxed area shows the burden of proof was on the employer for a vacation payout. My ALJ got both wrong.

Finally we get to the ALJ decision. It affirms the UIA denial of unemployment benefits due to the prior earned vacation payout (2nd paragraph, last sentence). States (wrongly) my "eligibility" was the issue. States correctly "vacation pay is the first in the list" from the first sentence of +

Continuing the layoff saga with parts of the transcript of the hearing. The first image, particularly lines 10-15, shows that vacation payout on layoff is not contractual. In the second image lines 4-14 show it is a unilateral "practice" of MSU. Why would that be? The most obvious answer is that +

Below are 2 pages I submitted to the Administrative Law Judge for review of my case. The first page clearly shows at -159 that vacation is my choice, not MSU's. By definition during a layoff I'm not needed. The second page at -171 clearly shows that vacation payouts are at termination not layoff. +

Continuing the saga. The first page below is MSU's fraudulent claim to the UIA that I was on vacation. The $ amount MSU has never been able to show the calculation for. The second image shows the actual fraudulent vacation entries with the last column showing CHOREYSH (instead of me, WHITEJ71)+

With no further response from the UIA I timely filed the below appeal. Here are the links to the Michigan law parts I quote: www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?obj... and www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?obj.... While the law has changed slightly the parts I quoted have not.