Since 1925, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has illegally denied the review of some very important federal appeals cases, with impunity. What adds damage to the United States constitutional insult on this prominent issue is that very few members of the American electorate realize that the United States Constitution, Article 3, Section 2, was, in effect, amended without the process. of amendment, by the fiduciary legislation of the Congress without changing the wording of the article. The Federal Judiciary Act of 1925 (FJA) inserted the competitive ridiculousness of Congress in the place of what had been an ongoing sacred process of intense appeal review from the time of the ratification of the United States Constitution until 1925. During those 136 years, the mandate of Article 3. Section 2 was applied by the Federal Judicial Power, the bicameral Congress, and the Executive Power. That is to say, “the Judicial Power will extend to ALL cases, in Law and Equity, that arise under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States and the Treaties made …” In other words, all federal cases that arise at through the federal appeals court system. , for 136 years, they were heard, as a matter of law, by SCOTUS! Appellants had the constitutional right to have their cases heard by the SCOTUS brothers, and today, in the 21st century, they still have the absolute right, albeit overruled by a frivolous decree of Congress, to have their cases heard by the brothers and sisters. SCOTUS sisters.
What the Federal Judicial Power Act of 1925 did was lightly state that, instead of a legal constitutional right to have their cases heard by SCOTUS, appellants had the optional “opportunity” to compete for a hearing of their cases. by SCOTUS by means of an essay contest and a very subjective vote of the nine magistrates on which essays to accept through what was called the “certiorari” process and the affirmative vote of four of the magistrates. Between the years 1891 and 1925, the Republican-led Congresses began the very secret deliberative process of persuading politicians that the workload of the nine SCOTUS judges was greater than they could bear, despite the fact that their days Working at SCOTUS, beginning in 1925, began at 10:00 am and lasted until 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. The 1925 FJA turned SCOTUS into a virtual country club and nine judges into a group of certiorari petition trial judges with the ability to subjectively select and choose cases that they would eventually review and decide. Consequently, from 1925 to the present day, SCOTUS arbitrarily denied review of quite a few very important federal appeals cases without any reasonable indication of why they were denied.
This has raised some speculatively disturbing speculation, along with many suspicious eyebrows, about the motives, intentions, and reasoning behind the justices who collectively denied review of some very high-profile federal cases since 1925. First, ALL cases rising to the SCOTUS review level are required by the United States Constitution to be heard in full SCOTUS session by all nine judges. The only way to avoid this requirement is for the mandate of Article 3, Section 2 to be amended through the Article 5 amendment process. However, as regards the workload of Brothers and Sisters, Congress does not and it has not even considered lengthening SCOTUS ‘working hours, incorporating the use of Saturdays or the convening of night court sessions when necessary to justify the volume of cases, instead of unconstitutionally altering the mandate of Article 3, Section 2 to hear ALL cases that meet SCOTUS requirements. Such job modifications for SCOTUS appeared, and still appear, to fall short of the dignity of the nine federal judges who receive salaries of more than $ 250,000 per year. However, I, and many other constitutional scholars, do not think they are. I believe that Brothers and Sisters should be required to work as hard as they did as attorneys, law professors, or whatever job they had before being nominated and confirmed and elevated to SCOTUS judgeships, and pay federal salaries as exorbitant. . The SCOTUS judges’ current business day is 10:30 am to 3:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and their legal staff and legal clerks do most of the required reading and case review for the nine judges. Judges regularly receive verbal and written reports from legal clerks advising them on what to do and say. It’s really pathetic how little work the famous Brothers and Sisters really do.
What appropriately “should” happen when terrible illegal and unconstitutional acts are committed with apparent impunity by much earlier Congresses against the Constitution of the United States and the People of the United States and later discovered? If such betrayal and duplicity was committed covertly without the knowledge of the People in much earlier times, say in 1925, but was discovered and publicly brought to the knowledge of the People in much later times, say in 2021, if the legal tables were turned and betrayal and duplicity repaired and reversed? I, and many other constitutional scholars, believe so, especially as grave treason and duplicity continue to plague the republic through federal culprits who continue to use this treason to their unscrupulous advantage. The Federal Judiciary Act of 1925 must be repealed and gutted, as currently enforced, and SCOTUS ‘mandate to hear ALL federal appeals cases that reach the level of review by the US Supreme Court. It must be restored, and all those cases must be heard by the nine magistrates in full SCOTUS. Congress must modify the workload of the nine justices to incorporate ALL the legal work necessary to accommodate ALL cases on the federal docket. Perhaps these actions would serve to rectify some of the painful injustices committed against so many deserving federal appellants during the intervening years since 1925.