A groundbreaking verified complaint has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia naming Federal Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes, State Judge Raquel A. Marquez, and attorneys John and Therese Bailey in a RICO and Bivens action for fraud, collusion, and ultra vires acts. The suit exposes coordinated judicial misconduct, void orders, and abuse of power carried out without jurisdiction or immunity. This case marks a historic challenge to the illusion of judicial untouchability and a direct demand for accountability before a jury of the People.
This declaration proves what every Constitution in America already affirms — the People are sovereign.
Drawn directly from all fifty State Constitutions and the Constitution for the United States of America, this document exposes how all lawful power originates from the People and is only delegated to government by consent.
It stands as irrefutable, judicially noticeable evidence that judges, attorneys, clerks, sheriffs, and politicians are mere trustees and servants of the People’s authority.
A must-read for anyone ready to understand where real sovereignty and lawful power truly reside.
This article exposes how every loan, mortgage, and public utility billing contract operates as a federally recognized government obligation — not a private contract. Backed by statutes like 18 U.S.C. § 8, 12 U.S.C. § 411, and 31 U.S.C. § 3123, the credit you generate is monetized and guaranteed by the United States Treasury. Banks and utility companies merely act as intermediaries, while your signature creates the actual value. This legal breakdown reveals the true debtor-creditor dynamic hidden behind everyday commerce. The truth isn’t theory — it’s codified in law.
This article establishes that verified filings under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 constitute sworn evidence equal to notarized affidavits and, when unrebutted, stand as final truth in law. Supported by Rule 8(b)(6) and Rule 56, it demonstrates that verified facts must be admitted and summary judgment becomes mandatory once no genuine dispute remains. Federal precedent confirms that attorney argument is not evidence (Trinsey v. Pagliaro, 229 F. Supp. 647) and that verified complaints carry full evidentiary weight. Under the Clearfield Doctrine, all statutory and public acts are commercial, binding officials to the same evidentiary standards as private parties. Any judicial act ignoring verified truth is ultra vires, void ab initio, and actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents.
What began as freedom under Natural Law has been hijacked by statutes, attorneys, and codification into a corporate empire. The Great Overlay dismantles the illusion of justice by showing how BAR-run courts reduce men and women to incompetent wards while enforcing color of law. This is a devastating breakdown of the fraud behind “U.S. citizenship” and the unlawful corporate overlay that replaced the republic.
A federal judge’s July 2025 order is now under fire for unlawfully striking a removal, misapplying criminal statutes, ignoring unrebutted affidavits, and participating in a fraudulent party substitution. The case, originally removed under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), involves severe allegations of constitutional violations, jurisdictional fraud, and due process abuse. Despite clear legal precedent barring time limits on § 1443 removals, the court falsely claimed the removal was untimely and smeared the petitioner with defamatory labels. This article exposes the judicial misconduct, factual distortions, and illegality underlying the void order now being challenged.
Federal courts are now under scrutiny after a verified Writ of Mandamus vanished from the Ninth Circuit docket without explanation—raising grave concerns of judicial tampering, fraud, and systemic misconduct. Judge Sunshine Sykes defied clear jurisdictional divestiture by issuing rulings on a matter under appellate review, violating 28 U.S.C. § 144 and § 1651. This article exposes a disturbing pattern of ultra vires acts, denial of due process, and potential RICO violations implicating both district and appellate judges.Ask ChatGPT
A federal RICO action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California unveils a calculated scheme orchestrated by attorneys Barry Lee O’Connor and John Bailey, in concert with MARINAJ PROPERTIES and the Doumit family. The Verified Complaint lays out a detailed pattern of racketeering involving simulated legal proceedings, fraudulent conveyance, and theft of trust assets through a void and defective Trustee’s Deed. Despite perfected title claims and unrebutted affidavits establishing lawful ownership, Judge Rachel A. Marquez has enabled the misconduct by shielding culpable parties and targeting the rightful beneficiaries asserting their rights. The suit cites violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962 (RICO), 241 (conspiracy against rights), and 1341 (mail fraud), along with California Civil Code §§ 1709 (fraud) and 3346 (treble damages for wrongful injury to property). This case exemplifies judicial corruption—where bar-protected insiders act with impunity while private Americans are silenced. The court’s response will reveal whether justice, equity, and due process remain alive in California.
UCC §§ 1-103, 3-104, 3-601, and 3-603 operate as the foundation of lawful commercial remedy across all 50 states. Section 1-103 ensures equity, common law, and the Law Merchant remain enforceable alongside UCC processes. Section 3-104 defines what qualifies as a negotiable instrument—an essential element in debt discharge. Section 3-601 codifies the principle that all obligations can be discharged by contract, agreement, or valid performance. Section 3-603 delivers the lethal commercial strike: once lawful tender is made—even if refused—the obligation is discharged as a matter of law. These statutes, codified in every U.S. jurisdiction, are the legal artillery that allow secured parties and private trusts to assert control, tender discharge, and permanently terminate fraudulent or unperfected claims. Use them with precision—or be used by those who will.
In an unthinkable display of judicial defiance, the United States District Court for the Central District of California—specifically Judge Kenly Kiya Kato—has openly violated federal disqualification statutes and constitutional protections, triggering a full-scale procedural breakdown. The Plaintiffs, Kevin Realworldfare and Corey Walker, filed a timely and sufficient affidavit of bias under 28 U.S.C. § 144—invoking a mandatory disqualification. Yet, Judge Kato continues to issue orders and direct proceedings as if the law simply does not apply to her. This is not a mere procedural oversight. This is a calculated refusal to follow the law, a violation of the U.S. Constitution, and an unmistakable act of judicial misconduct.
In an unthinkable display of judicial defiance, the United States District Court for the Central District of California—specifically Judge Kenly […]
When a court acts without lawful jurisdiction—whether through improper removal, lack of subject matter or personal authority, or constitutional violations—its orders are void ab initio and carry no legal force. This article explains how judges who continue to issue rulings after losing jurisdiction are not merely mistaken—they are acting under color of law and are subject to direct civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Backed by black-letter case law and statutory authority, this piece dismantles the myth of absolute judicial immunity and affirms a fundamental truth in law: jurisdiction is everything. When it’s gone, so is the court’s power to act.