The Constitution of the United States serves as the bedrock of our nation, guaranteeing unalienable rights, due process, and the supremacy of the people over the government. Yet, Sheppard Mullin, Shannon Peterson, and Blake Partridge, Junior Partner at Sastre, Saavedra & Epstein, PLLC, have demonstrated through their actions that they stand in direct opposition to these foundational principles. Their conduct represents a calculated assault on constitutional protections and the sovereignty of the American people, effectively waging war against the Constitution and its intended purpose.
Violations of Constitutional Protections
The actions of Sheppard Mullin and Blake Partridge reveal a deliberate effort to undermine the rule of law and erode the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Their behavior directly contradicts the constitutional mandate that the government exists to serve the people, not subjugate them.
1. Deprivation of Unalienable Rights
Both defendants have systematically deprived plaintiffs of life, liberty, and property without due process of law, as guaranteed under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Their conduct demonstrates contempt for the foundational principle that all individuals are entitled to freely contract, own property, and live without unwarranted interference by the state.
As affirmed in Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 47 (1905):
“The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited… His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution.”
By disregarding these protections, the defendants have not only violated the rights of the plaintiffs but also betrayed the very legal framework that secures these rights for all citizens.
2. Subversion of the Rule of Law
The defendants have undermined the separation of powers and disregarded the judiciary’s constitutional duty to uphold the law. Through their actions, they have attempted to operate outside lawful authority, rendering themselves unaccountable to the Constitution. This usurpation of authority is a direct affront to the rule of law and the foundational principle that no one is above the Constitution.
As ruled in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 177 (1803):
“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.”
Acts of Aggression and Tyranny
Sheppard Mullin and Blake Partridge’s actions extend beyond mere negligence or ignorance of the law. Their behavior constitutes an intentional and aggressive war against the sovereignty of the people and the Constitution itself.
1. Usurpation of Authority
By misusing their positions of power, the defendants have positioned themselves as adversaries to the constitutional framework. They have replaced lawful governance with arbitrary and oppressive dictates, undermining the very system they are sworn to uphold.
As articulated in the Declaration of Independence:
“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.”
The defendants’ conduct embodies the tyranny that the Constitution was designed to prevent, forcing citizens to fight for rights that are inherently theirs under the supreme law of the land.
2. Weaponizing Authority
The defendants have weaponized their authority to oppress and silence those who seek justice. Their actions include:
- Suppressing lawful claims and evidence that protect plaintiffs’ property and rights.
- Engaging in fraudulent and coercive tactics to strip individuals of their constitutional protections.
- Dismissing constitutional mandates, including the right to due process and equal protection under the law.
Such behavior is not only unlawful but constitutes acts of domestic tyranny, jeopardizing the rights of every American and the stability of our constitutional order.
Slaves and Subjects of the Government They Created
The Constitution establishes that sovereignty lies with the people, not the government. However, the actions of Sheppard Mullin and Blake Partridge suggest that they view themselves as subjects of the very government they claim to serve. By disregarding constitutional protections and violating the rights of individuals, they have become complicit in a system that subjugates both themselves and their fellow citizens.
As affirmed in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886):
“Sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”
Their actions betray the principle that the government derives its power from the consent of the governed, reducing themselves to mere pawns of a system they were intended to oversee and protect.
The Constitutional Mandate
The Constitution, state constitutions, and Bills of Rights were established to protect the people from tyranny and ensure that no individual or entity could wield power arbitrarily. The defendants’ actions represent a direct attack on this mandate, placing themselves in opposition to the supreme law of the land.
Supremacy Clause
As stated in Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution:
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof… shall be the supreme Law of the Land.”
The defendants have ignored this clause, prioritizing their interests over the rule of law and the rights of the people. Their actions are not only unconstitutional but treasonous, as they undermine the very foundation of our nation.
Conclusion: Constitutional Change is necessary
Sheppard Mullin and Blake Partridge continue to wage war against the Constitution, the American people, and the principles of justice. Their actions are a betrayal of the rule of law, the sovereignty of the people, and the oath they swore to uphold.
The time has come to hold these defendants accountable for their transgressions. The courts, the people, and the government must stand united in defense of the Constitution and ensure that those who seek to undermine it face the full weight of justice.
Anything less is an affront to the ideals upon which this nation was founded and a threat to the freedoms we hold dear.
