No. 18-8817

Michael Clark v. United States District Court for the Northern District of New York

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2019-04-12
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: bradley-v-fisher civil-rights color-of-law common-law-rights due-process federal-procedure federalism first-amendment first-amendment-rights free-speech judicial-immunity nixon-v-warner standing subject-matter-jurisdiction
Key Terms:
DueProcess FirstAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-05-23
Question Presented (from Petition)

Did the Northern District and Second Circuit Courts
violated the Clark Family First Amendment and Common Law
Rights related to the two fraudulent court orders of 8/26/05 and
7/13/02 under Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc, 435 U.S.
589 (1978) and did those Judges, as well as the State Judges, rule
in favor of "usurped authorities" in violation of subject-matter
jurisdiction, in violation of Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall, 335
(1871) and do those judges have Judicial Immunity when they
ruled in favor of those "usurped authorities" and should criteria
be established related to that violation.

Did the Judges of the Second Circuit and the Northern
District violate the Federal Rules and Procedures and "Color of Law"
related to inserting county attorney's to represent state court's in the
petitioner's docket and conspire with the NY State Attorney General's
related to those docket entries in violation of federalism and comity,
and should rules related to that practice be made. Did Judge
McAvoy violate the Rules Enabling Act 28 U.S.C. § 2072 in relation
to discovery and did the Second Circuit use those rules violations to
deny the right to appeal.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Northern District and Second Circuit Courts violate the Clark Family First Amendment and Common Law Rights related to the two fraudulent court orders

Docket Entries

2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-04-30
Waiver of right of respondent UNITED STATES to respond filed.
2019-03-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 13, 2019)

Attorneys

Michael Clark
Michael Clark — Petitioner
UNITED STATES
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent