No. 21-5442

Jasper Crook v. Robin Shea

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-08-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: 10th-amendment 14th-amendment 42-usc-1981 7th-amendment 9th-amendment civil-rights constitutional-rights defamation-claim equal-protection judicial-misconduct pro-se-litigation treason-allegation
Latest Conference: 2022-01-14 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. If beneficiaries of the United States Constitution have the right to
prosecute in their own name under Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution
protected by 42 USC § 1981 and in accordance with the 7th, 9th, and 10th
amendments and evenly applied through the 14th amendment, then any
judges/justices who are clearly ignoring or suppressing these.rights
according to the supreme laws of the land are committing treason for any
blockage, suppression, undo-influence, or coercion not fulfilling their oath
of office?
All judges/justices in petitioner's case have violated 18 USC,Ch. 115:
TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES, § 2383. Rebellion or
insurrection - Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in a
rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United,States or-the
laws thereof (emphasis added), or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be
incapable of holding any office under the United States.

2. Do Americans have the right to access their courts to prosecute on their own
behalf under the constitution and law already established 42 USC § 1981 for
libel defamation?

3. If petitioner is a beneficiary of the United States Constitution and the
constitution being a binding legal contract, then paying $400 to the district
court for a case that is free with no cost, is a contract with consideration
between the court and the pro se litigant and if the pro se litigant paid for
a venue to conduct a trial by jury and verdict shouldn't the court provide its duty to the contract and the pro se constitutional beneficiary?

4. Do justices commit treason when they violate the constitutional jurisprudence
when it is clearly written, unambiguously, or capriciously and in plain
English?

5. If the Fourteenth Amendment provides equal protection at law and Dominion v.
Lindell (l:2021cv00445/US District Court for the District of Columbia) is a
defamation libel suit that is moving forward through the court then why has
petitioner's defamation libel suit not moved forward with service* discovery,
and trial by jury?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

If beneficiaries of the United States Constitution have the right to prosecute in their own name under Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution

Docket Entries

2022-01-18
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-12-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022.
2021-11-29
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2021-11-01
Petition DENIED.
2021-10-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/29/2021.
2021-08-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 20, 2021)

Attorneys

Jasper Crook
Jasper Crook — Petitioner