Indifference to Injustice Tracker (continued)

On October 6, I lost the ability to add to the Tracker, so rather than trying to debug the problem, I simply started this, new blog post.

October 19,  2020 — read NY Times op-ed on court-packing and e-mailed its author ( also, posted a comment:

“How about changing the way judging is done, for a change?

When I filed my lawsuit (Overview Books v. US – in retrospect, the mirror image of Citizens United, since it demanded that individuals be given speech rights of corporations), judges replaced in their decisions my lawyer’s argument with bogus argument of their own, so as to decide the  way they wanted to, not the way they had to. When I sued judges for fraud, they argued that in Pierson v. Ray judges gave themselves the right to act from the bench “maliciously and corruptly.”

This mode of judging flies in the face of constitutional guarantee of “due process of the law,” by turning judges into parties to the case. Block judges’ ability to inject their own argument into their decision-making limiting them to evaluating the argument of parties, and the problem is solved – republican judges would have to decide as democrat judges would, and vice versa.

The other problem is, that journalists who so eagerly investigate the executive and the legislature, adamantly refuse to investigate how judges decide cases; I spoke to dozens of journalists, and contacted hundreds by e-mail, and submitted multiple op-eds, but they were rejected. Not only is there deafening silence – but journalists even refuse to tell why is it that they refuse to cover one third of US government that is the judiciary, so I started my own Coalition Against Judicial Fraud.

Rather than pack courts, make judges follow rules – and the problem is solved.”,

e-mailed JP Tangen, Mining News op-ed writer (, Pit & Quarry (,,,,, Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review (, Missouri Press News (,, Oklahoma Press Association (,,,,,,,,, used form to contact the publishers of Law and Order magazine, Tikkun (, California News Publishers Association (,,,,,,,,,,, Editors Only (, Folio: (,,,, the Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association (, the Maine Writers & Publishers Alliance (,,,,,

October 18,  2020 — read 2 NY Times reports on judicial decisions and e-mailed their authors (,,

October 16,  2020 — e-mailed the Litigation Counsel of America (,,,,,,,,,, used form to contact Church Law & Tax getting auto-reply, and a generic reply a few hours later; the Gatestone Institute (,, Gregg Wirth (, New Jersey State Bar Association (,,, used the form to contact The Legal Intelligencer, the Women Lawyers Journal (,  The Business Lawyer (, Washingtonian (,,,,,,,, Urban Affairs Review (,,,,, News Leaders Association (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, separately contacting via a form Mandy Jenkins for whom I could not find e-mail address, heard on WNYC’s On the Media a segment with NYU Professor Jay Rosen, and e-mailed him (

October 15,  2020 — on WNYC, heard Professor Tolson and e-mailed her (, e-mailed Catholic University Law Review (, the Chicago-Kent Law Review (,,,,,, the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, read NY Times op-ed on republican judges and public health, and e-mailed the author (

October 14,  2020 — on WNYC, heard Amanda Becker of 19th News discussing Supreme Court nomination, and e-mailed them (, receiving an acknowledgment, and an interview with filmmaker Daniel Lombroso and e-mailed him (, e-mailed New York State Bar Association (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, University of Pennsylvania Law Review (,, Legal Management (,,, who almost instantly replied that the subject is not their fit, the Daily Court Review ( getting auto-reply, Chicago Law Journal and Chicago Lawyer (,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Michigan Lawyers Weekly (,, late at night read New York Times op-ed on Facebook’s Holocaust denial policy and e-mailed the author (

October 13,  2020 — e-mailed the Trial Magazine (,,, the South Texas Law Review (, the Prosecutor Magazine ( — received an almost-instant reply, the Nebraska Law Review (, the Journal of Southern Legal History (,, the Michigan Journal of Law Reform (,, the Michigan Law Review (,,,,, Idaho State Bar’s The Advocate (, Denver Bar Association (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Florida Bar Journal (,,,,,, Kansas Bar Association (,,,,,

October 12,  2020 — sent a submission to Duke Law Journal; saw NY Times Supreme Court nomination report by Nicholas Fandos and e-mailed him and his co-contributors (,,,; read an op-ed by Christopher Leonard, director of the Watchdog Writers Group at the Missouri School of Journalism, twitted at him, and used the form to contact the group; read another op-ed by Princeton’s Professor Whittington and e-mailed him (, e-mailed Knight First Amendment Institute (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Maryland State Bar Association (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, National Judges Association (, NALS the Association for Legal Professionals (,,,,,,,,, the Criminal Law Bulletin (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and got an almost instant reply “We would welcome the submission of an article from you on this important topic.” — submitted it on Oct 13, but it got rejected a few hours later — “Although interesting, this is not a scholarly article, which is what we publish.  Accordingly, we will not be able to move forward with publishing this essay.”

October 11,  2020 — on WNYC’s On the Media heard a Columbia University researcher Ms. Hemmer, who writes “on the origins and evolution of the “republic, not a democracy” slogan” and e-mailed her (, as well as On the Media hosts, one of my old blog entries on US not being a “republic,” but a mongrel mix of republic and monarchy — the US judiciary system being monarchical, not republican, by nature.  Read NY Times’ op-ed by Rabbi Soloveichik on Amy Comey Barrett’s religion and e-mailed him (, and another op-ed by Cristian Farias and e-mailed him (

October 9,  2020 — read NY Times op-ed by Jamelle Bouie on the benefits of court packing and submitted the following comment:
“The question is, what is “justice,” and what is “rule of law?”

I watched in astonishment how in my First/Fifth amendment case (Overview Books v. US, if you are curious) a judge in the Court of Federal Claims replaced government’s non-argument with an utterly bogus argument of judge’s own concoction so as to give victory to government, and a judge in the Eastern District court of NY replaced my lawyer’s argument with a non-argument to, again, make the government win. When I sued judges themselves for fraud, they argued that in Pierson v. Ray judges gave themselves the right to act from the bench “maliciously and corruptly.” I sued to get rid of Lady Justice which deceptively tells us that judges are impartial and evaluate parties’ argument, not judges’, but my lawsuit got automatically thrown out as “frivolous.”

How is this “rule of law” — if “due process of the law”  is the law? How is this “justice?” And how packing the court will help making judges obey law — which means disobeying the instinct to be lawyers for the party they want to win first, and judges — of their own argument — afterwards?

What needs to be done, is denying judges the ability to inject their own argument into the decision-making process, and leave all legal arguing to lawyers. That would indeed be “justice” — and to that end I started Coalition Against Judicial Fraud. Currently, we have “rule of judges,” not “rule of law,” and no amount of court-packing will change that. ”

Also, e-mailed the author ( suggesting that he learns about operation of courts before writing about them, and he instantly replied “Yes, I will be sure to consult my neighborhood crank before I write again”, to which I replied in kind, “I see, at NY Times ignorance is bliss, self-righteousness is virtue!” forwarding to NY Times editors (, The New York Times,,,,  “Please see the below correspondence with Mr. Bouie regarding his recent column. Not only is he incompetent, but he is rude too. While I replied to him in kind (“I see, at NY Times ignorance is bliss, self-righteousness is virtue!”), as perhaps I shouldn’t have, I don’t think that his reaction to totally justified criticism reflects well on your paper. My e-mail required substantive reply, not Mr. Bouie’s inarticulate, crude grunt”; Submitted op-ed to NY Times.

E-mailed Virginia Bar Association (,,,,,,, Duke Law Journal ( — got a reply on Oct 11 “Thank you for reaching out! Our Journal selects articles that have already been written for publication. If we receive an article on this topic, we will certainly consider publishing it in our next volume” — will submit on Oct 12, the Journal of the Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (,,, the National Lawyers Guild (,,,,, the Journal of Law — apparently, a humorous publication, if it is a publication at all and not some spoof (, the Brooklyn Journal of International Law (, Student Press Law Center (,,,,,, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, — got a near-instant reply “Thank you for sharing. The Reporters Committee is a pro bono legal services organization for journalists, and this is outside of the scope of our mission. ”

October 8,  2020 — read NY Times’ op-ed by Gail Collins on Amy Coney Barrett nomination and e-mailed her (, as well as posting the following comment:

“The question is — how is it possible for a judge to decide a case whichever way he or she wants? Presumably, judges are impartial — except that they aren’t, feeling free to inject their own argument into the decision, thus becoming parties to the case before them — counter to any interpretation of “due process of the law,” which in fact does not exist.

I learned that the hard way: having spent tons of money on an attorney in the First/Fifth amendment case, I was astonished to see judges, one after another, discard the argument which cost me so much, and decide case based on their own bogus argument pulled out of thin air!

Remove that ability, restricting judging to mere evaluation of parties’ argument — as any interpretation of “due process of the law” demands that they do — and you solve the problem: there won’t be any 4-to-5 decisions, Amy Coney Barrett won’t be able to decide cases differently than Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have (and the reverse would be true, too).

So the problem is judicial fraud — judges’ judging judges’ argument, not parties’. The problem is procedural, not personal.”

e-mailed Washington University Jurisprudence Review (, Global Studies Law Review (,,,, the Washington University Law Review (,,,,,,,,,,, Washington University Journal of Law & Policy (,, they replied on Oct 9 “Unfortunately, we have already selected topics for our three yearly publications and judicial fraud does not fit with our planned symposia”, the Wayne Law Review (, the West Virginia Law Review (,, the Willamette Law Review (,,,,,,,,,,,, the Willamette Environmental Law Journal (,,,,,, Willamette Law Online (,,, — got an instant reply that they post summary of cases, not articles, the Willamette Journal of Social Justice and Equity (,,,,,,, Mitchell Hamline Law Review (,, Wisconsin Law Journal (,,,, the Wyoming Law Review (,,, the William & Mary Law Review (,, Ecology Law Quarterly (, the Law & Social Inquiry (,,, the American Society of International Law (,,,,,,,,,,, Duquesne Law Review (, Hawaii State Bar Association (,,,,,,,,,,,

October 7,  2020 — got a reply from Texas Tech Law Review Editor explaining that they only accept submissions from JDs; used form and form to contact Louisiana Bar Journal; e-mailed the National Jurist (, Rhode Island Bar Association (, UMKC Law Review (, University of Illinois Law Review (,,, The University of Kansas Law Review (,, and Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy (,,, The University of Toledo Law Review (, Utah State Bar (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Virginia Lawyer Magazine and Virginia State Bar (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Virginia Lawyers Weekly (,,,, heard on WNYC Jeff Brady’s report on the impact of Amy Coney Barrett on environment and e-mailed him (



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>