When State Courts become abusive because of immunity….when you just can’t win…..

Federal Civil rights injunctions SHOULD BE available, and if you can present your case properly they MAY BE available…. this is a theory that I have been working on for almost 7 years now…. because the laws (statutory and common law) are there on the books, but somehow Younger v. Harris has been twisted beyond recognition, bent ALL out of shape and perverted.  It SHOULD be seen as the middle case between a trilogy of Dombrowski v. Pfister, Younger v. Harris, and Mitchum v. Foster, two of which upheld Federal Court injunctions against State Court proceedings and only one—Younger did not.  So why is Younger the one that all Defendants cite and few Plaintiffs know about in Civil Rights cases?  Could it be….that the Defendants for the most part run the law schools and print the law books and they want to increase and maximize the abusive power of the State Courts?

Dombrowski v. Pfister 1965



Younger v. Harris, February 23, 1971

Mitchum v. Foster, a case from Bay County, Florida

Mitchum v Foster 407_US_225

Happy Reading Everybody!  Write me whether you think I’m wrong!  Because, after all, we all have the right to proceed pro se or in propia persona in defense of our rights, even though the Bar works hard to keep everyone, including lawyers, as ignorant as possible about the law:



2 responses to “When State Courts become abusive because of immunity….when you just can’t win…..

  1. Pingback: When State Courts become abusive because of immunity….when you … Federal Me

  2. I find your writings very lucid and insightful, and apparently practical. I would like to correspond with you. I have a law degree magna cum laude, but I only litigate pro se. I am suing in state court because local Democrat Albany, NY officials illegally (under false pretenses) demolished a house contining my personal property (e.g., skis, tools, building materials). I have encountered a group of Democrat-elected judges who are willing to disregard my constitutional right to sue for a post-deprivation remedy, claiming that merely because I did not “own” the house, I have no “standing” to sue in the case. They refused to consider my Complaint while purporting to decide that I have no standing. They further asserted that the owner of the house cannot rely upon an eye-witness Affidavit authored by me because I am not a party. (there is no such rule of law, but this is the game they are playing). In an attempt to overcome this criminal disregard for my rights, I took an assignment of causes of action from the owner and a deed to the land. Now, the Judge falsely says that no one can obtain standing to sue after the events complained of. I am about to file a federal complaint against the Judges and the city officials, alleging violation of my constitutional rights (right to petition for redress),(my Right to be Heard on the issue of whether I have standing to sue).
    I would like to discuss letting you publish the evidence of the crimes of these Democrat Judges.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s