No.

___________________

In The
Supreme Court Of The United States

Susan Herbert,

A Natural Born Citizen Who Is A Mother And So Shed Her Blood And Risked Her Life In Defense
Of The Constitution Or We, The People
Thus The Protected Right Is Hers

Applicant,
v.

Barack Obama,
John Roberts, Frank Hull
And
The United States Of America,

Respondents.

Susan Herbert, pro se

1100 Seagate Avenue 101
Neptune Beach, FL 32266
904-705-6171

Questions

Is SUSAN HERBERT the acting, legal President and Commander of the US, of the named,
constitutionally set government of original jurisdiction known as We The People? Is SUSAN
HERBERT the acting legal President and Commander as proven by her two conferenced cases both

1
of which are pro se, constitutional authority and original jurisdiction and as a third case was directly
entered and directly acted upon thus proving her point of law as the US failed to respond thus
defaulted, and was she at the time this election was held and if so was it unconstitutional and a
crime for Presidential candidates, court officers, attorneys and judges to conspire alone or in
conjunction with others to keep her name off of the Presidential ballot in all states and to then
suppress the knowledge of her case thus keeping it from The People? Did this activity constitute
intimidation of a federal witness in a federal case? Is SUSAN HERBERT the seat of the named,
legal power and authority within our Constitution and is BARACK OBAMA merely the illegal,
perceived authority as named by those who are acting upon ideas not to be found anywhere within
our Constitution and never named by our Founders? Is this the only federal question SCOTUS must
answer as then all other federal questions can, may and will be answered by We The People as
SUSAN HERBERT may then make the case directly to them as the constitutionally set President
and Commander? Were SUSAN HERBERT’s rights violated by federal agents namely FBI, the
Secret Service, US Marshal’s and The People and if so is the award SUSAN HERBERT
requested, an appearance in person before SCOTUS, available and if it is available is it
awardable? Does refusing to make this award then violate Marbury as SUSAN HERBERT
fully vested it as her right and as her interest? [I have named every federal question I ever
entered as they need to be answered either by this court, myself acting as President or by the People
alone. I named them all so The People could begin to formulate their own answers.]

Did Bush V Gore sit as a tie until SUSAN HERBERT addressed it deciding it in her favor thus in
favor of We The People? If so did Barack Obama and all comers have to unseat her as she first
unseated George Bush Jr.? May SCOTUS deny legal representation to any person vying for the
Office of Executive due to the Presidential Oath of Office and as legal representation is not a right
in the equivalent court, family court, as SCOTUS does not hear criminal cases? In Bush V Gore did
SCOTUS install a Commander only as it may not make law thus may not install a President, leaving
the Office of President vacant as no person has been legally elected to the constitutional office as
defined by our law since 1913? Did Wilson’s stroke followed by Pershing’s rise to become General
of the Armies thus actually and legally outranking the sitting President at the time plus the Iraq war
declared upon bad evidence thus the declaration is no good as nobody has yet addressed it and so it
is a dead institution only and no citizen is ever to fight and die for a dead institutions but only the
constitutions of government, We The People, then leave the Office of Commander vacant thus

2
paving the way for the plaintiff, SUSAN HERBERT, to bring forth her case thus becoming the
acting, legal President and Commander of original jurisdiction? Do SUSAN HERBERT’S actions
and her case prove our Constitution is no more except for her one person and SCOTUS, that is, did
SUSAN HERBERT prove Marbury and so SCOTUS itself is actual law and not merely legal
theory? In other words, is SCOTUS organic to We, The People and not the paper Constitution
thus proves the actual, named, constitutional government is We The People the living
constitution and not the paper Constitution? Does an appearance in person by SUSAN
HERBERT then remedy the earliest SCOTUS admissions to the bar in 1790, crown lawyers and
members of the House, as they were made before Marbury and as that act then allowed lawyers and
members of Congress to violate Article 1 Section 6 Paragraph 2, as it allowed for a violation of
separation of power that continues to this day and inadvertently created a privileged class who have
an honor accorded to no other and as it made it seem as if it is legal if a judge or Justice condoned
it? Is it impossible for a sitting Justice or any employee of SCOTUS to address violations of the law
and so secure redress for violations of their named, protected rights if SUSAN HERBERT as a pro
se litigant is denied an appearance in person before SCOTUS itself as a SCOTUS employee may
not sue for a violation it itself partially created as it then has unclean hands? Is any and all justice
now impossible as it has now been made impossible for any other citizen to then secure their rights
thus securing liberty and justice and so any court ruling is arbitrary at best as the US did default? Is
it unconstitutional for the US Supreme Court to invoke policy or rule as law as it states it refuses to
hear good cases based upon this policy: “A citizen may not invoke appearing in person as a right” as
it then excepts itself from the first amendment by denying the reality that entering this court is a
fully vested right and fully vested interest in some cases such as if SCOTUS itself, a direct act of a
SCOTUS employee, constitutes a violation of enumerated, fully vested rights no matter how this
ever came to be? Does this constitute a violation of separation of power and making law without
due process as it may become a violation of our vote and may be acted upon as if it is absolute law
as SCOTUS is deemed to be THE authority and so did in this case, and as it is not a power named in
our law but only within a federal court ruling this court itself created but then refuses to address that
says we may enter this court directly? Does this target women only as a man was allowed to enter
this court directly as a right and it then makes the case for equal rights for women or liberty rights
for women impossible to mount as it protects this court and those elected and appointed to the
offices of government from any and all accountability and responsibility when women are harmed
even when direct injury occurs to a citizen who is a woman or a crime personal in nature is

3
committed against a woman? Does this then leave all children both male and female exposed to
injury and harm from which there is then no escape as there is no legal means to address the injury
if the injury to mothers is ‘made legal’ or ‘legally condoned’?

Did the Supreme Court inadvertently create a privileged class – lawyers - by permitting lawyers
only to argue in person before the Court thus rendering the Constitution a dead institution of
government as it is now not real or actual for any person but lawyers or the wealthy who can afford
to hire lawyers thus justice is now bought and sold as are people? Does the deed for the sale of a
house in the amount of $1 that was exchanged for SUSAN HERBERT and ETHAN and
CHRISTOPHER then constitute the actual sale of their persons and was this only made possible by
the exclusion and denial of entry to the Supreme Court bar by anyone except lawyers and because
the discrimination of women is made legal or legally enforced by those in charge thus there are now
two governments, the constitutionally set one of We The People and the paper one, CORP US,
based upon acts that have no relation to the Constitution thus is foreign? Did the refusal of
SCOTUS to allow me to represent myself when I had exhausted the legal process and when I had
already proved justice had been made impossible due to events I did not control as I was born into
harm and in which SCOTUS participated in creating then serve to deny women and their children
fair or just representation and indeed any representation at all as only a pro se female litigant named
SUSAN HERBERT can then make the case for women and for We The People, the named
constitutional government of the US? That is, when the US defaulted did the Supreme Court then
have the legal and moral obligation to hear this case as no other court could or would and legal
representation did not exist as that is what the US defaulting is, proof of the unconstitutionality and
the unfitness of the sitting government? And as the testimony of a man or a hired lawyer never, ever
rises to proof while the testimony of my person is first person eyewitness testimony of the victim
and so the injured class thus is sworn truth and so may not be denied or ignored w/o redress in
person? Did it lead to a situation whereby all offices of government are now unchecked? Is the
only means left to recheck them then to hear my case in person?

Was the plaintiff, SUSAN HERBERT, made the US’ first and only absolute class of one, a class of
exactly and only one that can then represent the whole class of many, or all injured Americans who
have no voice, as the lower court officially certified her “forever pro se” the only such legal

4
designation ever made thus did this then make SUSAN HERBERT the living embodiment of US
law in both letter and spirit as only the actual Revolutionaries were and are “forever pro se”?

Was the plaintiff, SUSAN HERBERT and her two minor children ETHAN and CHRISTOPHER,
denied any and all redress in the lower courts as all written documents that SUSAN HERBERT or
her lawyer authored were ignored, all entered evidence and proof was ignored and denied if they did
not exist as was her testimony until at last a family court judge wrote that the testimony of the birth
mother was of no consequence in a custody case and a federal judge went so far as to write that she
is now not allowed to file documents in her defense thus denying her all forms of an appearance
making redress impossible and justice nonexistent for SUSAN HERBERT alone thus then
nonexistent for We The People? Is the 11th Circuit’s refusal to acknowledge a single fact or law and
it’s order to then physically unfile the Motion to Reconsider citing court rule thus overturning or
denying the exact prior order this same court made which SUSAN HERBERT obeyed and citing the
appearance of the document when plaintiff is not a lawyer and so not once agreed to play by the
court rules but only the law and as federal precedent is you my not cite the appearance of a
document only to then dismiss or deny a litigant redress as that is discrimination itself then a
violation of her named rights of redress, equal protection and due process, free speech and the right
to act as her own attorney and so all of her liberty rights and does it then create an impossible
standard no litigant can ever meet as this order then directs the clerk and The People to commit
what is a criminal act and makes it so if the plaintiff obeys the order of the court she is then harmed
for obeying it thus nothing she does will ever satisfy the court? That is, is this court now refusing to
obey not only the Constitution but the orders that it is generating its own self thus making justice
impossible for the plaintiff or any pro se litigant? Does this treatment constitute blatant
discrimination of SUSAN HERBERT’S person as well as constitute assault and battery upon the
Constitution or an act of war against the Constitution itself, WE The People, because SUSAN
HERBERT is a pro se authority case of original jurisdiction who has already directly entered
SCOTUS and forced direct action thus she entered the other Federal Court having proved her case
and so if you harm her or commit a crime against her you then are harming the Constitution thus We
The People itself? Is the court invoking rule in this manner then the court creating rule, interpreting
rule and enforcing rule as if it is law only to then except their own persons and their fellow lawyers
and judges from the law and the named consequences under our law for their actions some of which
are criminal as they meet or exceed the legal definitions of criminal acts in both the federal and state

5
criminal code? That is are the actions of all of the involved judges personal in nature and
devoid of the authority of the US aka the Constitution thus are they subject to liability? If not
how else does one secure their right of dissolution and abolishment when all offices are
unchecked and/or the Constitution has been overthrown as there is no other means to remove
unfit or criminal person from office and as a Bivens action is very difficult for a lone citizen to
press? Do the reasons that caused us to deny the citizens the ability to sue agents acting under the
authority of the US for liability still exist or did the US’ default then ‘erase’ any and all of those
reasons making liability feasible and necessary once again? Are all named persons private,
appointed and/or elected subject to liability in this unique case as no person has been acting under
the authority of the US which is the Declaration, Constitution and Marbury, since at least Bush V
Gore was heard as that is when they were informed thus knew as fact they were not acting under the
authority of the US as LAWYERS not the people vying for the office argued thus the oath of Office
was violated as it reads I WILL not MY LAWYER WILL and so the Office of the Executive was
awarded to lawyers not a person who was actually on the ballot and as SCOTUS is the court in
which you argue the Constitution or preserve, protect and defend the Constitution thus it is a no
brainer: a litigant must meet the strictest standard and the greatest or highest burden of proof thus
act pro se thus SCOTUS can and may deny you entry if you are not acting pro se in the case of a
Presidential election and as all other authority cases appeared pro se thus federal precedent was
established by Marbury? And as ignorance is not an excuse? Or did these people only begin to act
under an authority not the US thus subject themselves to liability upon Obama’s illegal election and
possibly criminal installation as he used private funds to secure the office and as he may be an
actual foreigner according to the Constitution and US case law?

Do Barack Obama’s actions and do the actions of his named legal counsel, Bob Bauer, meet and
exceed the legal definition of treason? Do the actions of Bauer’s named firm, Perkins Coie, meet
and exceed the legal definition of treason as they are all lawyers thus experts but acted to violate the
Constitution regardless? Do the actions of the involved lawyers some of who are judges and whom
all belong to federal and/or state bars and to national and state bar associations meet and exceed the
legal definitions under RICO? That is, do the involved bar associations who openly admitted to me
that they knew they were acting in direct violation of the law in the cases of women and then The
People as were judges and who refused to act lawfully thus did not so much as revoke any named
persons membership let alone confront a fellow lawyer or member who is a judge then constitute

6
the formation of a criminal enterprise? Do the activities of the individuals, as I can name at least 5
and as many as 11 activities, then meet the organized crime definition under RICO as I can name
hundreds of individual incidences and as this was done to expressly prevent me from acting as a
federal witness against lawyers and judges as well as other titled officers before or in SCOTUS, a
federal court or for that matter in any lower federal court, and was later done to prevent my children
from acting as federal witnesses in SCOTUS or any federal court and as SCOTUS has always
upheld that it is a violation of RICO if you are acting as a part of an enterprise, if you then commit
individual acts of the named offenses such as money laundering and if you do so to prevent a
federal witness from testifying in a federal case? If so do Obama’s, Bauer’s and Perkins Coie’s
actions then fall under RICO or do they fall squarely under US code and the treason clause in our
Constitution as they are constitutional experts who then deliberately acted to violate the
Constitution?

If chain of command theory is one type of order must be given orally then is SCOTUS by refusing
to allow me an appearance in person as redress then making it impossible for a citizen to execute
chain of command theory thus making it impossible to obey Marbury? Does it then create an
obstruction of justice? Does this target women unjustly as a woman may have no other means to
then issue this order out loud as they are still banned from some combat positions thus cannot
execute chain of command any other way?

Because our Constitution was violated by the inclusion of the 17th amendment and so our original
jurisdiction Senate is no more as Congress may not take up the issue of how or when Senators are
elected as this then changes the Constitutional Republic into another form of government as to do so
first the Congress would have to pass an amendment granting them the power to discuss this issue
and the Constitution prohibits this, or, Congress may not so much as congress upon this issue as the
Constitution expressly forbids this discussion let alone forbids Congress the power to then enact
law regarding this and as our Founders sought to avoid direct election of Senators as well as the
Executive as it is a failed model, was a situation then created whereby AZ, HA and AK not once
appointed constitutionally set Senators as they became states after the fact of the 17th amendment
thus were any persons then elected as Senators from these states prohibited from running for the
office of the Executive, in any capacity, as their election and consequent actions as Senators and
their inclusion on the ballot then has no constitutional basis? That is if the 17th Amendment to the

7
Constitution is repugnant and so is void were the elections of Senators from these states legal and if
not then was their inclusion upon the ballot for President legal? Or were they elected and then
running for President in the capacity as representatives of CORP US, the paper government, only?
Or is the entire election of 2008 repugnant thus void as both major candidates on all 50 ballots are
Senatorial appointments via direct election that never were constitutionally set and have no basis in
the Constitution at all? Thus even if you ignore the natural birth conflict did the citizens have their
liberty right accorded to them, or, did the citizens have an opportunity to elect a constitutionally set
President and Commander or was this made impossible? As not one person on the ballot knew Bush
V Gore for what it is, and that they were not legal as they were not constitutionally set, and as they
did not and could not reason any of the knowledge within my legal case and refused to become
aware of it even after SCOTUS notified them twice by conferencing the case twice over and in so
doing proved conclusively they lacked the human ability to preserve, protect or defend the
Constitution and/or were not willing to do so was the entire ballot in election 08 then no good and
so not valid as one of our named rights is safety and the very nature or design of a Constitutional
Republic is safety?

Did Resolution 511 create or make or elevate the House Judiciary Committee to a quasi court of
constitutional authority as it served to violate the Constitution’s natural born clause as well as the
equal protection clauses and the separation of powers? That is, in the case of Senators and/or
lawyers did Congress specifically the Senate use the House Judiciary Committee to then make legal
what is not and what favored other Senators only as the Committee “approved” 511 and failed to
investigate two of the signers, Obama and Clinton, when they along with McCain had conflict/s
they could never over come to then act as the Executive or did not even qualify to hold the Office
and/or were in violation of the law at the time they ran for the Office of the Executive thus all then
claimed that the actions of those named were legal by relying upon the Committee and not
SCOTUS or the Constitution? Is the Judiciary Committee now being used to circumvent the federal
court thus circumvent We The People? Did this then cause all Americans to then be subjected to an
unconstitutional glass ceiling manufactured by Congress that makes achievement impossible past a
certain point if you are not a member of Congress, not a lawyer, and/or are not willing to violate US
law? Does it serve to consolidate all power in the hands of Congress and make the Office of
President and Commander the domain of members of Congress only? Does it make the sitting
President then beholden to Congress or create an illegal conflict with Congress as his election was

8
only made possible by Congress? Does it unjustly target women as it prevents the vote of a woman
from ever possessing actual legal power, as that then is made impossible specifically for a woman as
the Office of Executive is made exclusively male as now, instead of putting forth qualified women
candidates Congress is illegally qualifying men who aren’t and never will be under our law? Did
511 target me, SUSAN HERBERT, specifically and exactly as proven by this very lawsuit?

What does the phrase “natural born citizen” mean? Must a citizen be born within the US or does it
mean one or both of his or her parents must be natural born American citizens? Must a citizen live
within the Us for a certain length of time to then claim natural birth status? Does Barack Obama
fulfill this requirement? What is must a citizen produce to then prove they are a “natural born
citizen” as only that and age 35 is a named requirement to then legally hold this office? Is a
registration of birth certificate acceptable or must a person produce an actual long birth certificate or
an official transcript of a birth certificate issued by a state and so not a registration only? Is paper
ever proof of natural birth?

Is the office of President and Commander the protected right of mothers and veterans only and a
privilege for all others? If so have women who are mothers been illegally kept off of the ballot
while men who have no right and have not earned the privilege or even proven their willingness and
ability been placed on it? Are the state rules for placement on the ballot arbitrary as a person can
buy out of them and they serve to prove nothing about a candidate? Do these state rules, mostly
because of the effects of discrimination, make it impossible for most citizens to access the ballot?
Do these rules serve to protect the currently entrenched, two party, predominantly male, Judeo-
Christian system?

Is the drafting of women unconstitutional as it constitutes double jeopardy as women are always
subject to death via sex and childbirth while men are not thus women shed blood and risk their lives
in defense of the Constitution each time they give birth? Is “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” unconstitutional
as it yet denies even women who are gay some combat positions namely Commander in Chief and
as it encourages lying from a time before you enter the military thus is itself a violation of the
Constitution?

9
Is it legal for any member of the current Congress to be on the ballot and/or elected to the office of
President as Congress creates legislation, impeaches and declares war, as it is a Congress that
refused to impeach and publicly announced it did not have to do its duties so it would not as it was
above the law, and who refused accord women justice by creating legislation always citing money
as excuse and who declared a war upon bad evidence and did not then address that bad declaration
and who later used money in the form of a denial of funding for equipment and troop requests in
order to prevent the Commander from discharging his duties and so effectively commanding thus
enlisted service members died in defense of institutions or is this a conflict of interest no member of
the Congress can ever overcome to then act as President and Commander? Is this a violation of
separation of power, as members of the Legislature may not then serve in the Executive? Is it legal
for persons to violate a TERM by seeking and claiming another office thus refusing to fulfill the
TERM of office? Or does this create a situation whereby people use offices as if they are stepping
stones to ultimate power as no penalties currently exist for such violations of a term of office and so
persons run for and claim an office for which they have no intention of fulfilling the term?

Is a President and Commander in Chief to be held not only to the highest standard, US law, but the
strictest standard, actual reality, and does Barack Obama meet these standards? Does he have the
ability as “to the best of my ability” is named to fulfill the oath of office as he cannot resolve the
injustices women face nor can he resolve any of the issues Bush V Gore then caused? Was he
unable from a time before he was even nominated by the Democratic Party due to the unique facts
of his life such as being a man, a sitting member of the Congress that did not address a bad
declaration of war, his being a lawyer and a Senator at the same time then he doubly violated Art. 1
Sec. 6 and his inability to reason Bush v Gore for what it is thus he cannot preserve, protect and
defend the constitution as he is then humanly unable to do so? If Barack Obama is found not to be a
citizen has he been committing voter fraud all of these years and so have The People who have been
electing him? Is it unconstitutional for candidates to ‘jump’ states thus establishing residency in
another state ONLY in order to secure a office like Senator or Vice President at the expense of
Natives of that state or does this give overly broad power to the wealthy and the politically
connected?

10
Is campaign funding as it exists now unconstitutional as recent reform only served to make it more
difficult for Did both major parties engage in the buying and selling of the office of the Executive as
evidenced by a reputed $5.3 billion dollar price tag? Did the voters? Does this massive influx of
money and the almost total lack of regulation as this money cannot be traced then make it
impossible for any person not willing to violate our law or the spirit of our law to then become the
elected President and Commander? Does it harm women due to the past effects of discrimination?
Did Barack Obama violate the spirit of the law by using only private funding so he could then raise
and spend an unlimited amount and so did he purchase this office? Does our law make campaign
financing as independent and third party candidates not less so while actually favoring incumbents
and major party candidates?

May you levy a tax upon what is a right? If the pursuit of hapiness is a right, and so work is a right
and it is equivalent to birth, may you tax it is as then you are taxing a person for being born and
pursuing hapiness? Does the federal income tax as it exists today, with its loopholes, exceptions and
‘tax incentives’ accord unfair advantage to the wealthy while unjustly burdening the middle classes
and women? Are all taxes since the unconstitutional installation of Bush and today Obama now
collected as tribute? As it is possible today to track and apportion taxes derived from the ownership
of property and stocks which is indirectly earned by the profiteer is the federal income tax as it is
now levied unconstitutional? Is levying a tax – any tax - against women when they have under
representation in Congress and have been shut out of the two offices that make law, Chief Justice
and the Executive, legal?

Was the 13th Amendment to the Constitution pre the 1871 DC Organic Act known as the Titles Of
Nobility Act ratified by VA upon the federal government receiving a copy of its unified code that
was produced by an act of the VA legislature and which included this amendment? If so was said
amendment then removed for the Constitution w/o due process due to war, due to human error, due
to limited technology of the times, and due to lawyers, members of Congress and the Judiciary
acting to remove it as it effected their persons? If VA did not ratify this amendment, if federal
notification did not occur, may it do so now as the time limits for ratifying an amendment were
enacted after VA took up this resolution?

11
Is the exactly named Creator actual reality? [I can scientifically and conclusively prove this or I
would not make the claim. My proof exceeds the burden of proof standard by leaps and bounds;
that is, I possess much more evidence and proof than is the minimum requirement under our law
and the rules of evidence. No sane, rational person can deny the proof as it is so good. As a
woman I noticed a fw thigns men dismissed as not real and/or not important or never noticed at
all due to our actual biological differences. So far not one scientist or theologian has been able to
cast doubt upon my claim. Only lawyers balk at this legal and scientific claim.] Is Susan a
human being of the Creator and so created equivalent to any man and if so does the Declaration,
Constitution and Marbury then apply to her and then all other women? That is are rights
inalienable for women as well as men?

Was Bush V Gore a failure to act on the part of former President William Clinton and the voters
and was it an illegal violation of separation of power as a Chief Justice may not uncheck him or
herself by negating the whole vote, as the only form of the power of one the Court as a whole may
invoke is unanimous and as a legal custodial relationship is created by the vote and so our custody
was awarded to third persons, lawyers, not on the ballot and whom received not one vote? Did
Bush V Gore then harm women as it has now made their death a valid award of the court and
subjected their children to die for the institutions of government as a bad declaration of war was
never addressed? If so, does remedy and relief exist?

May civil rights groups advocate the promotion of the violation of our law? That is may a civil
rights group use tax dollars to then prmote the destruction of our Constitution in the form of an
agenda that is unconstitutional?

Do the Republicans and Democrats have an illegal monopoly of power as only those two parties
appear on the bqllot in all 50 states? Is it legal to allow persons to buy their way around a states
requirments to then appear on the ballot such as paying a one time fee in lieu of collecting 10,000
signatures or does this give the wealthy overly broad power and unjust advantage?

Is using words to make it seem as if a lie is the truth or to evoke negative emotional feelings
within a person in order to deny with full knowing and deliberation the actual reality of a
litigant and the actual facts of our law and history as a nation the domestic violence named in

12
Article 4 Section 4? Does this then serve to deny us a Republican form of government? Is it a
crime? Is it a violation of our law for law schools to teach this tactic to lawyers?

Is the UCCJ unconstitutional as it awards custody of women over 18 to others as they are attached
to their children and as issue and jurisdiction are one and the same, and so awarding jurisdiction to
any place the mother is not or to any other person but the mother is a violation of equal protection
and due process, her liberty rights, her property rights and her power of one? Does it give judges
overly broad power to not hear difficult or complicated cases? Does it unjustly target women due to
the past effects of discrimination? Did the court err when ruling that custody of children is the
protected right of a man as men never fully vest that right or that interest but only have the
privilege as men do not suffer any injury at all when giving birth? Did it err in its application of the
equal protection clauses as it failed to consider the biological facts thus applied the law as if men
and women are exactly the same when they are not and never will be? Does awarding custody and
child support to men give already ovelyl empowered and overly privileged men even more power
and does it make it impossible for women then to achieve equality as evidenced by the last 30 or 40
years?

Is it treason to organize and collect money to overthrow the executive via foreignization? Is this
protected free speech? Do only mothers and veterans have a Constitutionally protected right to
hold the office of the president while all others have the privilege of becoming elected to this
office?

Is the New York State unwritten policy of never taking any reports of emotional assault and/or
battery no matter how severe, in direct violation of the written code of New York, a policy that
unjustly denies women and children their rights as they yet suffer from discrimination thus this then
is legally created and enforced vulnerablility and as women are the majority of the the victims of
emotional abuse and as this is due to a biological difference thus women are targeted unjustly so? Is
it a policy that then violates the Constitution as some rights such as liberty and safety are emtotions
thus NY is then actively denying women and children their Constitutional rights? Is the unwritten
policy of PA to ignore or deny the charge of domestic violence in reasoning their decisions the
unjust targeting of women? Is FL’s failure to name emotion in its domestic violence code
unconstitutional? Did custody of my children automatically revert to me when the third parties left

13
the jurisdiction of PA and sought redress in NY, a state that had previously denied jurisdiction when
I, the mother, asked NY to claim it and when the third parties were in default of a contract made an
order of the court of PA? Was it a whole violation of my rights to deny me, the birth mother,
standing in NY my native state but then grant it to the third parties only as they did not get their
way in PA? Did NY ever have jurisidiction or did it violate the law to hear it each time as our verty
first violation of rights was a federal violation? Did this become a federal offense as NY then
docketed and heard yet another action against me AFTER FL had finally docketed it when I filed as
the plaintiff and AFTER the federal court has assumed jurisdiction as I was within SCOTUS and
NY expressly did so to then prevent me from acting as a plaintiff in any capacity and to prevent me
from appearing as a witness in federal court? Did the forcible movement of my person and my
children’s persons agaisnt our will sometimes perpetrated by judges and other officers of the states
then constitute human trafficking as it was known and as it was done only to avoid spending money
– taxes – on me and my children (and to avoid spending money on resolving doemstic violence as
enforcing legislation and federal court rulings on behalf of women and children was deemed to be
too expensive or so officials told me ot my face) thus the states handed us back and forth like
chattel? Did this trafficking then make the actual sale of our persons possible?

Does a fetus become a person with rights when intrinsic force or human conscious awareness enters
he or she? Does this occur at 28 days post conception? Does abortion beyond 28 days post
conception cease being the right of the mother and/or the states as human heart cells begin to beat at
three weeks, conscious awareness enters at four and some brain activity has been detected at five
weeks post conception thus the right and the interest then belongs to the living government of We
The People as named in our Constitution thus only abortion before or at 28 days is a right of the
state? If abortion does cease being a right and as a woman does not vote to end her life if she is
innocent of a crime may the states and federal government deny women a health exception and the
morning after pill or any other birth control or any other medical treatment related to birth for
reasons of “safety” or as matter of policy as it is then forcing her to subject herself to possible injury
and death against her will and as it strips her of any authority over her own person and as these
excuses and policies are arbitrary and not based upon law, precedent or even actual reality but only
personal belief and deep seated prejudices? Is my son Christopher Quinones yet a legal unborn
person as FL unconstitutionally dropped the charges filed in his name without contacting me in any
way only as FL had a policy to not press cases of domestic violence when the woman was strangled

14
but survived as it was costly and to not press cases of domestic violence when the spouse was a
Navy dependent? Could FL know if I was or was not a good witness as it did not contact me at all
after the charges were filed but yet claimed based upon being a Navy dependent I was a bad
witness?

May the federal or state government deny funding for sex education classes that teach about birth
control other than abstinence as it has been proven this alone does not work, as it is based on
nothing other than religious and personal mores and is due to the effects of discrimination? Are girls
then effected in manner boys are not as they are then subject to pregnancy, injury and death and so it
is a denial of equal protection and due process and may be a denial of their very life? When does a
child’s right to know and the common good overtake a parents right as the child is subject to injury
and only girls are subject to death?

Are the powers of physical strength aka liberty and to give birth aka will distinct equivalent powers
and is this the separation of powers that natural law delineates as man and woman? If so, does a
man lose custody, control and any property interest in a child when he loses control of the sperm as
we choose to have sex and as a child is mostly the energy and matter of a woman turned into
another form? If so, may the courts hold a mother as most accountable and responsible for that child
in our family courts? Should child support be attached to a woman and not a child as the mother
risks death, is injured and experiences pain via pregnancy and birth while a father does not? Is it
about liability for damages to a woman’s person as birth thus the injury to her body is the direct
result of sex with a man and if you are separated then the honor bound contract has been violated?
And as this then does not place a price upon the heads of children thus it prevents the sale of
persons in our lower courts? Do only enlisted or once enlisted service members who are fathers
have a constitutionally protected right of custody and property as they too exactly like mothers have
risked death in defense of the Constitution, both the paper and the living Constitution?

Is the rape of women and/or child sexual molestation a crime equivalent to treason as it annihilates
self both physical and emotional and so is death and the overthrow of our law as it harms not only
one person but incalculable numbers of future citizens? Are both crimes then punishable by death?
Is it a violation of separation of power for this mostly male government to refuse to punish these
crimes, to punish them with sentences that in no way reflect the actual injury, to refuse to sentence

15
perpetrators according to the laws that do exist, to accord these male offenders early release as
policy and refuse to even prosecute at all as money as cited as reason for allowing rape kits to sit
unprocessed thus making all of us unsafe? Is this taxation without representation? Does it target
women unjustly as they are the exclusive victims of rape and are the majority of child victims and
as due to the past effects of discrimination they have no way to defend themselves or overcome
such injury?

Is gay a protected class? Do gay rights exist in our law? Are gay, heterosexual and bi-sexual
qualities or terms of being human or conditions? May the states accord same sex civil unions the
same protection as opposite sex marriages or unions or is there a vested, federal interest in
protecting the birth of new, baby constitutions? Do the exact words “natural born” legislate this? As
does common sense as only women give birth and all new constitutions – even those labeling
themselves gay – began as an egg and sperm?

Is "Don't Ask Don't Tell" unconstitutional as it is based upon appearance alone, as it prevents
women from entering some combat positions namely the office of Commander in Chief and as it
encourages a violation of the law and the honor code - lying about your person - from a time before
you enter the military? Did this policy harm women and the military, as it is partly responsible for
the animosity between women and military brass as it caused anger, blame and guilt to be placed
upon all? Was this policy a means to appeal to a tiny segment of the population in order to then
garner votes, appeal to a wealthy lobby and mostly to avoid granting women justice as it masked the
actual reality of denying some their protected rights while encouraging the US military to lie under
the guise of “equality”? Is this one of the reasons domestic violence became rampant within the
military as most all citizens did not stop to reason why the last place you want anyone to lie or to
condone it as policy is in the military or the office of President and Commander? As no person
reasoned without gay men we’d have a military but without women we would not? Has the military
unfairly been blamed for a problem that was created, condoned and promoted by elected officials,
by unfit and unjust men most of whom were or are unwilling to serve, and a two party monopoly
catering and pandering to all but the actual law of the US? [This question is still good as until the
policy is ruled unconstitutional President will invoke it as a matter of popularity and as it directly
harmed me as a woman].

16
Are children the right of anyone or is all third person intervention in creation unconstitutional as the
moment of the union of egg and sperm formerly a detail of God may be known and so third person
then has responsibility for any child he or she ‘created’, as women feel pain when harvesting eggs
but men do not when harvesting sperm so it is irreparable injury – damages, as no person can know
the future and if that woman will suffer further and if the child will be safe and as it is illegal to
recruit for free or pay even in the form of "donor's fees" and "insurance payments" one woman to
risk her life via pregnancy or birth in place of another as no man can recruit or pay another man to
sign the draft registry and/or risk death in war? Is "life for sale" and the denial that birth is still
dangerous and even deadly one of the direct results of the discrimination of women?

Do all babies have an inalienable right to a mother and father as it is about the opportunity existing
and not whether or not parents are married, stay married or live or die?

Is custody awarded to any person but the birth mother equivalent to a death sentence, as it is
emotional death that cuts to the very core of her being and is as lethal as physical death? If so, must
a state then grant automatic appeal upon any award made to any person not the mother? Was the NY
State Court of Appeals refusal to grant my children and me automatic appeal a violation of equal
protection and due process and is it a policy that favors men while unjustly targeting women and
children and thus treating humans as animals who suffer only from physical injury and death?

Are private paid for custody evaluations and agreements illegal and a violation of children's rights as
these contracts clearly state the children and not the adults are the clients and no minor may enter
contract, as the persons seeking custody are then made to pay the evaluators fee and as children have
no way to enforce the terms of these contracts no matter if the parents default or the evaluator
defaults or in the worst case, if even the state and federal government fails them?

May a state create the emergency but then refuse to address it legally by claiming it does not address
emergencies if the person citing the emergency lives out of state and the state knew this as fact upon
the creation of the emergency? May the federal government create the emergency but then refuse to
address it thus becoming the emergency itself? Is the Patriot Act unconstitutional as the exigent
emergency it is based upon never existed and as the FBI's criteria for searching persons is not based
upon any reasonable suspicion of illegal activity but only appearances and so it unjustly targets

17
some persons due to things beyond their control? Is it treason to spy on law abiding Americans in
this way, when it is not a true emergency, and is it slander to call such an act "Patriot" as it is in no
way representative of any founder or founding principle and as that word was used to make it seem
as if it was actually legal and necessary? Did it become emotional assault and battery? Did it deny
us a republican form of government? Does our exactly worded law naming "safety" make this
unconstitutional?

Is the Federal Reserve an illegal and possibly criminal institution as it is privately owned and not
subject to US law and even ‘legalizes’ impossible standards by effectively stating that if the
agreement creating it is found to be unenfocrceable it does not then relieve the US of any
obligation? And as it served to subject us and our currency to foreign authority totally removing the
named legal minting of currency and totally removed liberty from or denied liberty to We The
People and as it gives this power to an authority not named in the Constitution – that private cocern
- rather then the Congress and was the IMF/UN Treaty quitclaiming the US Treasury to the
IMF/UN ever legal as legislation concerning it was enacted at least five months before we ever
legally recognized the UN thus it was a predetermined judicial fate forced upno the People without
theuir consent? Does the Federal Reserve artifically create and manipulate interest rates thus force
us to suffer things like inflation,deflation, recession and boom that we would otherwise not suffer if
not for the Reserve and does it do this for the benefit of other privateers and other nations not the
US? Or, Has it turned the US into a gloabal welfare system that benefits everybody but US
citizens?

Does an exact Treaty with American Indians sit within De Cabveza’s notes that the US inherited
upon the purchase of LA and when it later took possession of FL both legally and illegally and were
we denied the opportunity to make good on it as it sat untranslated in Spain thus we did not know it
existed? If this Treaty is still good does it then mean my standing to argue this case is purest of all
as I now sit or live within land named in this Treaty and was a resident of at least one other named
place thus does its existence allow me to argue my sovereignty and so our sovereignty, our power
and authority as inalienable, back to the Spanish conquistadors and American Indians who were
here before our Founders and then around the globe due to the Human Genome Project and then
even back to the creation of this universe due to physics thus proving rights are inalienable and of
The Creator, that is, they came into existence with this universe, and does it then liberate us from

18
the sitting corrupted government as it then voids the later actions of the illegal paper government as
they are all based upon what is not legal and not even real as it is all not named within our law or is
based upon bad math?

May the citizens refuse to obey the equal protection clauses thus refuse to apply the law to women
only as they personally do not believe women are created equal? Is the refusal of the citizens to
apply the law to women the reason the promise of Brown has never been fulfilled and is it why
other forms of intolerance and discrimination yet flourish?

Once NY State legally certified Susan Herbert “forever pro se” meaning only she could and would
represent herself thus the Constitution did SCOTUS then have a duty to hear her case as that alone
made hearing possible only in SCOTUS as it is the creation of an absolute class of one and as all
lawyers she approached refused to represent her? Does the SCOTUS action on 11/20/08 prove that
Susan Herbert would have won if heard and that all lower court action was senseless and pointless
thus she and her children were made to suffer needlessly for two years only as SCOTUS is
prejudiced against nonlawyers? Are SCOTUS employees exempt from the mandated reporting laws
or did the clerks and the Justices have a moral and legal obligation to contact the authorities when
they refused to assist Susan Herbert and her children as the SCOTUS employees knew the exact
details of criminal actions against Susan Herbert and her children?

19
 IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Petitioner respectfully prays that a Writ of Certiorari issue to review the judgment below.
OPINIONS BELOW

[X] For cases from federal courts:

The opinion of the 11th Federal Circuit court of Appeals appears at Appendix A to the petition and
is

[ ] reported on the ; or,

[ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or,
[X] is unpublished.

The opinion of the Middle District of FL Federal Court appears at Appendix B to the petition and
is

[ ] reported on the ; or,

[ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or,
[X] unpublished.

The opinion of the Rennselaer County Family Court appears at Appendix C to the petition and is
[X] unpublished.

The opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States appears at appendix D to the petition and
is
[X] published as it is the SCOTUS docket dated 11/20/08.

The opinion of the United States (Corp US) aka the 2008 Presidential election appears at
appendix E to the petition and is
[X] published everywhere except in a court reporter.

The opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, Bush V Gore, appears at Appendix F to
the petition and is
[X] published.

20
 Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is the Supreme Court as I am challenging Bush V Gore which is a case of original
jurisdiction and the election of 2008 as well as the entire sitting government as it is not our
constitutionally set government but is a government based upon dead institutions: paper that is not
legal and is often the product of unconstitutional actions and bad math and that has no relation to our
Constitution. It exists as it is entrenched and until now no person had the ability to address it via
lawsuit. As women have never had actual legal power I was born into harm and have not once been
accorded the protection of US law or US case law and am now being kept out of all lower courts as I
was not granted an appearance in person or on paper and when I am a first person victim who is pro
se. Also: I am the lone citizen who thought to engage SCOTUS directly as officers of the now sitting
but dead government insisted SCOTUS was to blame for my injury and their unlawful actions thus I
was injured by SCOTUS and so now am addressing direct injury for which SCOTUS is responsible
thus USC 1331 is repugnant in my case and is void. I never should have had to set foot in a lower
court if I can and did name SCOTUS or its employees.

I have never before adjudicated federal questions and although the states have dragged me into court
repeatedly they never had jurisdiction as that belonged to the federal government as the most
important records are held by both as we were first harmed and had our constitutionally protected
rights violated as Navy dependents and as PA never intended to abide by the terms of its contract with
me and my children due to unwritten policy I was unaware of when I entered that contract. FL is now
sitting on the case and is refusing to act. It has been for over a year and a half. The states have
actually refused to allow me to file or appear as a plaintiff and have gone so far as to destroy and not
file or docket petitions I authored. I know the reason why: The states are bound and determined I will
only appear as a defendant as it then makes the actions of state court clerks and judges appear to be
legal and justified on paper to an outside observer when that is not the truth at all in any way; it is
done to give third parties some of whom are not related to me an unfair and unjust advantage, as if
they are innocent when they are not. In my unique case some of this activity has now escalated to
become criminal, Marbury is violated and as all offices have fallen as this nation is no longer
operating under the authority of the US, under the Constitution, but only falsely claims it is then no
form of remedy and relive exist for me in any other institution.

If you know as fact a case belongs in the Supreme Court as the Supreme Court has already claimed it
via the granting of original jurisdiction to Bush V Gore and/or by direct action in regards to a case the
plaintiff has brought and you know this case to be a constitutional authority case that was a gross
violation of separation of power and/or the equal protection clauses by every branch of government,
you must then rule and/or issue an order for the Supreme Court to hear the case. In over 200 years the
Supreme Court has never failed to be accountable and responsible; it has always been of the ability to
review itself without exception. It might take 50 years sometimes but they’ve done it. It is disgusting
that the other federal judges think nothing of tarnishing this amazing record in order to preserve their
personal, unjustly privileged status quo and act as if we deny the reality of the current state of our
nation it will all just go away. It will go away. I’ll die someday as will the US but nothing will be
made different or better.

I have lived the life that is the case for equivalent rights. I cite the extensive and lengthy whole of this
case, the issue of this case now the most important case since Marbury and perhaps the most
important in world history, the sensitive nature of some of these issues and the fact that illegal and in
violation of the law court activity occurred in three states and in the federal court and only because I
am SUSAN HERBERT exactly. I cite that I was born into this harm as a woman and cannot possibly
escape this harm in any other court as they steadfastly refuse to adjudicate the legal issues and my

21
injury. I cite so far I have found no cases of any woman or any pro se nonlawyer arguing in her own
defense before this court. I cite John Adams telling me to protest loudly and Justice Stevens advising
Citizen, heal thyself! in his decision regarding Bush V Gore.

Congress may be able to address the written Constitution but I’d like to see it address its unwritten
spirit as that is not in our paper Constitution and neither is the Supreme Court as it came to exist but in
our Declaration and Marbury thus Congress then is grossly violating the separation of powers with
1331 and all of its recent activities.

Finally: This case always was a case of original jurisdiction. That has not changed as I stated above.
But due to “judge” Hull’s recent order? It is doubly so. If you look you will see my case caption has
changed. I am not employing a nasty lawyer trick used to deceitfully gain entry as an original case
by changing it. By naming Roberts I named the entire Judiciary as heinous acts, crimes, have been
perpetrated by judges involved in this case. This began with a county judge acting to perpetrate
what she knew as fact to be kidnapping; that is she knew as fact my children had been kidnapped by
a relative and then did everything she could to help him going so far as to admit openly in her ruling
she had zero evidence let alone proof to rule against me but was doing so regardless. This would be
her violation of NY code 561, as she assigned greatest and only weight to something NY says you
may not even consider and NY later tossed out as manufactured only a couple of weeks after she
entered her ruling. It culminated in two federal judges acting in such a way I can call it nothing
short of collusion and conspiracy. I did not think a judge could do anything worse but Frank Hull
did it: I very clearly articulated and reasoned, I supported my claim with hardcore fact and the law
along with US case law, that an act to deny my case or dismiss my case or to render my case moot is
to then rule The Constitution itself is denied and dismissed by the federal court as it can be nothing
else as SCOTUS already acted directly in my case. I clearly reasoned how and why this would be an
act of treason that would meet and even exceed the Constitutional clause naming treason. “judge”
Hull then outdid himself and committed what I truly believe to be every bit as bad as the abuse of
my children: He ORDERED a court clerk to UNFILE or REMOVE THE CONSTITUTION OUR
FOUNDERS AUTHORED FROM THE FEDERAL RECORD AND THEN REMOVE IT FROM
THE 11TH DISTRICT FEDERAL APPEALS COURT BY MAILING IT BACK TO ME. He is
ordering a clerk to participate in what is a crime and even involving the Post Office as the only way
to “return it unfiled” is to mail it. And he did this after I wrote within the very motion he was ruling
upon, and that motion is itself The Constitution in another form as they are one and the same and I
went out of my way to tell him my motion and brief based upon the SCOTUS docket symbolize the
purest form our Constitution is ever realized as; I wrote: You have read this thus you own the
knowledge. To return this knowledge you will have to cut your head off and return your brain to me
as there is no other way to remove knowledge [of the crime you are committing]. In other words: As
it is treason you will have to die as that is the only means left to remove the canker you are from the
body from belief known as the United States of America and as the named penalty for treason is
death exactly. I told him if he did it again after reading the motion the criminal act rose to treason
exactly as it matters not WHO exactly did it as this exact same bench and he now had every fact
went but did it regardless. I even told him we are setting precedent; I told him he could look up the
SCOTUS docket as he would find no other case that had been directly acted upon after the US
failed to respond thus he knew. I reasoned any doubt this man could have possibly had as if he did
not trust the SCOTUS docket he could pick up a phone and call Roberts or a clerk to ask if they had
indeed handled my case. This order is very telling as this man met every word I said and every
statement I made tit for tat; that is he fine tuned his order to then sneak it past the public as if it is
legal. I can walk you through this order and show you each thing he did and where you will find it
within my motion. An example is: I stated that a Jax Federal Clerk was ordered to pull a complaint I
filed; I stated that the judge asked her to her face to pull it and so this man read that and so then
‘ordered’ the clerk to pull the motion within his ruling as if that made it just and not a crime. He
knows it is still a crime as it is evidence tampering if nothing else and as I stated if clerk obeys an
22
unconstitutional order then the clerk is liable according to Marbury. I AM NOT PLAYING THAT
GAME; IT IS A GAME JUDGES SEEM TO ENJOY ENGAGING IN AS EVERY ONE I’VE
ENCOUNTERED HAS PLAYED IT. In this same way I can show you where this man came to
have every idea he placed in his order and guess what else? In at least two of my earlier filings
which he had I said, ‘Judges act as if my complaints are instruction manuals as in they read what
my injury is and then use my complaint to then figure out how they can harm me over again, as if
they are using my words to then learn how to perpetrate the injury in a more insidious, sneaky
manner; it is as if I am sharpening their ability to cause harm’. This man spilled his true intent and
true motivation onto the paper. His black heart is self-evident. I have placed this man’s name in my
caption as it is my true belief he earned it and he volunteered; he had all of the facts and all of the
case law plus all of the history; of the hundreds or even thousands of people I have crossed paths
with he is the living embodiment of treason or so I truly believe. This man will answer for it, not for
authoring this ruling and order but for then ENTERING IT AS AN OFFICIAL FEDERAL
DECISION AND FEDERAL ORDER. This man speaks only for himself as this man had one more
thing no other person had – ZERO REASON TO BE AFRAID - thus he too stands alone and so is
now within my case caption. As all offices have fallen as the US’ failure to respond proves placing
him in my case caption is the only way I know of to then make him answer for his action as he must
answer to The People as that is who he ultimately made war against. I in no way added his name to
manipulate this court as I do not commit crimes and I have no need to employ tricks, as I possess
skill. See the attached brief and motion.

Statement of Case

This is the most extraordinary case in all of US history, as the law no longer exists in actual reality
but only upon paper. I am Susan of In Re Susan Herbert, Supreme Court of the United States Case
#’s 07-9804 & 08-6622 and now Susan V Obama, Roberts and The US. Upon first hearing Marbury
was violated and upon second hearing? A response was due on November 5th, 2008 and no response
ever came. The violation of Marbury and failure to respond by the US led me to appear in local
district family court, Rennselaer County, NY, on October 24th, 2008 in the state and in the exact
court with the exact persons that violated me wholly and absolutely and upon the same claim now
before US Supreme Court as no other recourse now exists as I have exhausted the process as
Federal Appeals was it. This local district family court action was filed within my 25 day window to
petition to be reheard and it was then held even after the US Supreme Court acted to address the
violation of Marbury by re-docketing and re-conferencing my case. This local court then attempted
to ungrant motions the Supreme Court had already granted, and unhear a case the Supreme Court
had heard and is now hearing again. Several of my rights were violated by this local court some of
which rise to acts of crime. As the plaintiffs cited my human ability to enter the Supreme Court and
the Court itself for refusing to accord me any and all remedy and relief so this court and the Chief
Justice himself and now the Solicitor General aka the US for failing to respond are at fault for my
most recent injuries as NY and the involved third parties said they would not be harming me IF I
had been granted oral argument. These injuries are unending and ceaseless until addressed.

Due to perjured statements and due to this court’s failure to award me any remedy and relief when it
is available and then due to the actions of local police I was then forced to file for an emergency
change of venue in Duval County FL on the very day I was denied by this court in April of 2008.
Thus I have an action open in Duval County FL that has sat and sat as Duval refuses to allow me to
appear pro se and as FL is attempting to avoid my case at all costs as it began here in 1995 and 1996
with a federal and state violation of my rights and the rights of both of my sons one of whom was
unborn at the time.

By appearing simultaneously in two local district local district courts in two states and in US
Supreme Court upon the same claim I then appeared in all US courts simultaneously as all fall in
23
between as US Supreme Court is our national family court. Two courts in two states is beyond
extreme; three courts one of which is our court of constitutional authority or was, is beyond
anything in this nation in all of US history. This has never happened to a citizen before and is due to
all citizens - the voters – failing me over and over since before I was born including Barack Obama
himself. If Barack Obama had not violated the law or had not ignored my notice of suit then I might
never have been harmed further as I first contacted him in June of 2007 – before I filed in US
Supreme Court.

In over ten years of acting to enforce the law on my behalf I have never once been accorded any
relief at all. Now I am not only denied any appearance in person but the sitting judiciary has begun
pulling filed documents and ordering clerks to pull them after they have acted upon them thus I am
now not ‘allowed’ to appear on paper. I have exhausted all other options and all other courts. I have
almost exhausted this court and may be forced to get myself arrested upon federal criminal charges
to then prove my case against this Court, Obama and this nation.

Lawyers, politicians and judges have become a privileged class granted an honor no other citizen
has – argument in person before this court – and so blanket immunity from any and all named
consequence under our law. Citizens have no means to exercise their rights as they cannot secure
them as these people now act as if they are members of a criminal enterprise, the bar and bar
associations, and so as if the are gangsters. In my case? At last count at least 11 of the RICO Act’s
named activities have been perpetrated upon me and my children including kidnapping and this is
done to keep from testifying in federal court expressly and specifically SCOTUS. When Judges are
participating? It constitutes treason but this illegal paper government insists as long as not one
‘authority’ is willing to act then as long as no paper charge exists they are guilty. In fact what they
did and are doing never happened as long as no paper naming it exists. When I then went and
secured that paper, the SCOTUS docket listing me as a nonlawyer pro se plaintiff who directly
entered and forced direct action? These criminals, for that is what are, then ignored and denied the
docket and SCOTUS actions including its prior rulings thus stating via their words, actions and
failure to act that SCOTUS is not a constitutional authority but court rule is thus then proving our
law is dead. I, Susan, never needed to live through election 08 as I knew the people sitting as the
‘official’ government caused the Constitution to drop dead about 20 years ago. My children and I
never had an opportunity; we were never not going to be injured. Barack Obama and all of election
2008 is nothing more than show for the sake of show, to ‘prove’ to law-abiding citizens that today
no power belongs to the people, something the people have known as fact for quite awhile.

Both of my cases which were before this court and were denied any remedy and relief in violation
of the law and all prior federal precedent are inextricably linked to the 2008 election of the
President and Commander in Chief which then resulted in Barack Obama becoming the President
elect when he is a person who is guilty of harming me by failing to act for me or to answer a notice
of suit I served upon him, or to answer a summary of my suit or to answer an emergency letter I sent
him concerning a constitutional challenge regarding this war and my person. He also referred to my
person as “garbage” or rather his representatives did. Barack Obama refused over and over to
acknowledge me, my children, our plight or my case in any way and I cannot ignore this is due to
the very nature of my suit and my legal claim: I am the person Obama had to unseat or defeat to
then act as President and Commander not John McCain and not George Bush Jr. as I am the acting
legal President while Bush Jr. actually sits and our law names the difference between legal and
actual reality.

Barack Obama now representing the US as President when his election is itself a violation of our
law and my rights let injury befall my person and my children’s persons and allowed innocent
citizens some of who are mothers and enlisted service members to die. I alone am the only citizen
able to bring this suit as I lived to tell and I have the ability to act pro se. Unbelievably, the Chief
24
Justice of this court or his agent then committed what is a crime personal in nature against me as he
received an application for a stay, acted upon the knowledge within it but then hid it from the public
by refusing to file it. In short he illegally circumvented the injured class – me, all women, enlisted
service members and the pro se - when he did not have the legal power or moral authority to do so
as his very appointment is not legal – yet. It is personal as I’m unique; it cannot be anything other
than personal or I would not be unique in all of SCOTUS history! This is a crime personal in nature
due to the contents of that application as I, not a lawyer authored it. This court cannot now refuse
to address a monstrous legal situation it itself created by refusing to obey US law and by treating me
like no other litigant ever. How is this not a criminal act?

For the same reason it is a criminal act as issue and jurisdiction are one and the same and always
were due to my very first contact with SCOTUS. It may not be a crime but only mistake or may
even be a genius legal maneuver due to the contents of the application itself, lol. This court and its
Chief may not have known something that I did as it is not on the paper as I truly believed it is
obvious when it may not be. Plus the Founders never promised me fair or easy and in fact informed
me it would be unfair and most difficult of all. Thus here I am still as I’m forever pro se and as I
am acting to claim my award unlike William Marbury who did not act upon leaving SCOTUS as
Marshall instructed him to do:

I, Susan, the living person acting PROVE Marbury and SCOTUS is our law as it is organic to We
The People and not the illegal paper government now sitting that has no relation to either our living
or dead Constitution. To become the law SCOTUS and its Chief must hear me in person as no
nonlawyer or nonpaper constitution has appeared before SCOTUS and until or unless one does?
SCOTUS is not law but only theory and so actual criminals can and do negate its rulings; they can
and do deny us liberty and justice as a living citizen who is of the living, constitutionally set
government only and so not of any paper like a law diploma, college degree, law license or two
required outside signatures as references then has no legal recourse when injured as the Constitution
and the ability to enforce it via order of the court is not real or actual for them. It accords their
power and authority to the paper instead of to the person and this is not our law as WE THE
PEOPLE EMPOWER THE PAPER AND SCOTUS NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

It’s not humanly possible for me to empower my paper documents and so lend my conscious
awareness to the Constitution and SCOTUS unless I appear in person as I have no lawyer and never
will as the lawyer who can make my case for me does not exist. If my injury is partially the result of
no nonlawyers ever arguing before SCOTUS and no woman being allowed direct entry and/or entry
to then make her own case I must then act pro se for to hire a lawyer is then to lose my federal
standing! My case is a constitutional authority case thus I, not my lawyer, must act to preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution before SCOTUS and on behalf of SCOTUS. So then SCOTUS
and its Chief (or a clerk acting as an agent of a Justice) had no choice but to injure me and with full
knowing and deliberation as if they did not? MAKING THIS LEGAL ARGUMENT WOULD
THEN BE IMPOSSIBLE. I COULD NEVER SECURE JUSTICE!

The denial of oral argument and now any appearance at all in any form along with the failure of the
Solicitor General to respond make my case proves all I claim for me for if even one office remained
checked or even one other person was obeying both the law and the spirit of the law then I would not
be writing this as my case would be resolved or it never would have gone on for ten years across
several states until it landed in United States Supreme Court as an authority case of original
jurisdiction as this would then be impossible.

Monell V DSS upheld a citizen’s right to sue to enforce the law; Bush V Gore set precedent allowing
me to sue for legal power and custody of the US; Marbury, never applied to women, states I must defy
illegal, unethical and immoral orders of commanding officers and that I am equal to all other citizens
25
up to and including the President as my one vote, denied me since before 2000, is equivalent to
Executive Order; Brown proved discrimination causes a physical and emotional injury to the class and
proof was life not science and not the exact words of our law as “black” appears no where in our law
and the science did not exist until the 1970’s. I am a woman and a member of the only injured class
still denied a federal ruling in their favor a la Brown. As a woman the 19th amendment, the equal
protection clauses and the exact words of our law as written in 1776 & 1787 clearly state I am to be
accorded equal legal power but this legal power has not once been realized so my vote has been
nothing more than an appearance as I went through the motion of voting when it was meaningless.
Since before 2000 I was and am denied my vote; I have been lied to by those holding office, the law
has never protected me at all as it is renegotiated against my will via force and as I was born into harm
in both this national family and my own nuclear family as women are subjected to unsafe conditions
and so as safety is denied us as is liberty, as liberty is an emotion and a protected right and liberty is
realized as justice, then I nor any woman is safe.

Today I have been subjected to even newer injury since I brought forth my first petition: The citizens
have acted to elect a person to the office of President based only upon an appearance – “black” – as
they have reasoned and decided that appearance then equals justice when it does not and when their
decision flies in the face of actual reality and our law and the NY courts have once again
unconstitutionally acted to deny me my liberty rights and did so after denying me any appearance as
both my testimony on paper and in person was wholly ignored and labeled not of any meaning or
consequence in a custody action when I am the birth mother and it is third parties opposing me. A man
who cannot possibly fulfill the oath of office and who has a conflict of interests he can never
overcome, who stated he would not because he could reason constitutional law on behalf of women
and their children as defining life was beyond him, who refused to answer the notice of suit I sent him,
who refuses to let any citizen see his original birth certificate as if it contains some kind of super-secret
information and who has announced he will break the law and even subject women to double jeopardy
is now the President elect and violent and unrelated men have been awarded control of my person and
my children as if they actually own us. See my Reasoning below. The citizens have then committed
treason as Bush V Gore which remains a tie as it is not 9 as 5-4 as 1 as that is bad math and not our law
and In Re Susan Herbert went unajudicated as did the violation of Marbury at the time the citizens
voted for President and all had notification their vote for Obama or McCain would then rise to an act
of treason as it would become treason as we are at actual war and as it would result in the death of our
Constitutional Republic both legally and physically if either man was then installed as President. They
had access to the docket and I myself made several attempts to inform them. There exists a write in
space for just such an emergency. The voters did not “believe” our written law nor my case as the
Supreme Court denied me oral argument and the citizens have been led to mistakenly believe our law
is our law only if the Supreme Court says so, or that injury is only if the Supreme Court says so, which
is not truth, which defies reality and which is not our law itself as the federal court does not make law.
State and federal judges acted as if the law does not apply to them or me, as if they could make up
what does not exist and use lies and rule to then support the injury they are inflicting upon me, making
it seem as if it is just when it is not or as if I deserved to be harmed when no person does.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander; equal protection and due process then means if Bush
and Gore were able to address the vote and if Bush was then able to overturn it, then I, Susan, the
injured party and a member of the injured class known as woman or female may then press suit
seeking to drive what is now endemic corruption and discrimination out of our institutions by
informing the people and being awarded constitutional remedy and relief, this Writ and an appearance
in person to give oral argument rather than unconstitutional remedy and relief as Bush, Obama and the
Austin’s were awarded thus injuring all Americans as it is now the effects of Clinton’s perjury and
failure to resolve a tied decision of this court and Bush V Gore with all of its effects that harms us as
does the denial of justice to my own person, as there is no actual reason or cause other than woman,
genius and ethical.
26
All other authority cases and all other original jurisdiction cases were brought by men on behalf of
men and I alone, a woman exactly named Susan Herbert, was denied oral argument when I
specifically asked for hearing as remedy and relief and hearing in a case of my standing is then
automatically both reading and oral argument. Anything less makes liberty and justice impossible
and is a violation of Marbury. This court denied me oral argument without any reasoning or just
cause; the NY family court then cited my injury was “forever”. I entered this unconstitutional
finding to this court upon entering In Re Susan a second time. Thus In Re Susan Herbert became a
Bill of Attainder as I alone am unique and have been treated like no other natural born citizen ever
in US history; the refusal of this court to address injuries it has partially caused is then a Bill of
Attainder in my case as it is in my name only, and it is treason, as it works a corruption of blood and
as it then causes incalculable injury to not only my immediate biological descents but to my
national family which is all citizens, past, present and future. To be clear, Austin V Herbert and
Bush v Gore became In Re Susan Herbert and now Susan V Obama, Roberts and the US thus I
became subject to what constitutes a Bill of Attainder as my name alone appears on my case as I
have no legal representation and this was deemed to be “forever”. As I am my own attorney then
this means I will forever be banned from appearing in court in person as a petitioner or plaintiff and
so forever be banned from adjudicating my injury. “Forever pro se” means I am the last American
citizen standing in defense of our law, as I am also forever constitutional authority and original
jurisdiction.

As loopy as it sounds if your issue is SCOTUS aka the Constitution and the legal authority both
paper and living thus you’re a pro se authority case a la Marbury SCOTUS had to injure you thus
your very injury opens up the avenue to sue to then restore justice and so restore constitutional
authority. I needed and wanted a denial as I claimed I had no protection of the law; if SCOTUS then
granted me protection via granting a Writ any sooner I would have protection of the law but no
case, lol! I MEANT TO MAKE IT VERY PERSONAL TO THEN FORCE SCOTUS’ HAND
THUS SCOTUS, THE CLERKS AND ROBERTS ARE IMMUNE; THEY ACTED AS I NEEDED
THEM TO ACT. Who cares why as long as we got here: In a position to PROVE our form of
government along with Marbury V Madison is the most perfect of all.

I only blamed and faulted Roberts and the clerks as I could as it happened to me and to then sneak
my case past the sitting crooks, as I always knew I would have to enter my case backwards thus file
it whole, with a brief, upon exhausting the process as that is the only way if you are a woman and if
you cannot tell SCOTUS what it does not know about the injury any other way as all access to the
legal system including an appearance in person or on paper is denied you. Who can fault SCOTUS
for being composed of lawyers if it does not realize LAWYER and/or PAPER is my legal problem
and so caused the injury? Thus filing and so hearing me on paper only is then an exact violation of
my rights?

Upon tangling with the Federal Appeals court and upon receiving a ridiculous, outrageous order that
instructs a clerk to PHYSICALLY UNFILE an acted upon motion to then deny me any appearance
at all in any form thus denying The People the knowledge contained within that motion so that
liberty and justice is then made impossible to secure in any way whatsoever I am back to try this
again as now...my brief exists! I can and will lend it my conscious awareness in person! I can and
so did enter my SCOTUS case whole as any true, actual authority case of original jurisdiction must
be entered whole!

Thus no action on SCOTUS part is actually criminal if it occurred BEFORE I created and entered
my brief and BEFORE I objected in SCOTUS’ name as well as my own to the illegal government’s
criminal actions and before I revealed the facts in my motion. SCOTUS can’t possibly be guilty of a
criminal act if I could not reveal specific facts to then due to safety concerns as I and my sons were
27
and are exposed to mortal danger and not one citizen is willing to defend us. The citizens do not
know: If the living constitution known as We The People is attacked? If that’s possible and
happens? Then the employees of SCOTUS are too under direct attack and unless The People defend
them they have no defense other than the US Marshals who do not have the power or authority to
press a lawsuit in their names but the Citizens do. That is why the now ‘unfiled’ motion is so
important as I cited the injury to SCOTUS and its employees thus proved the lower courts are acting
to obstruct justice and to actually violate the rights of SCOTUS employees and The People. I left
zero wiggle room as I am my own attorney thus as I directly contacted SCOTUS via phone and the
legal process these lower court judges could not then say they were acting as they are as SCOTUS
made them. They had to obey the Constitution or commit a crime, as I left no gray area as only I
could claim SCOTUS actually caused me harm; no judge and no politician may claim that as they
had no direct contact with SCOTUS at all thus that is not a fact and is a lie, an exact lie. I removed
or unproved every sorry excuse any person sitting in any office or holding any title ever told me
including the now standard “SCOTUS makes me do it”. What these lawyers, politicians and judges
are doing is criminal – there is no other word for it – and now twice documents in my case have
been illegally pulled from the files via the direct order of a federal judge. Twice is no accident; it is
a pattern and it is a crime. Judges who are lawyers possess criminal intent no matter what they claim
due to the very nature of my claim; they have a conflict they can never ever overcome. They all
chose to violate the law and so commit what is a crime. WHY?

As long as Marbury and SCOTUS remain unproven theory lower courts can and do exert overly
broad power, claim unjust privileges and exploit power to their advantage and to the advantage of
their friends and associates, fellow lawyers and/or politicians. These judges actually believe that
power is theirs to give or take! They actually believe that they can and may take from you what is
inalienable. They truly believe they can violate the law yet then claim they are acting under the
authority of the US thus there are no consequences and nothing they do is ever a crime!!! They
interpret the law to mean as a judge it does not apply to their own person and their own actions, as if
they can do anything at all and it is not wrong, immoral or unethical as they the judge think so and
say so in spite of what US law and US case law says. As if my vote counts only if they say so or as
if I am human only if they say so. As if the Constitution is real and actual for me only if they rule
thus order it is. I tell them “No, Marbury says it is real and actual if I own it and my case proves my
ownership of the Constitution thus you must obey it” and so they then refuse to let me access the
system in any way. Today? I can’t even get myself arrested to then force a criminal prosecution as
that seems to be the only means to access the system that is left to me and SCOTUS has ruled this is
legal; it is not a crime if the law that protects you never existed or if once did exist but does not now
exist.

These judges and all the involved people in my case can and did read the SCOTUS docket but yet
DENIED the Constitution as if...no court but SCOTUS must obey the Constitution! As if no citizen
has to obey it unless a court says so. Thus to make it seem as if pull my documents or deny all of
what I enter including my spoken words. Lower courts effectively make the illegal and criminal
actions of the other branches possible as they refuse to obey the Constitution and use the excuse
SCOTUS HAS NOT YET TOLD ME THAT THE JUDICIARY HAS TO OBEY THE LAW; AS
SCOTUS IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL ITSELF IT THEN MAY NOT ORDER THE LOWER
JUDICIARY TO OBEY THE CONSTITUTION AS TO DO THAT A NONLAWYER HAS TO
GAIN ENTRY IN PERSON, OR IN OTHER WORDS, IT MAY NOT ORDER ME, A JUDGE, TO
DO WHAT THEY THEMSELVES DO NOT DO, OBEY THE CONSTITUTION aka OBEY YOU,
A PRO SE PLAINTIFF WHO IS ALSO THE VICTIM THUS NOT AN AUTHORITY AS NO
PAPER SAYS YOU ARE AS IF YOU HAD THAT PAPER? YOU WOULDN’T BE A VICTIM,
WOULD YOU? Meaning: “If you cannot get a paper from SCOTUS saying you are an authority
and your vote has power than you aren’t and it doesn’t; no power and authority for you no matter
what the Constitution says!”
28
Acting in a hostile and violent manner, a criminal manner, always worked for them before as the
litigant went away without securing the paper from SCOTUS but I did not. I knew there was a way
to get a ruling from SCOTUS even if you never set foot in the building: Engage SCOTUS, suffer
the injury to then prove to SCOTUS the law has been overthrown and so force direct action as
SCOTUS would be moved by your reasoning on your paper as you have entered sworn testimony
not hearsay and not your lawyers words. You have entered this claim: I WILL SO I AM. You’re
first. Thus as I refused to stop acting they were left with no choice: Commit a crime or obey the law.
You’d think that would be simple, wouldn’t you? That judges and other officers of the court would
then obey the law. Not if they have a reason to violate the law: power and control not the
constitutionally named power and authority. A violation of Art. 4 Sec. 4 as it is federal domestic
violence thus it is treason as it constitutes war upon The People, the named legal government,
as it denies us a Republican form of government aka a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. We
then are something un or not constitutional: An oligarchy.

I have now proven conclusively that justice no longer exists and that it is not possible for me to
receive redress in a lower court as the illegal authorities do not want to be held liable as they know
as fact they are guilty which is why they operate so directly and openly, as no means exercise our
right of dissolution exists if we may not sue them. I however proved that the US was in default by
actually forcing it into default via an airtight legal argument thus liability does now ensue and so no
judge will touch my case as I have already won. The reasons to prevent the citizen from suing for
liability no longer exist and liability has proven to be our only recourse as unjust power in now
entrenched. We can’t ever become a constitutional nation once again if we can’t sue for liability,
especially as the persons in question are acting with deliberation. It is as I say: Sometimes you want
to reform old guards in order to secure your future safety.

I, Susan, said via my legal claim, I’m first! I came here AFTER having accessed SCOTUS,
remember? Thus all you can do is obey the law or commit a crime and in my case? You will be
made to answer for it. I can and will prove SCOTUS is our law thus is constitutional as only
SCOTUS the institution as it exists today is a product of the constitutional government as am I, as I
possess that one piece of paper no other nonlawyer ever came to possess as if a pro se nonlawyer
was conferenced? It was not done upon the issuance of an Executive Order as mine was! and so I
entered the legal history and my reasoning plus Congress’, the military’s and the 10th Circuit’s
acknowledgment of the fact and law regarding authority being of The People or the lone citizen thus
the truth of my power and authority was then UNFILED, lol, as NOTHING would then make any
action except ruling for me thus for SCOTUS and for The People legal. All you can do is avoid it
completely by pretending you never read it and then pulling it for good measure. They violated the
law and all federal precedent with deliberation and full knowing thus spitting on our Constitution
and on me personally thus it is a criminal act. Even devoid of a ruling that they are not acting under
the authority of the US I alone can and may then sue for liability as any citizen may for a crime, an
injury, personal in nature. Well I cannot sue for liability if they pull documents and refuse to allow
me any form of entry at all, can I? I can’t then secure redress, can I? My legal response to the
Federal Appellate as the appellate court said DO NOT FILE ANYTHING ELSE SUSAN ENTERS
is then made here:

“Sorry fellas! I do possess that paper as it is the SCOTUS case conferencing list based upon an
Executive Order I issued thus you had to unfile this motion to then get around SCOTUS thus The
People and so the Constitution, as that is the only way – remove it from the files - or so you thought
didn’t you? Wrong, as you have now denied me an appearance on paper and have ordered a clerk to
commit what is a crime: evidence tampering, witness intimidation, threatening the life of the legal or
constitutionally set President and obstruction of justice otherwise known as treason if a federal judge
does it with full knowing and deliberation. I gave you, this entire bench, all of the facts I was forced to
29
keep secret previously thus you of all people KNEW but did it regardless. As I’m the only one ever it is
personal. You can’t unfile what your very action has already filed and you cannot unfile what
SCOTUS has already physically filed twice and heard twice and like you filed and heard via action a
third time thus already ruled FOR me thus for The People. It’s not possible to undo what is done! You
do not possess that power, as it does not exist in this universe let alone this nation! That power is not to
be found within our Constitution, as it isn’t and it never will be. Like I’m forever pro se your action is
forever a part of the historical record of Earth and then the universe! It is now a part of the unified
field! Of time and space. Evidence rising to proof? The dates or numbers on the SCOTUS docket are
the ruling for me not the words as the dates prove the US, you, are in default. The word DENIED is my
means to then sue for liability as that is my exact legal claim: I am DENIED any and all protection of
the law thus SCOTUS has concurred with me. Pull all the documents you want, as that never changes
what SCOTUS has already done; what already is. If you, the 11th Circuit Federal Appeals Court, truly
believe you can deny The People including SCOTUS what is inalienable then I will dissolve and
abolish you and your criminal belief as you have just ordered SCOTUS out of existence in favor of
paper. In favor of the crooks and the illegal or dead government. You have acted against Congress and
the military even! That’s desperate; guilty people act desperate. You just gave SCOTUS the only
reason it needs to hear me in person as you, the 11th Circuit, made SCOTUS’ actual existence thus We
The People’s actual existence the prize. I truly believe SCOTUS is going to want to hear the case that
legalizes them as it proves they are Constitutional. They are law not theory! The only thing SCOTUS
has to do is act to then prove it to their own selves by granting me my award and so hearing me in
person. All SCOTUS has to do is TRUST THE PEOPLE!!! Inform them and then TRUST
THEM TO GOVERN THEMSELVES VIA OBEYING THE SCOTUS RULING AND THE
CONSTITUTION!!!”

Read the rest of this paper and then see my attached Federal Appellate motion and brief as an
actual original jurisdiction case enters whole.

Reasoning To Grant Writ

Some of but not all of the constitutional reasoning which invalidates the results of this election and all
prior court orders against me from day one, as appearances are deceiving and ‘black’ is not the issue
the voters should be citing nor should the lower courts be resorting to actions that meet or exceed the
legal definition of a crime in my case. Instead judges and voters should be citing my injury, the
discrimination of women, lies made to seem like the truth and illegal actions that are made to seem as
if they are legal; they should be citing the Constitution and US case law as well as US history and
their math should add up correctly as no court order then changes what is actual fact and law:

1. A majority, the whole court even, is likely to rule for me thus securing their constitutional
authority once again by upholding Marbury on behalf of myself then all women and their
children both male and female thus all Americans and applicant is likely to prevail on the
merits as it is math and exact words of our law plus the exact words of prior federal precedent
as well as actual biology. My case is supported by proven scientific fact, my own experience of
this American life and eyewitness testimony. I am the only person ever to be granted the
standing of pro se, authority and original jurisdiction and I have done it twice over as Marbury
never owned the knowledge of what his legal standing is. I have chosen to say too much rather
than not enough thus proving I can make this case if this stay is granted and win on the merits
of my case; you will mostly find the merits of my case within the attached brief and motion to
reconsider. I know one usually would not outline the case to be filed in a petition for a Writ of
Cert but this is an original case SCOTUS should have heard firstly and I am not a lawyer. Thus
I recapped the acted upon emergency application below for the citizens benefit and then
attached what the lower court refused to acknowledge – my brief and motion - as it is the
citizens who are not lawyers who need informing.
30
 2. This election was never legal as Bush V Gore was not legal and remains a tied decision. No
Presidential election and indeed, no election at all, is legal and so valid unless Bush V Gore is
addressed. By addressing Bush V Gore and In Re Susan and now Susan V Obama, you then
address all others. Bush V Gore is an extreme test of chain of command theory which is how
and why it became an illegally waged war; Bush V Gore is the citizens unchecking all offices
up to Chief Justice by refusing to obey the law, reason their vote and/or obey the spirit of our
law; it is the citizens reasoning and deciding they are powerless victims and so actually
becoming powerless victims.

3. Bush V Gore is a Chief Justice unchecking himself, the Justices voting twice for President, 9 as
5-4 as 2 not 1, or, 5 as 1 V 4 as 1, a tie, and an illegal third party custody award of my person to
lawyers – men – not on the ballot. It is also two persons proving they cannot fulfill the oath of
office, as they did not act pro se. The only form of the power of one the Supreme Court may
invoke is 9 as 1 or 1 alone but never per curiam especially in the case of a Presidential election
as any dissent means the math will never match the exact words of our law or federal
precedent. See Exhibits L & M. [A sitting President does decide ties in US Supreme Court; a
case of original jurisdiction has no lower or other court ruling plus authority cases by their very
nature are challenging the people and the Congress as the inherency or implication is the people
and Congress have failed to act or failed to fulfill duty already thus the case enters Supreme
Court, so if tied it then goes to the President as a tie then is a case thrown to the people who are
embodied by the sitting President as he or she is their one vote realized as executive order. A
President and Chief Justice are equivalent legal authorities; a President enforces the law and/or
the correct application of it not a lower court. Remember both litigants have entered an honor
bond and so it is accepted as fact they voted and so accessed chain of command and secured
federal standing thus they are to trust the decision of a sitting President aka their own self and
their fellow citizens. A President calls the tie by issuing his or her own reasoned decision, as we
do not vote on our law as it is. If a President issues an unconstitutional decision? Then
Congress can and may act, then a citizen may press another suit or then a citizen may even
refuse to obey, as may all citizens. This is WHY you are to reason your vote. I have no idea
where, why or how men came to posses the mistaken belief a tie is decided by a lower court. If
that has happened? It is incorrect. It was done in error as it then strips a citizen of authority over
their own person and robs their vote of legal power.]

4. Bush V Gore then became a never legal President then unchecking the office of President,
Chief and the whole court as the only legal appointment of a new Chief Justice must be one that
is arbitrary like old age in this unique case as the only way to recheck the offices is by arbitrary
appointment. Thus, all offices of government were then unchecked; no person is in charge
and/or all separation of power is grossly violated; not one authority is fulfilling his or her oath
of office or discharging their duties and no person knew the actual reasoning to then overturn
Bush V Gore when ignorance is not an excuse. Whole schools of law failed. Not one authority I
contacted obeyed the law and some even broke it. The citizens violated Marbury first as they
obeyed the unconstitutional, unethical and immoral orders of their commanding officers thus
they are then liable as proven by their willingness to continue to pay taxes levied unjustly (w/o
representation) and their willingness to suffer the Bush administration; they began volunteering
to die in defense of the invention of the institution, office of Chief Justice and President who is
also Commander, as all male. As a government and law they became dead institutions. The
election of 2004 was no good as Bush should not have been on the ballot. I had no choice so
had no liberty and my right to vote was denied me yet again. It is still denied me.

5. Congress enacted Resolution 511, which is nothing short of Congress acting to overthrow the law
by overthrowing the office of the Executive; 511 states that persons who do not meet the
31
 qualifications to then fulfill the requirement of natural birth may run and be elected. This then
changes the form of our government to one that is an oligarchy not a Republic. Congress not only
committed what is an overt act of treason as I informed all 100 senators and many Reps – dozens
even and same twice over – but this Resolution was sponsored by persons who knew they did not
meet this qualification or were in conflict of the interest thus members of Congress acted to change
our law and our form of government only to then benefit members of Congress as only members of
Congress were on the ballot in all 50 states and in the district of Columbia. Exhibit .

6. The declaration of war is no good as it is based upon bad evidence. Congress declares war
therefore Congress is to address this declaration by issuing a new one based upon good evidence,
invalidating the bad one and not re-issuing it and/or presenting new evidence to then support the
bad one thus making it good. Congress did no such thing thus our Constitution was violated in an
absolute fashion. May a Congress declare a war upon bad evidence and then act as the
Commander? Congress has acted to usurp the duties of the commander via commanding by
committee – a vote of Congress and abuse of the War Powers Act – and this is not legal or
practical. You do not command via committee; Barack Obama has already said he cannot and will
not make decisions alone as he said he would make ‘no decisions re “Don’t Ask” by himself’.

7. Congress then used money to prevent the person the voters believed to be the legal Commander
when he is not from discharging his duties and from waging ‘effective’ war. Thus enlisted service
member’s lives were traded upon the dollar. Enlisted service members are the innocent children of
women who are mothers; they are all volunteer and the military is controlled by the civilians – us.
We even have a civilian Commander. Congress is supposed to represent or be WE, the people. It
does not and is not; one of the most grievous offenses any office holder can commit is trading the
lives of the innocent upon money, especially enlisted service members and mothers then all women
and children and so all Americans. Not one member fulfilled his oath of office thus NO MEMBER
OF CONGRESS CAN THEN OVERCOME THE CONFLICT OF INTERESTS TO THEN ACT
AS COMMANDER. Obama and McCain equally then were automatically excluded from the ballot
as YOU do not get to amend our law in a manner not legal or to elect persons not able to fulfill the
Presidential oath of office. The voters are creating a situation that is not only absolutely and wholly
unconstitutional but that then denies enlisted service members, mothers and all other women and
children their liberty rights and so zero opportunity. No liberty then no justice. Our common
interest is to be the law; obviously Congress has reasoned and decided then forced it upon the
voters as the voters allowed it and even condoned it: Congress no longer obeys the law at al; it
does not have to so it will not. It only seems as if and even that façade is quickly deteriorating.
Recently Congress has been printing up or creating energy – money – that does not exist and doing
so to protect private interests at my expense. Congress’ interest is money and the privilege they are
accorded via a title. It is perceived power. The voters have given them power that is not theirs by
voting them into office over and over even when they admit they have behaved criminally and/or
do not know the law. The voters violated the separation of powers first.

8. Neither major party candidate has clean hands and neither can actually do anything they have
promised to do, as it is humanly impossible for them. For instance, to institute any kind of
economic recovery plan? First you must name the exact problem – the cause – and all of its effects
and then you must know what our dollar actually is and what standard supports it. Neither
candidate does. Obama has no clue; he can hope all he wants but nothing he claims will actually
happen as ideas are the cause of things and he has none but the same old, tired and used ideas that
have not worked and will never work when it comes to money. He truly believes we do not control
things like inflation and deflation and that we can legally and actually conduct business with
nations who can never return the honor bond and not suffer for it. This extends to every area and
every problem our nation faces. If a “plan” of his does seem to make things better? He violated the

32
 laws that rule this universe, he violated our written law and/or it only seems as if; it is not an actual
solution but may be a temporary ‘fix’.

9. Unity is not possible unless you can reason and apply the equal protection clauses to women and
their children. The promise of Brown will never be realized unless this occurs, as all actual rights
are human rights as there is no such thing as women’s rights. Money does not resolve this issue.
You must define when life and so personhood or the right comes into being. A man cannot do this
ever, ever, ever as he will not give birth thus he can never own as fact the knowledge. The only
way he can do this is by asking a woman for help as in voting for her for President or appointing
her Chief Justice. Obama missed the boat when it came to securing the office of chief Justice by
rechecking it. This woman? I have no desire to be Chief Justice or even a Justice as I have been
sitting and thinking about the universe for 40 years. Justices do a lot of that – sitting and thinking –
but they do not make law unless they stand down a sitting President. Obama has already said it is
“above [his] paygrade” to reason this thus he cannot and so will not reason and apply the equal
protection clauses to women and their children and he failed when it came to standing down this
illegal federal government. It is not legal to subject me to the moral authority of a man who has
none as he will not name it; no man is safe if he refuses to define his beliefs on when life begins
and this issue affects women and children only. It is my life and/or the quality of my life that is at
stake not his. This effects women and children but not adult men.

10. Only mothers and veterans have a protected right to hold this office; all others have the privilege as
only mothers and veterans have proven they can and will shed their blood and risk their life in
defense of the Constitution or WE, the people. Obama then claimed for himself a right that he does
not possess at the expense of able and capable persons who do have a protected right. McCain? As
a veteran he then may be held to a higher standard, as he then should possess this knowledge re
chain of command theory and illegal war. I am an equal opportunity petitioner as I held both major
party candidates equally at fault as no third party could or would win as they lacked the funds to
buy the office and so hold them equally unable and incapable.

11. Obama claimed he is a constitutional law professor when he is not. An argument began over the
fine differences in words and technicalities. If I call you “professor” are you then it? If your
paycheck reads “professor” are you then it? He also snuck into and out of Jacksonville and never
stated his reasoning for doing so. This was purposely done as he engineered a situation whereby
later in the day he made a splash in Tampa thus the papers did not carry the Jacksonville story as a
reporter caught him in the act but only carried his Tampa appearance. This is not an accident or
mistake and Floridians are sick of being a doormat for these kinds of antics in regards to
Presidential elections. FL was denied justice in 2000 and we were denied justice once again as our
delegates to the Democratic Convention thus our vote did not count as the Democrats were
censured for holding the primary too early. You cannot ignore the possible – possible – connection
between that sneaky visit to Jacksonville and the sanction by the DNC. There is a connection but
did it then cause injury? It matters not if a Democrat then won the national election, as we will
never know what might have been as FL delegates could have cast their votes for another
Democratic candidate based upon moral authority and the law and because two parties one of
which is the Democratic Party have been given control of the ballot. These two parties have overly
broad power in violation of the law and prior federal court rulings that sanctioned them for playing
fast and lose with votes and state no party may be favored over another. If these two parties were
not favored they then would not be the only two on all 51 ballots and they would not appear in the
first two slots on all ballots I have seen so far; they would not hold almost all offices and would not
have owned the office of President for the last century and a half or so.

12. Obama did not keep an honor bound contract and in fact absolutely and wholly violated at least
three by going against his word to run for this office using public funds only becoming the first
33
 person since 1976 to use private money thus this election was bought. There is no polite way to say
this: If you cannot keep an honor bound contract, if you default before you enter the office of
President, you may not then be legally elected, as taking the oath is then a lie as Obama had the
human ability to keep that contract but did not as he was greedy for the office. I have no way to
trace all of that money and this privatization of the election gives large businesses and their
interests an unfair advantage.

13. Obama ignored several notices of suit as he is named in my federal lawsuit now before US
Supreme Court. He refused to respond over and over. He also kept inundating my mailbox with
requests for money thus enticing me to break the law and harassing me, which is a crime. I cannot
overlook this due to the very nature of my suit: Justice is, as fact w/o question, now bought and
sold as that is what buying an election and violating Marbury and so unchecking all offices is. I
repeatedly sent him cease and desist orders all of which went ignored.

14. Corinne Brown who was so vociferous in her opposition to Bush V Gore and stated repeatedly that
she felt as if her vote had been stolen ignored me, as did the NAACP. I was told to my face by a
citizen who appears to be black that this most likely happened as no black person or black
organization was going to help me, no matter how tragic my personal situation was, to unseat a
Presidential candidate who was black. I was stunned, as this thought had not once entered my
mind. Now I must consider it. Not only must I consider my appearance as white and Obama’s as
black may have caused a part of my legal situation to become worse but I know as fact ‘woman’
did as the person answering the phones for the Jacksonville ACLU told me this. They said that
word: ‘woman’, as a reason I might not be called back. The NYACLU, when informed of NY’s
unconstitutional unwritten policy re emotional abuse and the details of my federal claim
deliberately, knowingly and willingly waited to answer me until November 20th, but served me
notice on November 23rd. Their answer? It is an exact lie as the very case now before the Supreme
court was said to be unsupported by evidence or proof when I gave them exactly what I gave the
US Supreme court with one exception: I gave the NYACLU even more evidence as I also included
written, personal testimony. The NYACLU is guilty of malpractice, several crimes according to NY
code and US law and a violation of their ethics plus the public trust. I find this especially offensive
as most of the ACLU’s agenda is unconstitutional, it harms women and I have been subjected to
their actions in federal court over and over. There is no reasoning whatsoever which actually
reasons why and how the ACLU and atheists enter federal court all of the time even if the claim
violates our law and/or actual reality but I am yet denied. Not one organization or single person I
asked for assistance would do so and almost all of them receive public money of some kind. Three
Senators including one from NY where my case sits in family court wrote to me when I stood them
down and said that they could not help me, as I was not their “constituent”. My FL Senators also
refused to help me with one saying he could not interfere with a federal case - when I was no
longer in federal court and when Senators interfere all of the time for their friends or in cases that
garner them ‘good’ publicity. My apologies to Bader-Ginsburg but: I personally despise the ACLU
as it exists today. See Exhibit . The NAACP & ACLU violated its own policy in my case -
their own criteria for what cases they do or do not accept - thus my rights (they participated in
the injury) and these organizations are composed of lawyers.

15. In my unique case the Supreme Court of the United States and its Chief Justice then reasoned and
ordered itself out of existence as a court of law thus an authority by actually violating Marbury
only as I am a woman and specifically this exact woman thus my life was sold to the highest bidder
as were my children’s lives. Thus no vote has actual legal power or any authority but only appears
to have it as Marbury was the decision that then created the Court’s constitutional authority by
vesting the vote with actual legal power and moral authority by making the President equal to the
citizen and so liable thus answerable to the lone citizen. It matters not how or why Marbury came
to be violated as I know why: The citizens violated the law first and violated over and over. By
34
 violating Marbury, and doing so to then harm the person who is the actual legal President and
Commander, myself, as this was at first acknowledged by the Court by granting me status no other
citizen has ever been granted and then by obeying Executive Orders I issued and signed “The
acting legal President and Commander” yet denying me oral argument so that the people were not
then informed and denying me and my male children any and all remedy and relief, but then
according terrorists and terror suspects rights and privileges I was denied as were other women, the
Court overthrew our law. Again we all know why and how it came to pass: The citizens are at fault.
It was, in effect, a coup as a coup in American is silent but then becomes violent. It remains a coup.
The coup had to be pre-existing or before I entered SCOTUS directly or direct entry would not
have been possible. You can but you may not hold a Presidential election if it is a coup. There is
nothing orderly about a $5.3 billion dollar transfer of power whereby people are still starving and
going w/o basic healthcare so that a child dies of an infected tooth. A coup is coup no matter what
it looks like – bloody or papery.

16. The only possible way to then recheck all offices and so balance all power and establish actual
equal rights is to then accord me oral argument. You recheck the offices via telling the exact truth
and winning a unanimous decision in favor of women and their children and all ethical Americans
who made an attempt to obey the law and the spirit of the law. In this case ANY citizen could have
volunteered to recheck the offices if they could then act pro se and make the case; a citizen could
have, if it was then possible, claimed third party standing on behalf of the US against Bush & Gore
as no person was ever likely to possess the human ability to sue in their own defense thus it then
goes to the first volunteer. I’m that person, as I acted upon my knowledge as soon as humanly
possible for me to do so. The Judiciary’s actions as all are members of the bar and bar associations
now fall under RICO as the bar and bar associations are acting as a criminal enterprise and their
members as individual agents of crime. To date 11 of the named RICO activities have been
committed and hundreds of incidences have accrued and this was done to stop me from testifying
as a federal witness in a federal case, an application of RICO that SCOTUS has always upheld. It is
a violation of the treason, sedition and subversive activities clauses and US code first and/or is
RICO secondly. It began and is due to a violation of the equal protection clauses with no
consequences for lawyers or judges who are lawyers or for any titled persons thus they do what
they want when they want without fear; they became criminals. If lawyers acting as the Judiciary,
the Legislative and/or the Executive as Obama is a lawyer are now RICO then it rises to treason as
treason is the only named crime in our Constitution and so overthrow aka has for a fact occurred.
SCOTUS may not be able to criminally charge the offenders but it can adjudicate if it falls under
treason and/or RICO so the people then can prosecute them if a charge of treason, sedition and/or
subversive activities is not levied against them or is not successfully prosecuted as fellow lawyers
who sit in violation of our law would then be in charge of doing what they have refused to do so
far: Apply the law and its named consequences to their associates and friends. Of course if I win
my case as I should then I can and will enforce the law and strictly. This is another reason why
these people are so desperate to keep me out of a court of law, as I would then enforce the law and
they know they are guilty. Proof is these people are acting guilty as they keep committing more and
more crimes. It is incessant in my case and has never stopped from the first second I entered a
court of law over ten years ago.

17. I uncovered proof that a 13th amendment to our Constitution exists and was ratified by VA; as this
amendment would then affect lawyers and judges who are lawyers and who are now a privileged
class if it is recognized? Exactly as my argument regarding equal rights and natural birth and what
is already recognized as being within our law would affect these same persons? You know as fact I
was injured only to keep me from appearing in federal court thus acting as a witness in federal
court as no other explanation exists unless those involved are set to plead insane as I alone made
this unique argument and no man can bring the case for women as it is humanly impossible for him
to do so unless he gives birth to a baby. These people then possess motivation and intent. These
35
 people, judges, had to read my case, read the Constitution and read the SCOTUS docket plus all
named US case law and then willingly choose to commit what meets and exceeds the legal
definition of several criminal acts in both the state and federal criminal code. This is outrageous.
See attachment in regards to the missing 13th.

18. The military has several serious problems and neither McCain nor Obama can clearly articulate
what they are and so then fix them. Obama is for the continuation of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
Policy” which encourages recruits to lie thus violate the honor bond before they serve a single
second, strips recruiters of the ability to reason and decide if a recruit is fit whether he or she is gay
or not as each citizen must as we are self-governing and self-adjudicating and ignorance is no
excuse and as it yet denies women, even women who are gay, some combat positions namely the
Office of Commander in Chief. It is based upon a lie and appearances only. Obama does not
believe this policy has caused harm when it does and it harmed me in 1995 and 1996 and Obama
stated that he was for drafting women if a draft was initiated. See Exhibit G. Drafting women is
unconstitutional as it constitutes double jeopardy as sex and childbirth always carries the risk of
injury and death for women and not men. The draft is a written proof of death contract and
childbirth is a proof of death contract not in writing until after the fact of actual birth. The draft and
pregnancy are equivalent; birth and war are equivalent. Our law names life, death, natural birth,
war, double jeopardy and a Creator exactly thus defining this. Obama cannot fix what he does not
know is wrong or what he mistakenly believes is legal when it is not; he will only worsen our
current situation and cause a further erosion of our military. Enlisted service members will die
w/o reason or cause. Obama cannot command in the field as I can or others can and does not know
military tactics and strategy, basic chain of command theory and has never to my knowledge risked
shedding his blood or risked his life in defense of me, my children or the Constitution or else his
name would be on this lawsuit as co-petitioner or as an adversarial party acting pro se and my life
would not be what it is today: absolutely and wholly unsafe.

19. Obama believes “gay” is a protected class and is for giving the rights of women to men who are
gay by giving them unfair advantage and overly broad power compared to women yet denied basic
human rights and our law protects no act of sex not even heterosexual acts as an act of sex is a
choice unless it is forced. The word “sex” was jokingly and mistakenly used in the Civil Rights
Act, as the protected class is women as “female” is a quality of being human and acts of sex are
not. Quality of sex or gender is not a choice. Rights if you are gay consist of the same rights all
citizens have if they are human and then law abiding. As men and women have one distinction so
do persons who are gay.

20. It is intrinsic to doing the job of according women and their children thus all humans true equality
and justice that you are an actual woman, as Obama will not ever know what that is as absolute fact
– at least not in the next 8 years. He cannot reason equality. The Civil Rights Act allows me and my
children or all Americans to discriminate based only upon man as woman is necessary or intrinsic
to do this job and so not vote or install Obama as President and Commander only upon male even
if no other reasoning existed. Women may also refuse to obey anything he orders, or, they may
legally stop paying taxes and even legally use violence if necessary. Therefore, as Obama is a man
I openly cite that as my part of my reasoning as hell will freeze over before yet another man usurps
and violates my rights and injures me without consequence when I am most able and most capable
and innocent so I have always obeyed the law and the spirit of the law and I as a mother possess
the protected right not he and he, by his very nature, cannot perform the job of President and
Commander while I can and did. I still do.

21. The Equal Time rules were not obeyed or enforced and were exploited for their four exemptions.
Proof would be Oprah Winfrey as she gave Obama airtime she did not give other candidates as her
show qualifies for such an exemption. Due to Winfrey’s unique situation one cannot ignore her
36
 money or influence in this unique case and one cannot ignore her refusal to answer my suit or
address it in any way. Winfrey also never before did such a thing; she herself cited black over and
over and she campaigned against Bush citing his record of not according women what she believed
to be their rights but did not hold Obama accountable for the same and even ignored his “above my
paygrade” comment as if he never said it. Other proof would be Fox broadcasting not allowing Ron
Paul to debate when he was a legitimate contender with the means as he had the support of the
public via the internet; Fox cited Obama’s race over and over and had no reasoning to deny Paul
airtime. Fox exploited an exemption. Paul is an Independent Republican not a Republican so he
and his party received unequal airtime as in none. To my knowledge only Jay Leno addressed this
by inviting Paul to appear and discuss his exclusion by Fox. Due to media consolidation all
networks now produce their own programming thus must abide by the Equal Time Rule and some
citizens like Winfrey have a higher standard to meet due to their own unique facts regardless of the
four exemptions. These exemptions have been exploited over and over during this election. I my
own self was ignored by all media outlets when I made US history and am the acting, legal
President and Commander. The reasoning? The press did not believe the US Supreme Court ever
heard my case as I was denied oral argument thus stated that I had not executed executive orders,
had no actual case and so was ‘making it up’ and ‘delusional’. I was turned into an exemption! I
would have received news coverage and airtime if I were not unconstitutionally denied oral
argument before this court. See Exhibit & under “cost of media coverage” & “unfair media
coverage”. I can also resolve campaign funding issues.

22. If Marbury is violated then your vote does not have any legal power or the legal power it has is not
equal, as it has now been made an arbitrary decision of the federal court. A woman’s vote has never
had actual legal power but only the appearance of it. As the vote is your check then it is not
possible to balance power w/o equal legal power and/or any legal power so the Office of the
President has been purchased.

23. We are supposed to be subject to the terms of a contract not the conditions. We call it a “term of
office” and “term life insurance” for reasoning. Women are yet the victims of men changing the
conditions on them thus while they say they believe in equality and often act as if they do, their
true unspoken belief is realized as gross injustice and even murder as their true belief is the citizens
are powerless and women are less than so even more powerless; that no woman can reason and so
make this case nor ever act as Commander.

24. I proved my ability beyond any and all doubt by actually fulfilling the oath and so acting as
President and Commander and by making this case in spite of every single citizen acting against
me and all denying reality and my case. I defeated the entire federal government acting alone, as I
am a power of one. I know how to use my vote as a weapon. I am the lone citizen standing as I
acted as an actual a Commander is to act by willing government into being and creating life where
there are only dead institutions: In our federal government. President? I have already made law via
executive order and my suit; I have already preserved, protected and defended the Constitution
beyond what was believed to be humanly possible for a woman as my lone vote now floats this
government and law as does one other vote which is the one vote cast for my person. This vote was
cast where all of this began, in FL. This is FL ballot # 3481 upon which my name for President and
the name of Ron Paul for Vice President was written in the space provided for write in candidates
and was then mailed [As aside: There is a short and long number]. See Exhibit . My standing to
press suit is then secured. If Ron Paul is disqualified it does not then disqualify my person. I have
the means to justly address the legality of all candidates.

25. The US failed to respond within 30 days which is standard contract law thus I win as by failing to
respond you have offered me a contract to which I accepted all terms and you then refused to honor
it. You may not offer me a contract then revoke it only as I accepted and met all of your terms as
37
 proven by my docketing and re-docketing as I wholly embodied the law. This, failing to respond in
30 days, was the means for the case known as the “Auschwitz Lie” brought by Mel Mermelstein
against the IHR as he successfully proved he could have been awarded promised compensation if
the IHR responded to him as the IHR offered Mermelstein a contract asking him to prove the
Holocaust happened and he accepted. When the IHR did not respond within 30 days he then sued
for breach of contract and emotional distress among other things. I too press suit for the same. I
was promised the blessings of liberty; I too accepted the challenge to prove the discrimination of
women is alive and well and perpetrated by the federal government, upon the ‘highest’ levels of
power and within the ‘highest’ offices, that women are actually created the equals of men, that the
Creator exists, that our law is elegant as it is written originally, that the resolution of Uniformity is
within our law but has gone unnoticed by physicists and that our one vote is an actual power and
the US failed to respond. My entry to this very court is my absolute proof and my denial is other
absolute proof as I did get a unanimous decision as I predicted. I know exactly how extraordinary I
am. Like Merlmelstein I would have won a ruling in my favor and all the blessings of liberty if
allowed to argue orally thus execute the contract known as US law. This Court and this nation has
been telling what I have nicknamed the “Women are the equals of men and receive equal protection
and due process of the law thus may become Chief Justice, President and Commander while they
yet go without a federal court ruling and while they are yet the victims of discrimination lie” as
equal protection does not exist nor does the opportunity to become Chief Justice, President and
Commander or to enter this court pro se if you are a woman and/or if you have defeated the federal
judiciary’s, Congress’ and the Executive’s faulty reasoning in an airtight fashion. I did make the
case – a case no man and no attorney could make. I can and will prove I would have won my case
and won it unanimously 9-0 not 0-9 if I had been allowed entry thus I can now sue in a like
manner. CA Evidence Code as to the obvious: The Declaration is; the Revolution is; the
Constitution is; liberty is; my authority is so I am. I can and will so I am. To be perfectly clear: The
unjust persons who sit based upon actions and documents that have or share no relation to or with
our original jurisdiction government, or are not organic to our original jurisdiction government,
may not then nullify the original contract known as The Constitution for the United States of
America only as I fulfill it as upon my direct entry to SCOTUS via my execution of the authority
and power known as Executive Order SCOTUS and I aka The People made that contract forever
irrevocable. It is irrevocable as we, the authority, proved it. Neither may that same unjust
government commonly known as CORP US who sits based upon actions and documents related or
organic to the DC Incorporation Act of 1871, as that is when this unjust government was inserted
and then entrenched in lieu of our original jurisdiction government, rescind the contract they
offered me known as THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION only as I, a natural born American
citizen named Susan Herbert, managed to fulfill it.

26. This election and the subsequent court orders are yet more illegal third party awards of my custody
to men, to the unjust and to a major party that has violated our law and women over and over.
Some of these persons are guilty. Nothing in our law says Susan Herbert alone may not address her
injuries or that Susan Herbert alone is exempt from our law. Nothing says that I alone am to receive
no protection of the law especially when innocent and especially when the states refused to name
anything I was guilty of yet kept ‘punishing’ me over and over by issuing false and unconstitutional
decisions and orders based upon no case law and which even violated the code of the issuing state
as well as US law. These decisions and orders then found me when the law does not protect me
thus I alone am subjected to the law when I alone am not allowed to use the law as a weapon in my
defense. If the law accords me zero protection it then may not find me. Courts may not then begin
citing rule instead of law as an authority that finds me! That proves our Constitution is no
more!

27. This court nor any court is to consider the consequences of adjudicating a case or of awarding
remedy and relief to a litigant, to a class of one or millions, as it is impossible to predict the future
38
 exactly and as this then makes the preservation, protection and defense of Declaration and
Constitution impossible. No woman can preserve, protect and defend her own life or the lives of
her children. Violence may erupt; riots may ensue. This is the case of the aftermath of Brown V
Topeka. Federal precedent is: At times blood must be shed in order to water the tree known as
liberty. While the ideal is we have orderly transfers of power some citizens refuse to own
knowledge and so choose ignorance when ignorance is not a reason or an excuse. To cite possible –
possible - consequences in the cases of women only or in the case of invalidating the election of a
person who is black to the Office of President is then to break the law, discriminate, harm the
injured class or lone person worse and to participate in what is now a criminal act as it is treason as
it is the overthrow of our law. Black or color is inconsequential; woman or gender is not.

28. I overcome all prior decisions against a private citizen suing to remove a candidate from the ballot
or to be placed on the ballot; I will win on merit and airtight reasoning. First, I am the acting, legal
president. Am I even private then as I volunteered? Second, I stood down all of Congress, as it is
unchecked thus no statutory method exists in actuality but only upon paper. Congress is mostly
male and mostly Democratic; this court cannot overlook this nor the gross violation of separation
of power nor the cause as unconstitutional term limits have become repugnant and so they are
string theory as they change numbers that should never have been changed and skew power in
favor of Congress. We then have no way to check Congress or any branch as that is our vote and it
is negated by decisions of this court and by Congress itself. I wrote to all 100 senators and to
dozens and dozens of Reps, some more than once. All failed me and all denied reality. As I named
the Chief Justice John Roberts exactly a suit in International Human Rights Court not only removes
the seat of power from the US but also then would name these people exactly for engaging in what
is human trafficking under the guise of family court orders and federal court orders none of which
are supported by the evidence or by our two governing documents. It would find John Roberts and
this entire nation guilty of becoming human traffickers and pimps; of becoming child abusers and
wife beaters for profit.

29. New injury has occurred as a direct result of all of this most especially the Supreme Court’s failure
to hear me in person: I have now had a visit from the US Secret Service who announced that they
had no rational basis for visiting me and were not at my home to detain or arrest me or even
question me. They asked if they could come in and I said YES fully knowing the law and the plain
sight rule. Incredibly, this occurred upon December 5th, the very day the Supreme Court was
conferencing my case. An interesting conversation then ensued, I refused to consent to a search
legally reasoning that this was not constitutional, necessary or rational as the only “concern” the
Secret Service had was a Notice of Suit against Obama and as they refused to call my reference –
John Roberts – or to look up the Court’s docket. I reasoned if I did consent to a search then I lost
my federal standing as I would then be making the legal claim that the Secret Service is the
authority and not my person and/or that it has authority over me when it does not. To even so much
as question me re Obama as the President first the Secret Service has to establish his election is
legal. They did not and could not.

30. I was in legal limbo due to the failure of the Solicitor General thus the US at the time of this
election and as lower courts began to cite or blame the Supreme Court within their rulings for their
dismissal and denial of good cases and all fact and law as if they too need not name any actual
reason. The election results are then invalidated. Interestingly, created or manmade legal limbo was
one of my very first claims in federal court that was then denied and cited as being frivolous and
having no basis in fact or law. I do not possess ESP; legal limbo existed for women, children,
enlisted service members, persons who are gay and I alone from a time before I entered the courts.
It did exist then and does exist now or else I already would have given oral argument before this
court. The US Supreme Court by denying me oral argument and refusing to answer a single
question then answered: The exactly named Creator does not exist, Susan Herbert alone is the
39
 exception to the law, women are not equal and so less than men and not of the Creator and Marbury
does not apply to anyone not even this very court so the Presidential election thus the office of the
executive may be purchased or stolen by snakes. It was. A woman’s only other recourse? Marry
into the possibility of becoming elected. This nation may not force me to marry a man or have
relations with snakes to then become the elected President. This nation may not reason if a man
cannot prove God exists than a woman cannot; that is like saying a man can prove life – give
childbirth – but a woman cannot. Proving the Creator is actual reality or when life begins in the
womb is easy for this woman due to all the knowledge she spent her life collecting as science
missed something tiny and obvious. In fact it was easier than suing the Chief Justice of the US.

31. An emergency application for a stay of enforcement of judgment was not treated in a timely
manner when it is a true emergency and enlisted service members, women and children have died
as a result. It was acted upon then held but not filed and not returned thus I then sent a supporting
petition to the court only discovering today, December 2nd, that it was never filed and would be
returned as would my petition. This is yet one more example of how men are granted what I am
not. Bush Jr. received timely treatment in 2000 when he applied for a stay but had no true
emergency. He was not sent back to a lower court to adjudicate the never heard issue. I did the
exact same thing, EXACTLY THE SAME, that he and his lawyers did but received different
treatment. Also Berg, a man, had an application for a stay filed. The only difference is “woman”
and “Susan”. I know a true emergency is a life or death issue; does this Court and does the Chief
Justice? as Congress and the never legal Executive do not know what an actual emergency is and
abuse that word constantly in an attempt to instill unwarranted fear in the citizens.

32. No other litigant can meet the burden of proof you must meet to then make this case yet at least one
other litigant has been conferenced: Philip Berg. A man pressing this case is then asking a political
question but seeking to adjudicate it as equal protection and due process issue or as an authority
case is something done one time only: Bush V Gore. All men have unclean hands. None of these
men acted as I did – from a time before this election and before Bush V Gore. No man may ask this
federal question then as he cannot know woman or birth as fact and to ask it and not be political
you must be a member of the only class denied justice and denied legal power since a time before
our founding: Women or Susan alone. Further, to prove material harm and injury one must first
prove they have felt actual liberty but then were denied it thus they actually suffered a denial of
liberty. To my knowledge I am the only living American who can and did experience liberty as
sacred i.e. as an actual emotion and physical sensation and later did then feel liberty denied. I have
read descriptions of liberty denied by former slaves and by Patrick Henry and some civil rights
marchers who are black. Other litigants have not felt this nor adequately or at all described this.
The last two burdens a person must meet to then make this case? The person must possess the case
for equal rights as I do as evidenced by the federal questions US Supreme Court has refused to
consider at least two of which were then certified when litigants after me then asked them thus it is
discrimination of me and: the litigant must meet proof of death both ways, physically and
metaphysically, but then have survived to be able to give living testimony as SCOTUS began
requiring proof of death in the cases of We The People, most especially if the person is female. I
managed to meet that standard. Not one other American in all of history has done what I have done
by surviving both then acting pro se thus all others bringing suit fall short. I am the lone litigant
with absolute and pure standing.

33. I possess no evidence that Barack Obama is a natural born American, as the only certificate I have
seen is not a birth certificate but a registration of birth certificate, which any person can and may
get. All this certificate does is certify that you were born and your live birth was registered in that
place in that state but does not certify that you were actually born in the US or that your parents are
natural born citizens or even American citizens. Also Barack Obama’s mother, called a citizen, may
not be as she did not live in the US for five years before giving birth to Barack Obama or so I was
40
told thus he would not then qualify for natural born status even if born in Hawaii. Eyewitnesses
have placed his birth in several different places, in two different hospitals and in two different
countries. This registration of birth certificate has no seal that I can discern and no signature which
it must have; unlike my own registration of birth certificate it does not state on the back that it
proves age and citizenship for passport or driver’s license but not for qualification to become
elected to the office of President and Commander. I have both certificates and can secure the
original on file in NY; does and can Barack Obama? Many citizens noted that his father’s race is
listed as “African” which is odd indeed as any actual American birth, a natural born American
citizen, would not then possess such a racial classification on this certificate as it is to be a
transcript of the original and in 1961 no documents listed “African” as a race but only “Negro”.
Thus this casts doubt upon its authenticity, as any actual transcript should state “Negro” and not
“African” unless Hawaii is ahead of its time. The word “transcript” is missing from this registration
of birth certificate, which leads me to believe Obama’s actual birth certificate is not American
and/or that his parents could not prove his place of birth to Hawaiian officials. While I have never
seen an actual birth certificate from Hawaii nor an official registration of birth certificate that is
Hawaiian I do not believe Hawaii alone would have documents so different from any other state’s
that these documents then become the focus of a federal lawsuit as they violate the equal protection
and due process clauses as well as our right of safety by offering us no protection from foreigners
flying into or traveling by any means into the US to register a birth thus making that child eligible
for the benefits of US citizenship known as the office of the President and Commander. While no
person could engineer a situation in which their child needed a birth certificate to then run for
President and so tried to deceive the public by registering the birth only, that is no parent could
know if their child would ever run for President, if Barack Obama does not have the same
documents I have, equivalent documents, then I must know as he then is not a natural born citizen
and so has not even the privilege of becoming elected to this office. I REFUSE TO GIVE MY
BIRTHRIGHT AWAY BEFORE EVER BEING GRANTED IT AND THEN STILL REFUSE. I
PAID MY DUES, AS DID MY PARENTS, AND I SHED MY BLOOD; I ACTUALLY DIED IN
DEFENSE OF THE CONSTITUTION. If McCain also is not qualified as he may legally be a
naturalized citizen and not natural born I then had two unqualified persons forced upon me by the
major party political monopoly and that – unjust choices – is then not liberty. As for third parties?
Unless they knew the reasoning Bush V Gore is unconstitutional they too lacked the human ability
to keep me or my sons safe so all choices on the ballot were then unjust. And if it is proven that
Barack Obama traveled outside the US on any passport other than an American passport then he
relinquished his US citizenship and must reapply to then become naturalized thus he may not even
be a citizen as no evidence of him ever reapplying exists. He must go through the same process as
any other person as that is equal protection and cue process; Barack Obama may think he is special
and so above the law but he is anything but and as he himself professes to be a professor of
constitutional aw, a claim the University of Chicago supported, then he is to be held to the highest
possible standards, the same exact standards a Justice of the Supreme Court would be held to as he
is asserting he is the legal authority. The US DOES NOT recognize dual citizenship no matter what
any other nation says or does; this is within In Re Susan 08-6622. Obama himself on his own
website once posted that he was a citizen of Kenya at one time and it is reported that he was once a
citizen of Indonesia as he attended school there and to do that you must then be an Indonesian
citizen. See Exhibit E. It seems as if Barack Obama is a citizen of whatever nation is offering him
benefits at that moment; he is a citizen of convenience or a fair weather citizen. Actions define you
and so prove you; Barack Obama’s actions are very telling as nobody works this hard to avoid the
truth. Obama is creating a situation that is shaking the faith of the people to its very foundations.
He is acting as if he is anything but a Chief Justice, President and Commander. As he owns the
knowledge and always did and as nobody forced him to act in direct defiance of our law then he
himself is committing treason as we are at actual war. I wish the court to give special consideration
to one of the most unique assaults upon my human dignity ever and an extraordinary violation of
my rights perpetrated by the state of MD, specifically the Department of Motor Vehicles, which
41
 involves my registration of birth certificate: I had used this for 35 years to secure a federal military
ID and my original driver’s license as well as a federal grant. Not once was it questioned as it has a
raised seal and signature and as the military and the states supported it with other documentation
and my living person. It was proved. MD however, even after reading the back, insisted that I had
to pay for a new birth certificate from NY or else I could not get an ID forget a license. I told MD it
may not compel me to do that as it constitutes a violation of the equal protection clauses and is an
unjust tax. This clerk insisted that she could not accept any of my ID no matter what due to this
registration of birth not being the new style of birth certificates NY had begun issuing. She said
NY had “new” ones that replaced an older style. I said, “Lady, my other ID does not expire and so I
do not die thus am no longer proof beyond doubt as to who I am only because you refuse to accept
the registration of birth certificate. The registration is evidence rising to proof, as are the other state
documents but the federal military ID is proof beyond any reasonable doubt and I, the living
person, am the absolute proof rising beyond any and all doubt. Neither you nor NY can make me
pay for a new birth certificate each time NY redesigns it. I’m not redesigned the paper is. That’s on
NY not me.” She insisted I could not be processed so would not be and when I demanded an exact
reason she stated: “I can’t as it’s not the right color. You’re not the right color.” The room went
silent. I asked, “You just said ‘not the right color’. What color do I, Susan, have to be to then get an
ID from MD?” She answered, w/o skipping a beat, “Blue.” I became indignant and irate and
ordered her to get her supervisor and I told her she just asked me to meet an impossible standard
and that if this was not discrimination of Susan Herbert alone then I had no idea what is as nobody
but nobody had to be blue to then get a driver’s license or state ID. I’d be more upset than I am
with MD but this was the event that tipped me off to what this injury became: discrimination of me
alone as I knew the law and so knew my rights and concepts like the burden of proof standard; that
my ethic and my intelligence was causing me injury. One would think this could not escalate any
further but it did as I was once cited for being Native American; being born here and so “you
know[ing] the law” was actually exactly used against me to then injure me not the words Native
American. I never did turn blue in DMV but I did receive a MD state issued ID within the hour that
day. When I recently received a “new” NY birth certificate? I’m still not blue but I am out $60.

34. Marbury clearly states that: There are three ways a case can be heard in the Supreme Court: (1)
filing directly in the Supreme Court; (2) filing in a lower federal court, such as a district court, and
appealing all the way up to the Supreme Court; (3) filing in a state court, appealing all the way up
through the state's highest courts, and then appealing to the Supreme Court on an issue of federal
law. The first is an exercise of the Court's original jurisdiction; the second and third are exercises of
the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. The clerks have now referred to what is a case of
original jurisdiction as a case of a Writ of Cert when it is no such thing as a case may be wholly
original or enter here firstly as I did; that is, I never had to ask for any lower court opinion but
SCOTUS forced me to do so when I had already proven the law had been overthrown or direct
entry would not have been possible and when we all know Bush V Gore happened as did the
election of Obama! I as the authority do not need to ask for any Writ as what we are now
adjudicating is: Is this a case only SCOTUS could ever adjudicate thus no matter how many lower
courts plaintiff has been in is she an original case that enters here thus a decision is rendered at last
upon the named claims in light of actual fact and law for the very first time and not upon what
lower judges made up or are denying? Literally, SCOTUS is hearing and deciding this case as no
lower court ever once allowed me entry on paper or in person as they wholly denied what I wrote
or said thus all prior rulings going back for more than ten years are no good and do not even stand
as legal or actual as they adjudicate what was never claimed, what is perjured thus is a lie and what
was not even said in a court of law! They finally resorted to pulling documents thus negating my
appearance. I do not know how to state this for you so you will understand: All any lower court
judge did was resort to what are named crimes to then avoid this case thus they then opened up
LIABILITY as all involved in my case acted with full knowing so with deliberation. If SCOTUS
will not allow me entry unless I ask for a Writ of Cert I will but it is senseless and devoid of logic
42
 or reasoning in this case; did Marbury have to ask for a Writ of Certiorari? NO AS THAT IS HOW
WE ESTABLISHED O.J.!!! Marshall said MEN could not ask for Mandamus against those acting
under the authority of the US – YES as men voted then thus lent the sitting officers their conscious
awareness of their knowledge of the law or authority under the US; my claim has always been I’m
a woman and those I named are not acting under the authority if the US aka the Constitution as
authored by our Founders and the Solicitor General then proved it for me by defaulting thus I,
Susan, always could ask for mandamus unlike other litigants. Another reason is LAWYERS may
not ask for mandamus as the fact they are lawyers means the legal assumption is that lawyer, even
though he or she is representing a client, is asking as the lawyer truly believes the judge or court
has the authority of the US or else he would not be in this court asking, would he? As lawyers the
assumption is they are all acting under or according to the law, the US. Only Marbury and myself
are actual cases of original jurisdiction. Marbury is the theory; I, Susan am the law as I’m now
proving Marbury is legal and is constitutional thus is a law!!! It’s silly to force me to ask for
Mandamus and Prohibition against SCOTUS itself or even Cert now as then I would be proving
you are not law thus not a constitutional authority, get it? Cert implies that a lower court ruled in
error. In my case the lower courts never once ruled on the claim I made, on the facts or on the
law. They not once allowed my testimony entry, not on paper or in person. If I did appear in
person they then refused to consider it and even wrote it was not being considered. That’s a
problem if I am my own attorney as what a judge is then saying is “I will not allow Susan to
enter any legal argument whatsoever; I will not let her argue the law, its application or my
own actions; I will not let her protest”. It’s a sneaky means to circumvent the SCOTUS ruling
that a litigant can act as their own attorney and a sneaky means to violate the law openly and
directly w/o anybody else knowing as they were not there, in person, and so would not know
what the presiding judge knows: only I made it all the way into SCOTUS thus proving I
CAN ARGUE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW THUS A JUDGE ACTING ILLEGALLY AND/OR
CRIMINALLY STANDS NO CHANCE AGAINST ME IF I OPEN MY MOUTH OR
WRITE IT DOWN AND THAT JUDGE KNOWS IT AS HE OR SHE CAN READ THE
SCOTUS DOCKET THUS SEE I MOVED SCOTUS WITH MY REASONING. In my case
no ruling based upon the actual fact and law then was ever rendered! LEGALLY then my
Writ of Cert is against the citizens who voted for Obama and who failed to act before and after
Bush V Gore and who have let judges run away with our rights as if the law does not apply to them
thus my case is still o.j.. Actually it reads Cert or ‘against’ the lower court ruling, a ruling that
does not exist as the judiciary never made one upon what I filed and what I entered! Or it
entered a ruling and order but then pulled MY DOCUMENTS from the files so that order can
then never be compared to my testimony as I then made no appearance – I have no case - if the
documents are not in the files!!! It’s as if they let me make an appearance on paper but then
changed their minds ex post facto, upon reading the truth, thus then ‘erased’ that paper appearance.
SCOTUS then will be issuing an actual ruling and order at long last. For the first time.

35. As for litigants that came before this court after Bush v Gore and after Roberts appointment? They
had an opportunity, didn’t they? Our law is what you knew, when you knew it and when you acted
upon it. If you truly believed these people had power and authority over you than they did as you
created that belief - a mistaken belief- and then made it real by acting upon it. Those litigants do
not get to return and argue the same points of law; they do not get to turn back the clock, as they
did not argue what I am arguing when they could and should have done so. If they actually
disagreed and felt as if they were denied justice? They had the opportunity to disobey and/or act
against the decision they received as I myself went to these very people. They declined that
opportunity. John Roberts is not their problem or their point of law – they themselves are their own
legal issue, as those very litigants are the federal question and are the constitutional authority case
now known as Susan V Obama and the US. A person only controls you if you allow it as you have
to first give your power and authority away. WHO told you that you could not reason and apply
law your own self or that a Justice could count but you could not? Our law exactly states you need
43
 to be 18 and human to enter a contract aka reason and apply the law to yourself. WHO told you that
you could not? As if you lacked the human ability or that I lacked it? That it was impossible to
disobey? All you have to do is serve those acting with notice thus all you have to do is get within
US Supreme Court - on the docket - as it is then informed consent; you petitioned for redress and
so now anything goes if you are failed. WHO told you that you cannot mail in a petition thus issue
an executive order like anybody else as your one vote is the power of executive order? Our law
exactly states that you must be 35, human and natural born. "Law school" is nowhere in sight as
law school did not even exist as we know it when this was written and as the entire point of this
nation is self-actualization aka rising in spite of the odds set against you. The citizens had access to
a free public education and the free public library just as I did. If public school fails you the library
has volunteers that will teach you how to read so you can then defend yourself aka act pro se. I
went to school for over thirty years to reason it is a denial of liberty rights all protected and fully
vested but unclaimed as any person can and may go to school from the cradle to the grave in
America – for little or no actual monetary cost - and as every American citizen is then a lawyer as
that is the very nature of American citizenship. You are born into the contract or later volunteer
to then enter the contract thus you are a lawyer. Law school commences the day you hit the
bricks; it is entirely up to you if you graduate and then enter the bar. WHO told you that you
need a dead piece of paper known as a diploma or license or else you do not know what you
know??? What you lived??? What you see, feel and hear??? Claim the vote for yourselves and
there is no going back but only forward. Once I knew as fact all American missed the event
horizon, the vote, as they are it so could not know it I then knew I had to overturn Bush v Gore as it
is not possible to survive a black hole unless you are equal and due first and that was the cause of
my legal nightmare. You are reconstituted upon exiting on the other side. In this case? We will be
the first and only great government to survive our own success as success unchecked can become a
black hole as you begin to forget who and what you are. We will be reconstituted as equal and due
on the inside by correcting a mistaken belief about women and ourselves as Americans. As for
Congress? They can and should send away to the Vatican for a book known as the Baltimore
Catechism for it defines, reasons and even applies "high crimes and misdemeanors" as this is lost
upon Congress or so Congress claims. The Vatican will give you an actual list. For free. It tells you
everything and even exactly names the risks to your own constitution. "High crimes and
misdemeanors"? Mortal sins and venal sins. Congress certainly acts as if it does not know sin, as it
has become a sin.

36. The only thing that ever makes anyone whole is the truth. I need to be able to tell my truth and I
need to know what Obama’s truth is. This nation needs to know the truth of my life, the recent
election and Bush V Gore so they can then reason what they did – the how and why - so as to avoid
it ever happening again. Justice is about the truth and learning to live truthfully no matter what that
is for you alone and then we as a nation. When you avoid the truth? You never know if you are then
denying yourself good consequences. You are. You deny yourself the Constitution thus you deny
yourself you.

37. It is unconstitutional and not effective or practical to let the inmates run the asylum, as at some
point asylum will no longer exist. Actual reality is no liberty, no justice and so no America. As goes
the law so goes this nation and the eventuality is death. This eventuality is avoidable. James
Madison warned us against the temporary passion of the people. He exactly said the people can and
may become “possessed” of a “temporary passion”. The DSM names this as a mental illness.
Liberty is choice so you choose: Are you possessed and/or mentally ill? I own the knowledge the
Supreme Court and its Chief Justice may be misguided at times mostly due to attorneys missing the
argument or presenting what is a lie as it is not the whole truth but I do not truly believe they are
crooks who intend to cause harm and who have motive to do so as that is not a legal or just choice,
is it? The law is: You are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty and as that choice – Justices
who are actual crooks - then would mean I am going to have to find a foreign nation willing to
44
 allow me to liberate it in which to make my home. While I could poll the jury by asking all 9
Justices whom they voted for that is not necessary. For a Justice or myself the law is crook is not an
option. Period. If you are a President and Commander? Crook is not supposed to be an option; you
may be forced to act extra-constitutionally but never unconstitutionally. This citizen knows the
difference. Like this: In order to make his lection legal? As the Chief Law Enforcement Officer
Obama then would have to immediately resign upon his election or refuse to take the oath of office
and instead make his case to SCOTUS or order his own arrest. That’s how you know as fact he is
acting in violation of our law or unconstitutionally as you cannot be the person enforcing the law if
you first violate it to then become that person! How is it ever enforcing the law to violate it in both
letter and spirit??? It seems the voters institutionalized themselves!!! Now they need to
constitutionalize themselves.

38. As it is too long to include here see the legal history and bad math is included as Appendix This
details how we came to be here and why our Constitutional Republic fell. It reasons how and why I
ever came to be so grievously injured and why women were lulled into believing they had legal
power and protection of the law when they do not - nor does any citizen today as of Obama’s
election and installation as foreignization or overthrow was then completed save my one person
acting. This deals with the Executive, the 13th, 16th & 17th amendments, Office of Commander,
the Federal Reserve, IMF, UN, Bush V Gore and my ability to argue our sovereignty or
constitutional authority of our lone person back to Eden and then the creation of this universe as
this is possible and not so difficult for me to do. Bush V Gore, the Resolution to Uniformity and
when and how actual life begins in the womb is uniquely my own as no other person reasoned this
correctly (or as in the case of life could not prove it but I can) while other knowledge is owned
jointly with the named authors as we came to it simultaneously. Pursuing this case caused me to
stumble upon the resolution to Uniformity as physics is my first area of expertise and a law is law
across the board: Physics, government and theology will all line up if it is an actual law of this
universe. Our Declaration, Constitution and Marbury is. I am arguing two governments now exist,
the sitting CORP US and the legal We The People and CORP US holds all power unjustly and so as
members of CORP US the lower judges had no business hearing this case but should have sent it
ahead as their own court rule and US law as well as all known case law dictates. I also attached my
brief and the now “unfiled” (!) Motion To Reconsider. My brief may serve as the brief for this very
case as my case never was anything but O.J. and I authored my brief with that in mind and secure
in the knowledge that as long as I did not make Marbury’s mistake thus fail to act I would indeed
be entering SCOTUS on behalf of myself, We The People and even on behalf of SCOTUS itself. I
argue my prior petitions now along with my brief and Motion To Reconsider may now be entered
as my case of original jurisdiction thus all that is left is oral argument before SCOTUS in person.
Due to my injury and my unique facts I was forced to enter the knowledge backwards thus
SCOTUS now has the brief I would have entered to SCOTUS if heard person the first time around
as the motion then compliments it or includes the knowledge I had to enter to a court lastly in order
to protect myself. Taken together both make up my SCOTUS brief.

39. The order from the Federal Appeals Court? As these judges are lawyers and are members of CORP
US not the legal government and so would have been effected by a ruling for me thus they had a
pre-existing conflict they could never overcome they had no business ruling in my case. As unjust
privilege only exists for them if I am denied entry and the knowledge within my case is suppressed
their vested interest always was and still is violating me thus The People and so denying us liberty
and justice. As they had motivation to harm me and did so once already they then needed to recuse
themselves as they already proved they would not or could not obey the Constitution and so made
my motion to reconsider necessary. They had no legal standing to adjudicate the motion but only
send it ahead especially as they can read the SCOTUS docket. This is serious, very, very serious, as
it proves our Judiciary has fallen. It’s a done deal thus liberty and justice are now dead in the lower
courts. The Judiciary has abandoned the Constitution and The People in favor of CORP US. It is
45
also a judge attempting to suppress what is a legal and valid thus binding order I issued against the
named judges and to suppress what is a legal arrest warrant I swore out as this nation’s Chief Law
Enforcement Officer. A judge can make an attempt to unfile my Motion To Reconsider but the
judge had to read it to then issue any order whatsoever so we know he owns the knowledge
contained within it thus the named judge has no excuse for his actions. They are indefensible:
Marbury says that delivery of the paper or filing is not necessary and that acting is proof of
ownership; that acting then proves your true belief or proves you own the knowledge contained on
the paper. Thus we know as the judge acted upon it that he read my motion thus upon his action to
then issue a criminal order that instructs a clerk to physically unfile the paper motion as if it does
not exist or as if he, the judge, did not read it? He then filed the motion no matter what his order
says as his action, his response, constitutes filing as it proves ownership! Filing would not occur if
he did not act at all. His action proves his true belief is that he is above the Constitution and so not
subject to it thus he himself has proved he is not acting under the authority of the US. His action
also proves he truly believes me to be less than he is and so not entitled to protection of the law. It
is as I said: The truth is self-evident. SCOTUS must send a message and tell judges and all others
who are appointed and elected that attempts to skirt and violate the law will not be tolerated as this
is 2009 not 1930. As these people know different they will act different or else every legal method
there is will be employed to stop them and even remove them from office as now the citizens will
have the means via my lawsuit. Actions against the Constitution will never be tolerated and
obeying the exact letter of the law is not enough. Also: The judge said it would exceed 80 pages if
my motion were subject to the rules regarding appearance. The order said no more than 20 pages
exactly and nothing else and I entered only 19 pages and made it clear that legally all I needed to
write was one sentence (thus the Do not let The People file that one sentence so I’m ordering you
to not enter any documents this litigant files as then The People have won). So he committed
perjury as NO IT WOULD NOT EXCEED 80 PAGES IF SET TO THE COURT RULE
MARGINS AS UPON SETTING THOSE MARGINS I’D WRITE ONE SENTENCE and he knew
it when he wrote this as I exactly told him. If a judge lies it is perjury and if a federal judge lies? It
is treason as it rises to treason, as it is a violation of Art. 4 Sec 4 as it is federal domestic violence
thus it denies us a Republican form of government. What else is it when a federal judges
ORDERS the People are to be denied a constitutional Republic, denied protection of the
Constitution, if it is not treason??? When a federal judge commits domestic violence against
The People and does so without any relief for The People by the Legislature or the Executive?
All it can be then is treason! I even said the other 18 pages are merely for the court’s benefit, so it
is thoroughly informed of all fact and law thus can and may give informed consent, as it’s actions
will result in consequences as I myself am acting for my person and The People and so must return
to SCOTUS. This man wrote my motion would exceed 80 pages in his order to make people who
read the previous 20 page order then assume I violated that order when I did not; this man needed
to stop The People from filing that one sentence. He proved he believes he is slick, slicker than all
of The People as he is trying to pull the wool over their eyes and you only do that if he truly think
you are above the law, if you are smarter than and so better than The People. He needs The People
to believe I did not ‘obey’ the 20-page order as if the injury is my fault, as he cannot escape The
People thus the Constitution any other way. BUT as I entered 19 PAPER PAGES not an electronic
file the number 80 interested me. I not once had 80 something pages no matter how I set the
margins. But did I ever use the court rule margins? So I conducted the experiment to secure proof:
Set to the margins and type face SCOTUS accepted it is 30 single sided pages; set to the automatic
defaults of Word, the motion in unnecessary HUGE-O 14 POINT TYPE is only 55 single sided
pages. Double spaced it is 85 pages BUT these settings are not the court rule settings regarding
appearance and: this document is on my PC and so is accessible but I gave the court only a paper
copy not my e-file. Where and how is this man getting his ideas? How did he come up with 80, that
exact number? I find it very interesting indeed that this man some how was able to place my
document on a computer and then play with the margins, line spaces and type face but yet expects
us to believe he then did not read its contents. As if appearance alone caused him to then write DO
46
 NOT ENTER A CORRECTED COPY OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS FROM SUSAN. He read
it, as that is what motivated his criminal action; the truth moved him to try and hide it from The
People and to make it seem as if his action is justifiable thus not criminal when it is criminal.
However: Is this what federal judges do on our dime? Is this, playing with the paper itself
and not reasoning it or the Constitution, what sitting federal judges do with the taxes that
then pay their salary? This man as he authored and signed this order is proof I am being
taxed unjustly and that this tax is collected as tribute. An actual monkey could do what this
man did and they cost a lot less to keep. I have witnessed a monkey count. Plus: actual
monkeys do not harm humans with criminal intent. I speak for The People: We’d rather
suffer actual monkeys than the likes of this unjust person pretending to be a federal judge
when he is not. For that matter we’d rather suffer actual actors, as at least then we’d get the
actual theatrical production that we’re funding. Grant this Writ so we finally get what we
paid for: An appearance in person in SCOTUS. Turn all tribute back into just taxes.

40. This order is an example of a judge making law as there is no basis in the Constitution or in any
SCOTUS ruling which supports this judges action. As I said he violates the law and at least one
SCOTUS ruling. So he makes what is being levied against me as if it is law - he makes law as
even the rule he cites is not applicable to my person - and then enforces it by instructing the clerk
to do so, to enforce his ruling by pulling the motion from the files. Thus he is making law,
interpreting it himself as he answered to no one not even the paper Constitution and then he
enforced it. I have been claiming from day one: Crimes are now legally enforced or made legal
when they are not! Exactly as the kidnapping of my children was legally enforced or made legal.
This judge acted to keep the knowledge within my motion from the living Constitution, The
People. Thus he truly believes HE empowers The People and he truly believes he then has the right
to deny The People authority and power or else he would not have to resort to enforcing his own
ruling, would he? Why not let The People govern themselves upon being informed? Why usurp
SCOTUS’ constitutional authority? I know why: As the judges on this bench would be some of the
first officers I win a liability claim against and that The People roust from office! Proof of a gross
violation of separation of power, of consolidation of power by lawyers and/or those already
entrenched, endemic corruption and/or treason aka overthrow. They are all equivalent as it is
actually endemic. The People cannot enforce the Constitution if living ethical or law abiding
persons are denied access to the system and now all lawyers are dead institutions as they are
arguing a paper constitution our original Founders did not author. The People must be granted this
Writ so that access then exists and The People, one of which I am, are then able to address the
violation of separation of power that caused this: The vote.

41. As other judges have begun blaming SCOTUS exactly for their actions? So have members of
Congress only Congress has gone one further: Granting constitutional authority to make believe,
fantasy officers. They are also stating as fact that they know what is said when SCOTUS meets to
discuss cases as in how they voted. Also if you merely lived here for 14 years you are natural born.
YES, if you lived here in 1763 or 1777 as you left off at the time the Constitution was adopted. That
would make you natural born as you were actually present when the actual Constitution both paper
and People was actually naturally born, when it sprang from the minds of our Founders one of
which you then are: Thus you are natural born. From a letter authored by Anders Crenshaw, my
Rep, in response to why he is not addressing Obama and why he did not address the candidates on
the ballot: “According to Article II of the Constitution, the eligibility requirements for the Office of
the President include: 1) natural born citizenship; 2) 35 years of age, and 3) 14 years of residency
in the United States. Concerned citizens have questioned whether President-elect Obama
meets these minimum qualifications, and some have brought legal challenges attempting to
prevent him from assuming the office based on his place of birth. However, these legal challenges
to the President's citizenship have been dismissed in several states, and the Supreme Court
overwhelmingly decided that it would not issue a writ of certiorari to hear an appeal of each
47
dismissal. In addition, Hawaii's Health Director and Head of Vital Statistics examined and
certified the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate following an investigation by
his office. The document has also been reviewed and deemed authentic by experts at the
University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center.” Policy??? Not Law? I
reasoned: ‘I have new evidence. A Rep wrote and said he knew as fact and law Obama is qualified
as A COLLEGE TOLD HIM SO. Not the one Obama went to either. It’s actually a matter of policy,
Crenshaw’s personal policy. He is convinced we will believe his fact is the Constitution does not
apply to himself or to Obama or even to SCOTUS, lol. Since WHEN is the word of a college via
it’s Policy Center then a constitutional authority??? We do not ask colleges to reason our
application of the law precisely as they are not the constitutional authority. Why pay the Justices if
colleges will tell me for free what the Constitution DOES NOT SAY as no where is “HEALTH
DIRECTOR”, “HEAD OF VITAL STATISTICS”, "UNIVERSITY" or "PHILANTHROPIC
THINK TANK ASSOCIATED WITH A COLLEGE, THE WEALTHY AND MAYBE A
POLITICAL PARTY" named? As no where is “PAPER” or “BIRTH CERTIFICATE” named? I got
a birth certificate for ya: The SCOTUS docket with my name on it pro se proving direct action took
place as I directly acted to create that. I gave natural birth to it as I moved the Court to then directly
act with my fact and my reasoning or knowledge and my application of the law. I proved
ownership. Why pay the Rep as the Constitution and US case law is published at no cost all over
the place? You’d think a Rep would act as if he is a constitutional authority not ask someone else
who is not named unlike him as “Representative” is exactly named. So are the concerned citizens
as “The People” are exactly named as well. A Rep, my Rep, reasoned his violation of
the Constitution by citing “SUPREME COURT” exactly as the cause or reason, he names that first,
and then claiming he knows the vote, as it was exactly “overwhelmingly” against The “concerned”
People, the actual equal authority who have an interest and a right. SCOTUS as it exists today is
not exactly named as a constitutional authority as the actual first constitutional authority,
Crenshaw’s actual first cause, The People, created it ex post facto via the named Constitutional
process – redress in a court of law - thus LENT THEIR CONSCIOUS AWARENESS or
AUTHORITY to SCOTUS. The People not the paper empowered SCOTUS and still do. SCOTUS
never acts against the citizens as that then is acting against the Constitution! Against their own
selves!!! Who does that??? Who harms their own self??? Who violates their own right of safety???
We negotiate a lot of things but not the Constitution!!! So WHO does negotiate it against our will?
I can’t name one Justice who is nuts and/or power hungry. I’ve met these people on paper; we have
a relationship, the Constitution, so as we are related I know. Like the judges in my case and in the
cases of other nonlawyer pro se litigants SCOTUS is his named excuse; SCOTUS is now the
default excuse of oligarchs.’ That’s what I reasoned but I wrote back: ‘SCOTUS is not the
cause. That’s not why you refuse to obey the Constitution or abide by the oath you swore. I would
know as I’m IN RE SUSAN HERBERT and I live in your district. The authority, the citizens, has
made a simple mistake and one they would make as you are the cause of it: They asked to see
Obama’s paper as if that paper is the authority or as if they do not trust SCOTUS thus they do not
own the knowledge of the Constitution or US case law...John Marshall said your action is the proof
that you own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus delivery or filing of the paper need
not occur. He ruled as we are a living government of people then PEOPLE ACTING IS THE
PROOF NOT THE PAPER. This is for anyone who does not understand why SCOTUS is so
hesitant to hear a case asking Obama to produce his paper. 1, Paper is never absolute proof in any
actual Constitutional nation as people or life is proof. You can't trust paper especially if a crook is
producing it! The crook has will and liberty but the paper does not thus you cannot ask the paper if
it was forged as it can’t answer thus can’t be questioned – you can’t charge a piece of paper with
fraud thus why would you ever suspect it? - and you can't trust whatever the crook tells you. Well,
you can but you shouldn’t. Trust is an emotion. Trust is for people not paper. I trust myself, The
Creator and the signers who embodied the law not the paper copy and not you, Crenshaw. My fact?
I never yet met a Rep I do trust. 2, Obama then can refuse to obey a Justice as a Justice cannot
mount an argument back or against him thus a citizen must. The citizens protect the Justices and so
48
 SCOTUS thus the Constitution. Usually they enforce SCOTUS rulings by living them out as real
but a citizen might have to defend an employee of SCOTUS or the institution itself from you or
another crook. What if Obama refuses to obey an order of SCOTUS aka The People but yet still
sits? What if no named 'authority' charged with the duty acts to make Obama or Biden or any of
these persons comply with the Constitution? Obama would not be refusing to obey SCOTUS but
the Constitution aka The People. THE authority. That's dangerous as it sets a dangerous precedent
for the crooks: it tells the crooks they can do whatever they wish w/o consequence. 3, If people
acting is the proof? All you can and may do then is act pro se thus leveling the playing field as
Obama then has to do the same thing - enter his legal argument pro se or in person w/o a hired
gun as the oath of Office says I WILL. Thus you'll soon know who is or is not the
constitutionally set President; you'll know who is or is not qualified to preserve, protect and defend
the Constitution aka We The People. The proof, the actual President who is a natural born
American citizen will rise and you can then compare that person to Obama and both to what the
Constitution and US case law states; you weigh the evidence and assign greatest weight in light of
the burden of proof standard thus you know. You own the knowledge or the truth of the
Constitution thus your own self: are you acting as you wrote the letter and you voted
constitutionally or unconstitutionally? Trust me, as you can and may: You’ll forever know what
natural born is or is not. See ya in court!’

42. I practice or live what I teach: As further proof we are no longer a Constitutional Republic and are
paying what is tribute Obama is now acting to investigate the CIA as he said his administration
would be the most transparent but then he promptly acted to hide his facts by hiding his paper thus
everyone but Obama is being made transparent or is subject to Obama’s arbitrary
enforcement of the law. He is violating the equal protection clauses as if SCOTUS, the CIA and
Susan must obey the letter and the spirit of the law so must he but he does not. He is arbitrarily
picking and choosing what he will live out and what he will enforce. Proof is he first said he would
not investigate the activities of the CIA but then acted to do it. That then is arbitrary, it is
conditional, and as no other condition changed Obama then is the condition that changes and there
is nothing lawful or equal and due about it. Obama changed his mind and upon what only he knows
as our Constitution did not change nor did new case law arise nor do we have a new CIA director
since he installed himself as the Executive and appointed one. The chief law enforcement officer
enforces the law, period. He applies it to everyone including himself. Ideally he never violates it.
But Obama has not once lived up to the letter or the spirit of our Constitution or so I truly believe
and he falsely claims that he is an innocent victim of crime. Thus: I never need to see a single paper
to then prove Obama is not the acting, legal constitutionally named or set President and
Commander as I have what our Founders gave me: life. Plus the paper trail exists and I already
entered it as Obama and CORP US hid the wrong paper. I previously stated that they failed to hide
Resolution 511; I now state that they failed to hide the Declaration, Constitution and Marbury as
well as Bush V Gore, the SCOTUS docket dated 11/05/08 & 11/20/08 with my name only upon it as
both the victim and pro se counsel, several SCOTUS rulings that set federal precedent, the text of
the missing 13th Amendment, the dates on the IMF/UN legislation, the UN Treaty, the Albany
County Police report dated JUNE of 98, the Albany County Court record dated JULY of 98, the
Philadelphia County Court record dated DECEMBER of 2000, the Middle District of FL court
record dated APRIL 4, 2007, the Middle District of FL court RULING & ORDER dated JANUARY
20th & 21st, 2009 and the Federal Reserve as it is named on the paper being passed off as US
dollars when they are not: Our money reads FEDERAL RESERVE, a private concern, and NOTE.
I exactly entered a picture of a $500 NOTE as an attachment to my acted upon emergency
application that has John Marshall on it; he would turn over in his grave if he knew he was
pictured on a foreign note passed off as constitutional when it is not! I believe this was also entered
to lower federal court. My fact is Obama and CORP US did not manage to hide one single
piece of paper evidence that rises to proof. The paper they hid never rises to proof thus I
never need to see it. Obama and his lawyer, Bob Bauer, can keep Obama’s birth certificate,
49
 passport and college records to themselves for all eternity as what he has to do is give birth to
a record that he does not have the human ability to forge: He would have to change the exact
words of our Declaration of Independence. The Constitution provides for no method of
amending the Declaration. Neither does Marbury. Even the whole of SCOTUS, the Chief
Justice himself and the President all working together and with every resource at their
disposal cannot amend the Declaration as we won the Revolution or so I allege. This Writ needs
to be granted so I can teach Americans what constitutes proof and what does not and so they learn
that no piece of paper ever actually proves a thing about who and what you are or who and what we
are as a nation. We The People serve – live - to be or become proof of the paper!

43. SCOTUS need not serve the US again. This very filing is service over again. There is zero need to
serve the US (CORP US that is) once again thus wait thirty more days as they have no defense and
so no answer as that would be the US arguing against the Constitution and against math; it is them
arguing to violate the Constitution and to harm my person and The People with the permission of
SCOTUS. This Writ needs to be granted as I must teach The People what is or is not an actual
emergency and what a safety issue actually is, as the unjust persons in charge have abused those
words and ideas until the citizens do not recognize lethal danger and react to irrational and often
wholly manufactured fear. Proof would be the recent admission that the ‘terror threat level’ was
manipulated by the last administration thus was elevated when no actual threat existed. The People
have been taught, trained, to negotiate their safety via negotiating their vote. Plus: Granting this
Writ may be the only means for some sitting persons who may be just and may be fit to address
their injury: The SG is working for Obama and/or CORP US and has not once chosen to obey the
Constitution. There is a conflict present that she might never overcome: Elena Kagan (born April
28, 1960) is the Solicitor General of the United States. She is the first woman to hold that office,
having been nominated by President Barack Obama on January 26, 2009, and confirmed by the
U.S. Senate on March 19, 2009. That is: She is lawyer and she truly believes Obama is the legal
President thus that her own appointment is constittuional when NOTHING in our
Constitution and no US case law supports this. She had access to my filing; she is to know the
law and its application. Like lawyers and judges apparently the Constitution does not apply to you
or to the person who appoints you if that then benefits you. Like all others who now hold in the
‘highest’ offices as none of them have sued to make their authority and power legal; like Obama
and others now seated the SG is picking and choosing when the Constituion applies and when it
does not when in reality the Constituion ALWAYS applies. The Constitution is always good as you
are to own the knowledge or...not hold the office. If you do not own the knowledge of the
Constitution and then US case law, how does your appointment or election then have any basis in
the Constitution??? It does not as you, the SG, are not the Chief Justice creating your basis in the
Constitution as you live it out as Susan sued you exactly and as your office as it came to exist today
has its basis in Marbury, case law which itself is firmly rooted in the original Constituion, are you?
[An aside: I’d be in jail for much less!!! As it is I’m on a possible terrorist watch list and so
dangerous and powerful is the truth of the Constitution and US case law that the Secret Service
comes to my home for FILING A FEDERAL LAWSUIT ONLY. Yes, as I will terrify you, the
criminals, with the truth: with US history, with US case law and with what the Constitution
actually says and is. How much notice do criminals get??? All of these people KNOW what they
are doing as they are LAWYERS. If for nothing else I could sue them all, even Obama, for
MALPRACTICE. I could take their licenses. I could keep them from ever holding another
office.] Roberts and/or the clerks established their constitutional basis via filing this case and they
then proved their constitutionality via acting to address the US’ failure to respond as I left no room
for personal prejudices or personal beliefs; to act you either had to live up to the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights plus Marbury or commit a crime. I designed my petition to challenge any and all
of those prejudices voters yet act upon as do the sitting unjust persons so to act you had to set aside
every one of those personal beliefs and they managed to do it thus their direct action upon my
direct entry then made their offices and SCOTUS as an institution actually, legally and truly
50
constitutional. Their constitutionality was further proven as at least three times the clerks and I
argued law one of those times in person via the phone; we each won and lost points or
ACKNOWLEDGED EACH OTHER’S EQUAL AUTHORITY AND POWER. This Writ then
must be granted so every American citizen receives this same opportunity to establish a
constitutional basis for...their vote! Their existence as Americans! To become...natural born or
upon their own will and liberty without any force, any threat or fear of unjust punishment or any
unconstitutional conditions present. Not once not ever have Americans been able to vote for the
candidate of their choice; the closet thing to it they have ever had? Bush V Gore as not one person
had to obey it and could have voted another way as I did as the Justices employed no force and no
coercion. They even allowed citizens to petition for third party standing. This case then will finally
give them that opportunity as for the first time ever they will own the knowledge; they will truly be
acting upon informed consent. They could not do this when Bush V Gore was heard as those
litigants had no desire to accord The People their liberty. Those litigants not once informed The
People of their rights nor did they inform them that they had other alternatives under our law and
case law. They not once told The People the US case law exists, but it remains theory, so you may
prove it law by agreeing to meet us in court if you act pro se thus you can and may defeat us and
win the Office your own self - if you have the guts to do it. I will never believe the lawyers did not
know this nor will I ever believe Bush and Gore looked around this nation and decided they alone
were the only people able and capable to hold this office thus they HAD NO CHOICE but to sue in
SCOTUS and not let one other person in with them. I heard The People say it: We are being
robbed; this is a travesty; this is not a Republic; this is treason but we cannot do anything because
of the lawyers and the politicians. The citizens are upset over this past election; the uproar has not
gone away - it is merely silenced, as it is not reported on at all. Some people are claiming it is
about race and so the people complaining are racist when it is not as this cuts to the very quick, the
fabric, of who and what we are as it is about liberty and justice. Justice is NEVER realized when
victims reason and decide as remedy and relief they too can violate the law and its spirit as their
injury is not being addressed by the unjust persons in power. The injury now known as Bush V
Gore and the war in Iraq will never be healed if The People then act their oppressors. The actual
injury is: As soon as the US case law existed to then make liberty and justice possible for all those
yet shut out lawyers and politicians used and abused expert knowledge, influence and cash to
subvert it; they used their ability to enter federal court when the pro se victims – pro se voters -
were not allowed entry. Then they simply began ignoring the few federal rulings we won against
them as they consolidated all power unconstitutionally, entrenching injustice until it went on for so
long the citizens forgot their own history as they no longer felt liberty as an emotion and you
cannot find emotions in any book of history but only in real life: Shopping for liberty? Can’t feel it
on any paper in any institution you’ve ever been to? Act once more: SCOTUS is the store you want
to visit as you haven’t shopped there yet as only trained and schooled lawyers have. Only lawyers
who managed to get two signatures on a worthless piece of paper, a made up form, can buy rulings
there. You can shop there too only you can use money to do it if actual liberty is what you need to
walk out the door with. Thus I knew: I, Susan, am carrying Earth on my shoulders so I have to take
as many prisoners as I can thus I must unseat the entire government, municipal, state and federal,
by suing John Roberts and so forcing the unjust persons to answer to The People; I must access
chain of command at the lowest level and go through each office in every branch until I am at the
Chief Justice thus the President having exhausted all other known means of remedy and relief; I
must prove the lower Judiciary has fallen so only SCOTUS is left as the Judiciary makes or breaks
a Republic so if it falls we are no longer constitutional; I must prove we are an oligarchy and then
go back and sue all over again straight through the judiciary but for liability as nobody then is
acting under the authority of the US except John Roberts and I ; only SCOTUS and I are left
standing. As you are reading this and I did force direct action upon appealing to Roberts exactly
and he stood aside The People then I have stood down every person between the just born baby all
the way up to the Office of the President and Commander. On 11/20/08 the date John Roberts or
his agent acted thus stood aside The Constitution thus The People? THE PEOPLE WON THEIR
51
 CASE!!! Finally, after 200 plus years of litigation, The American People have won their case!!! It
is as I claimed: “America: number one in particle physics since July 4th, 1776”. The Constitution
and Marbury worked! My vote worked as the founders told me it would!!! The Constitution is
actual rocket science! The SG then MUST claim the US does have an interest and right; she as she
is not a man so never had actual legal power must establish her constitutional basis to act by firmly
rooting it in Susan V Obama, Roberts and the US, an original jurisdiction case based upon the
Declaration, Constitution and Marbury. A now sitting officer named Sandra Sotomayor must do the
very same thing: Establish her constitutional basis to act as a Justice. Our law is only one equal
opportunity need exist not three or four. For Elena Kagan and Sandra Sotomayor exactly this
lawsuit is their very first opportunity but it is not the first for most others and crooks are not
supposed to receive unlimited opportunities to harm us. I took it upon myself to serve the people
who might not know thus might not be guilty: the Chief Judge of the 3rd District Court in NY
where I also legally landed due to the sale of my person and the unconstitutional family court
action undertaken against me, Spain the Albany judge who first harmed me who now sits on the
3rd District Appeals Court so an insurmountable conflict now exists, the NY court employee who
acted to help me track down the missing NY transcript who is now the clerk of the 3rd District
Appellate Court and for good measure I served the Senate an astounding fourth time. I also
contacted the Joint Chiefs Of Staff to ask them if they were or were not willing to defend the
Constitution as TeamLaw claimed and warned them I would soon be within SCOTUS once again
thus needed an answer as Roberts and I (and so We The People) would like know if the military
stood aside us or not. I told them I had to ask, as it seemed as if the military is eager to die in
defense of dead institutions these days thus I did not want to but I must ask. Every citizen in the US
has been served notice; not one person can claim they did not know or were not served, as the
SCOTUS case conferencing list constitutes service to all twice over and they were served that first
time BEFORE Obama was then elected and BEFORE any primary was held. I made certain to
secure my own and then The People’s standing. Persons such as the involved judges and Senators
cannot afford to acknowledge the truth of the Constitution as then they can no longer deny the
reality of their illegal appointments and/or their illegal activities thus they act criminally to silence
me. Denial allows them to continue to act unlawfully. They interpret the law to mean it does not
apply to them if they CANNOT be held liable or even so much as accountable. So I decided to
reform a few old guards for our present thus future safety: I went to the only institution that I knew
of that still exist as it was created and as it was intended to exist by our original founders,
SCOTUS, as John Marshall participated in the Revolution and was at Yorktown only I took the
longest way, the high road, as I could not enter until or unless I possessed a solution to every
problem The People named. I do; as for the cause, the unjust persons? Art. 4. Sec. 4, Federalist 10
and liability! My fact is: I couldn’t sue to dissolve these office holders UNLESS they acted
unlawfully after I informed them so why do they then go out of their way to do it? CONTROL,
SELFISHNESS, GREED and even actual HATE, that’s why.

44. I truly believe the People acted as they did and so cast what is not a legal vote as they have zero
conscious awareness of what our law is and says and what the clauses “natural birth” and “equal
protection” actually mean. The People do not know how powerful their lone vote actually is as they
have never had an opportunity to wield it in such a way they exert actual energy, thus convert
matter - The Constitution - into energy - liberty and justice. They not once experienced an
institution being converted into a constitution or witnessed a living constitution become a living
institution. They have no idea our law provides for everlasting life if only you claim it as Marshall
said you must. They do not know our law is of the physical and metaphysical and that distilled
down to its very essence it not only can be expressed mathematically but it is very simple, basic
spiritual truths which are universal. They do not know as they have never been able to make the
attempt to live it out as real for their own person yet. Grant this writ and this lawsuit will be their
means. I truly believe they would not have acted as they did and still are if they were informed; if
they had the human ability to act differently. I rendered my verdict already in my brief: The People
52
 are guilty but actually ignorant thus our Constitution guarantees them a do over, an equal
opportunity. The vote symbolizes what injured People truly believe not necessarily what the
Constitution says as that is how the injury is realized. If knowledge is power then the citizens need
to be informed and so fully experience the example, me and my case, thus own conscious
awareness of the Constitution and the feeling of liberty. Ideally as I make this case to The People
via SCOTUS The People then reason and decide every federal question except the first one. In this
way trust is restored, as SCOTUS must trust The People to govern themselves upon a ruling and
The People must trust SCOTUS to issue a just ruling. SCOTUS might have to referee a couple of
other questions but trust thus faith in our law must be restored and this is how you restore it. Yes it
will be difficult to develop new ways of doing some things like running campaigns or choosing
who is or is not on our ballot but The People have plenty of ideas and some are fantastic as I have
examined them. The only way we will ever know if there is a better, more just way is to throw open
the doors as our Founders said. During the Convention or so James Madison noted (I can and do
trust Madison) they said tip the pyramid on its end if this happens according the most people
possible opportunity. It was our very first stab at a trickle down theory. It might not have been
possible to do this before but it is now as I can lead The People by example and teach them how to
test a new plan and what to look for to then discern if it is or is not working, if it is or is not just. It
is not as complicated as unjust men have made it seem; the problem has been they are not willing
to reason or to obey the law; they are not willing to obey the will of the People. They are also
afraid, as they are only willing to take credit but not willing to acknowledge fault. Of course we
will not do what we need to do overnight and of course we’ll make some mistakes but that is what
America is all about: Making an attempt and then fine tuning the experiment known as the world’s
first and only true Constitutional Republic, We The People. True Constitutional Republics? We get
to make all of the actual mistakes we need to make as we have SCOTUS who then advises us on
those mistakes if we cannot or will not address them ourselves. Take some recent SCOTUS action
which The People still question: Throwing money at Brown V Topeka did not work; it was a
mistake to keep doing it w/o any actual results as discrimination and segregation yet exist so
SCOTUS essentially said “You may no longer use money in this way to fix this mistake. Think of
something else” thus it is not as complex and hard as unjust men make it seem, as once you know
you can choose to make a sacrifice thus you never suffer needlessly. Suffering is what unjust men
make you do. Sacrifice is what Constitutional Republics choose upon their own volition without
any force or intimidation but only as I can so I will as I want to. In a just nation an informed “I
want to” is the best, most righteous reason of all as it makes YOU or The Constitution the just
cause. Constitutions like the Constitutional Republics they live in and under should always be their
own just cause. We have the means to prevent our mistakes from causing any injury that is
irreparable. Mistakes are a part of the design of the Constitution; mistakes are a part of the pattern.
Hence the due process clauses and the process to amend our law. I refer to anything after the Bill of
Rights and Marbury the “constitutional rules of order for the present society” as they are subject to
change but anything before them is not. Once informed The People can be trusted to determine
their own lives; if they all share a common interest they will then act as their brother’s keeper.
Grant this Writ as We The People demand the equal opportunity to screw this up differently than
the crooks!

45. There is only two ways justice can be restored. This is science - physics and government – and not
a matter of my personal belief: What must occur is a violent uprising of The People or a citizen –
me – must be heard in person before SCOTUS. No other means exist. I myself am all for a violent
uprising save one thing: Our law is we are not to be needing violent uprisings as we have orderly
transfers of power. YES, via the orderly transfer of knowledge! Via informed consent! If the
process exists. It does. No more people need to be injured; we must also end something else that is
now afoot: Americans are now referring to other Americans as the “enemy” using that word exactly
and are actively turning each other in to the entrenched ‘authorities’ and to quasi-authorities,
political groups. Instead of targeting the actual cause, LAWYERS and PRIVATEERS, they are
53
 senselessly targeting each other. We’re all supposed to be on the same side. That gives you a whole
lot of room to then express yourself. We can all join forces behind this case, in defense of the
Constitution. It’s not possible to ‘lose’ then no matter the ruling. Grant this Writ to avoid a violent
faction as Federalist 10 instructs.

46. You are never to take the law into your own hands but the Founders said you most definitely are to
take the government into your own hands, as you are the government. Grant this Writ so I can then
teach The People that taking the law into your hands makes you a victimizer or worse a criminal
exactly like those who injured you; taking the government into your own hands makes you a victim
who has triumphed over your oppressors the lesson being: In America there is no such thing as an
actual victim only a legal one. “Victim” is a legal designation; it is not reality until or unless you
begin to truly believe you are one. If SCOTUS fails you and The People? Take government into
your own hands: Declare yourself Chief Justice, post public notice of your appointment and
confirmation and name a place where The People can access you and so the court. Trust me as you
can: If a plaintiff sues me but goes to your court, you, and not the other SCOTUS headed by
Roberts? As long as you establish you were denied justice by the other SCOTUS I’ll argue my
defense in front of you. That’s how you take government into your own hands: you empower
yourself first by making the reasoned decision basing it upon the constitution and US case law and
then act upon it by doing something, you take action, and so you then lend that power via
conscious awareness to another. If you act to post notice of you having become the Chief Justice?
When I read it I am consciously aware we may have a new Chief Justice thus I then have the
human ability to go to you and find out for myself. I can and may enter a petition to you as I have
one criteria at this point: I know you’re constitutional if you have a gun as you have proven you
have the means to enforce your own rulings. You thus we can and may execute chain of command
theory. Ideally you won’t need a gun for long. Even more ideally once everyone is aware that they
own all actual power upon reading this very petition the crooks will start volunteering to leave as
SCOTUS recently ruled for us albeit roundaboutly: Guns, guns and more guns. US case law now is
we can and may not only shoot in theory post the fact of the Revolution but we may first own the
necessary constitutional element: A gun, and even if you live right next door to Congress. SCOTUS
ruled against the Executive, Judiciary and Congress and for The People. Buying a gun is taking
government into your own hands; shooting it before I am heard in person in SCOTUS? Before I
issue the order? Before you own the knowledge it is now necessary to shoot? That is taking law
into your own hands. This is why McVeigh, Nichols and all like them are criminals not patriots:
none of them accessed SCOTUS. The People need to learn the difference as “government” and
“law” are not the same things and if The People confuse them then they have confused perceived
power for actual power.

47. Grant this Writ so NY and the other states may no longer use federal ‘authorities’ who aren’t as
they are no longer acting under the authority of the US as of default on 11/20/08 to then harass the
citizens. I served four judges in NY with notice of suit and once again the US Marshal came to my
home with ONLY the copy of the lawsuit and brief thus 3 times I have been ‘investigated’ for filing
a federal lawsuit. Judges and others are abusing their power as due to the very nature of a federal
lawsuit the PLAINTIFF is not the law breaker, is she? To prove to the Marshal that he was acting
in violation of the law I showed him my name as the Plaintiff and then the federal order instructing
the clerk to UNFILE my motion after it had been acted upon yet he persisted, his excuse being “I
have to do what my bosses tell me to do. You caused your own this by sending this (lawsuit and
brief) to NY.” I CAUSED AN IN ILLEGAL INVESTIGATION?! EXACTLY AS I MUST SERVE
THOSE NAMED AND AS NO PERSON IS TO BE INVESTIGATED AND HARASSED FOR
FILING A FEDERAL LAWSUIT!!! You can never, ever justify this act and NY has done it twice
now thus proving it is not possible for me to receive a fair hearing in that state as they have shown
they are prejudiced against me. Further a US Marshal should laugh if he is asked to investigate a
person ONLY because she filed a lawsuit. When I challenged this man and asked him WHY didn’t
54
 the US Attorney or John Roberts call him if I was a danger, he had no answer, He then admitted
NY must be using him to harass me. Okay, so if the US Marshal knows this why do they keep
responding? Especially offensive is the fact that this Marshal had not read the suit but only read
four or five lines his boss highlighted. He also made it impossible to answer several questions as he
refused to define certain words. It became quite clear that we were talking about two different
things so I asked him to define what he meant by a very specific word as there is more than one
definition thus I CAN’T answer his question, it is impossible, unless he first defines what he means
thus clarifying what he is asking. He refused and began to raise his voice. At one point he asked me
WHO I was going to shoot if I was denied justice again. I said, “YOU, if you keep bothering me as
none of you are acting under the authority of the US. You do realize we won not lost the
Revolution, don’t you?” He expects me to give him advance warning if I travel. I’m not doing that.
Further, SCOTUS might want to send each one of these guys a copy of the Constitution as they
seem to think the Constitution gives them the power to do anything as in “break the law now, worry
about paying for it later as most likely the average citizen won’t know what to do”. For over one
year the US Marshal’s have had names of judges and exact acts that are criminal but have done
nothing to uphold the Constitution. The law is if you know you must act. Last time I checked we
did not make an exception for the US Marshall. This is yet one more example of taxes being
collected as tribute and to fund our injury.

48. Grant this Writ as I can and will then teach other citizens how to use the Declaration as an idealized
compass and the Constitution as an idealized straight edge so they too can then square the circle as
I did. There’s a sacred experience to be had other than liberty. As I discovered it I named it
“philadelphia” as I did it via volunteering to sacrifice my life on behalf of yours in order to turn
what is incessant suffering into another form of energy. Any citizen can do this but natural born
citizens have an edge over others. Those who come after me then will not have to suffer as badly as
I did to achieve this as they will have the benefit of my experience thus can avoid my mistakes.

49. What’s more important that restoring the Constitution thus the original government named and set
by the Constitution, We The People? What’s more important than preserving our law and our vote
thus preserving liberty? Sometimes you want and need to reform old guards for your present safety
and it is not possible to be a living government without living People who come to feel actual
liberty as that is the fabric of our Constitutional Republic as humans unlike any other animal
possess emotional reasoning capacity and the Americans are the people who then legislated this.
Upon my entry to SCOTUS to argue in person we have at long last severed any remaining ties we
have to Britain or any other European nation both legally and financially as they go hand and hand
and as I, Susan, prove Marbury is law and is uniquely our own thus the body of case law we have
established over the last 200 years then becomes American common law as our form of
government is directly based upon the Iroquois Confederacy and the idea of participatory
democracy via Franklin’s Albany Plan of Union and our contact with American Indians and only
indirectly based upon the Magna Carta and British common law. The Americans become the first
people to make it back to the original bar upon restoration of our named original jurisdiction
government, We The People, as that is how we came into being, as one. Every American begins at
the same starting line, as America is the place the races united after their long journey across Earth
first physically with the completion of the transcontinental railroad in Utah and then spiritually via
our law, Marbury and SCOTUS. Americans become the people who perfected themselves in the
image of their Creator, as just, and who are actually endowed in all ways possible with inalienable
rights born of that Creator. We become sovereign and so beholden to no other nation or law but
only our very own unique law. We finally realize what the Founders committed to paper so long
ago. We become the proof they said would someday exist, the people who prove that man can
govern his own person. It is the rebirth of liberty and an expansion of our conscious awareness as I
acted only upon my ownership of knowledge and my own will and liberty; I needed no outside
thing. It will serve to be the beginning of a chain of causation that will eventually liberate the
55
 planet as hundreds and thousands of years from now other nations will cite America, the
Confederacy, the Constitution and Susan V Obama, Roberts and the US as the seeds that planted
their own just government and law. We, The People via our own hard work and perseverance in the
face of astronomical odds and in spite of a doubting world have finally slayed the dragon known as
feudalism, slavery, royalty and religious intolerance. We have finally lived up to the good idea we
have had of our own selves since July 4th, 1776. We have united faith and reason. I cannot say I
enter alone as I bring every citizen that ever lived or will live with me as I am the product of those
people as our law is a never ending chain of command thus is infinite. Remove one person and I do
not exist! But I am and We The People are. I, Susan and so We The People thus you your own self
is the only reason SCOTUS needs. Equal rights, when life begins in the womb, proof the Creator is
actual reality and uniformity is what the Cajuns call ‘lagniappe’ – a little extra, an extra reward for
having made it home first as that is the product of the spirit of American law, as liberty breeds
wisdom. The minute I set so much as my big toe inside SCOTUS to then argue in person we have
realized an actual living government of People that is itself elegant. Marbury? I, Susan, am the
living proof! I, Susan, prove Marbury and so prove SCOTUS is organic to We The People, the
named legal government! SCOTUS is organic to the living constitution and not the paper one!

50. Federal income taxes: Grant this Writ so they are then made just as even if we turn tribute back
into just taxes how taxes are currently levied is not constitutional, as our founders never intended
People or a right to be taxed and as today the burden is placed almost exclusively on the middle
income classes. The poorest and wealthiest people do not pay taxes. Upper income classes do not
pay anything close to their fair share. Harlan was correct in Pollock but he missed something or if
he knew it he did not say it, as the Justices are not to tell us how to do it but only what we cannot
do. We are supposed to develop the means or the reasoning. For instance if SCOTUS rules the
current income tax is not constitutional? The government or The People are then to develop a plan
that is legal. We still have to run this thing...Grant this Writ so I can toss this idea into the ring:
Income from property and/or stock is not a burden, at least not all of it. Stick with me: I own a
rental property. Any income derived from rent was not earned DIRECTLY by the sweat of my
brow. The renters DIRECTLY earned it and then I INDIRECTLY ‘earned’ it as profit. I subtract my
salary as property manager, my employees salaries and expenses for maintenance then the rest is
taxed. Salaries and expenses are not taxable; anything else is. Stock? The GE employees directly
earn or cause profit; I indirectly earn it via stock ownership. I might only own a few shares thus it
is all taxed but it should be as I’m not expending any sweat to then take in the profit. A guy who
owns millions of shares? He’s using stock brokers and secretaries and money mangers. He should
be able to subtract their salaries as they do burden the property or stock. And if I know whatever I
pay my employees is not going to the fed? I’m going to pay them more only to keep it from the fed.
I’ll be overly generous, lol, as I want The People to have the power not the federal institutions. In
1913 we may not have had any means to keep track of who owns what and who is claiming what
but today technology makes tax levied this way feasible as we can account for it. The problem
before was tracking the money; figuring out if what persons claimed was in fact, reality and then
apportioning it as indirect taxes are apportioned geographically. We had no way to apportion it.
Today we do. Anybody can look up records and the IRS has taken getting into our business to new
heights as has the census bureau. THEY COUNT THINGS ALL DAY LONG FOR A LIVING. We
now have the Social Security index too and that did not exist in 1913. Besides, it is up to the People
to make their fellow citizens account for their actions. The People are not to be depending upon the
IRS to baby-sit the wealthy. If I say I am worth ten billion it might be true, maybe I can prove it,
but if Oprah Winfrey says she is worth ten billion we know it is not the truth as she only takes in so
much as does not generate anything close to ten billion dollars. The IRS should want to get an up
close and personal look at a person claiming they are worth ten billion dollars or worth more than
they are taking in. I truly believe we can revisit the federal income tax. Also: This then frees up a
whole lot of money. Money is a symbol; money represents the energy The People expend. There’s
only so much energy in the US. Contrary to what Congress would have you believe they cannot
56
 create energy as that is a power reserved to The Creator thus all of this create money to cover the
cost of legislation is unconstitutional. “Minting” is not “Printing at will”. We will have more
money thus more energy circulating. The People can then pay off their debts, as nobody is to
escape paying them as they chose to enter those contracts. You pay the debt off and never enter
those contracts again. The People can spend what they do have. Congress can’t spend what does
not exist in this universe and what is not constitutional for them to take from us if The People are
informed as the People check SCOTUS not Congress. Nobody checked Pollack as the 16th
amendment was forced upon us only to make it seem as if direct, unapportioned taxes are legal and
only to overturn Pollack as the power to tax is derived from Art 1 Sec 8. Some sources claim the
16th amendment was never made legal but only ordered entered as having been passed. I have seen
nothing that proves it was passed by a ¾ vote. FL, PA and VA never took it up. Granting this Writ
then is an actual stimulus package.

Conclusion

I have been denied justice absolutely and wholly as the protected right is mine and as I acted upon
ownership of the knowledge my right to appear in person in US Supreme Court fully vested as did my
right to exert the power known as Executive Order also known as care, custody and constitutional
authority or control over my own person and my children. I have claimed my commission: The
Constitution. Then I claimed another: Marbury V Madison.

The Office of the Executive is our protected birthright; women - either me alone or as a class - should
not have this birthright stripped from their persons before it has ever even been accorded to them. This
would be especially injurious as conditions exist today as just as the bald eagle went off the
endangered species list women went on it as this nation denies it is engaged in an act of war against
women and girls in spite of actual reality: Unchecked rapes, sexual abuse, child sexual abuse, the
spread of sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS, domestic and other violence, death from drug
addiction, one sitting Justice who is female in 2009 and only a handful of Senators, the unchecked and
now accepted prevalence of what Justice Potter would know as being actual pornography and the sex
industry being the industry which accords women the most pay. We are not advancing our cause but
losing ground.

Nothing in our law or any prior precedent makes it legal and binding for the voters to force a person
who cannot fulfill the oath upon my children or me. Nothing provides for direct election of this person
or for the circumvention of due process to then amend our law. Nothing provides for a total lack of
common sense as we suffer acts of those who were to protect us and failed as they have entrenched
themselves at our expense. It is actually the exact opposite. I have felt the vote, liberty and
Philadelphia as sacred so I know it. If you lie to me or break the law you can use all the fancy words
you wish or no words at all; I will still know it for what it is: Unconstitutional.

As people do not repeat myths unless they contain some truth I discovered how to use the Declaration
as a compass and so turn the Constitution into a map – a unique map of my sacred human heart - as it
led me to know some of the answers to the biggest questions we have ever had about this universe and
ourselves. I did not realize other people could not “see” the law as a three-dimensional picture in their
head or as equations and so other people did not know these answers were staring them in the face.
When I wrote “the structure of DNA is found in our law” I thought all clerks knew this and could “see”
it in the right of safety and office of President and Commander as it twists and turns to become two
offices in one person. When I wrote the “right of privacy does exist and is contained in the clause
exactly naming the Creator and is supported by Marbury” I thought all Justices and clerks “saw” the
right of privacy and equality as an equation balancing on a fulcrum or like E=MC2; I did not know you
were blind as to why Roe V Wade is unconstitutional beyond “abortion” the exact word is not named in
our law as I possess a unique skill or so I was told recently.
57
The universe? It is all contract law and math; it is constitutional.

What did I ask for as remedy and relief from day one, April 4 th, 2007 and on? The power of Executive
Order realized as an appearance in SCOTUS in person as I knew as absolute fact without question my
legal argument unseated Bush Jr. and then placement upon the ballot in all 50 states and DC for the
office of President and Commander. I claimed the power of Executive Order my own self by entering
the US Supreme Court pro se upon an claim of constitutional authority twice over and entering signed,
legal thus valid and binding paper Executive Orders that I authored and then made real via acting but
left it up to the people to claim it for their persons via voting for me thus against those intent upon
violating and even overthrowing our law for their own personal, selfish interests. As I was silenced
unconstitutionally, The People - especially women and enlisted services members - then had no
opportunity. They could not defend themselves as the ability was denied them and/or stripped from
them and unconstitutionally so. How or why it happened does not matter.

We as a nation were born in an act of self-defense by invoking our right of safety and liberty, as they
are inalienable. Our vote is actually paid for with our very blood. Our vote is our right to life and so is
our means of defending our persons. It is the Creator who ultimately reasons and decides which among
us will be born under these skies and within this country and so be of the ability to wield that vote -
the greatest weapon of mass creation man has ever wrought. What is of the Creator and which we are
then born into no man can or may put asunder as he will have to go through a woman first – I, Susan –
and this American refuses to negotiate as an actual American never negotiates her safety.

I will settle for nothing less than this nation’s unconditional surrender to the Declaration and
Constitution, as those are the inviolate terms that absolutely and wholly define our humanity and so
make us a living government and living law known around the world as We, the people – the
Americans.

I have been denied justice absolutely as the protected right is mine: the opportunity as at least one is
to exist to become the President and Commander via official recognition of this court and The People
in the form of this Writ granted and then an appearance in person in the Supreme Court to give oral
argument thereby acknowledging the contribution of my one person, my sons and women thus proving
We The People are the constitutionally set legal government and that our written law is elegant and
was inspired by the exactly named Creator. I wish to make a gift of my priceless intellectual property
most of which I have never written down to all natural born citizens or to all Native Americans. I want
and need to give as many people as possible all the same tools I possess, that is, I want and need to
level the playing field so the citizens have as much or even more power than their oppressors as then
they will have the ability and capacity, then they can, exactly as our Founders intended.

This petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted.

58
Respectfully submitted,

Susan Herbert

59