Become An Experienced Constitutional Counsellor
By Knowing Key Authorities of Law!

Doe v. Bush, 323 F.3d 133 (1st Cir. 2003) is a 2003 completed Boston Federal Appellate Case.

28 U.S.C. § 1291Title 28, Section 1291, a legislated (U)nited (S)tates (C)ode states, "The courts of appeals shall have Jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court."   

FEDERAL JURISDICTION is deeply rooted within Article III of the U.S. Constitution as it is an awesome power our constitutional framers wished not to be abused! 

JURISDICTION is the power to say what the law is!

USSC ORIGINAL JURISDICTION by U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 2 states clearly that, "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction."

FRCvP Rule 8(d) states, “Averments in a pleading to which a responsive pleading is required are admitted when not denied in the responsive pleading.”

FRCvP Rule 8(d) is (F)ederal (R)ules of (C)ivil (P)rocedure Rule 8(d) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is stipulated by USSC Rule 17 to be followed for USSC ORIGINAL JURISDICTION! Let's follow up with USSC Rule 11.

USSC Rule 11 A Case pending in a United States court of appeals before judgment and is a case OF SUCH IMPERATIVE PUBLIC IMPORTANCE requires immediate determination in the United States Supreme Court.

CASE LAW is referred to as unwritten laws as only Congress is allowed to write laws pursuant to Article I of our Constitution. Case Law depends on finding ONE LINERS from an Appellate and/or USSC Case RULING and making a quotation as to enforce a legal argument and right below a USSC Case ONE LINER is relevant.

Northern Pipeline Constr. Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U. S. 50 (1982), states, "Congress may not give away Article III "judicial" power to an Article I judge."

The Federalist Papers were a series of articles written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. The entire purpose of The Federalist Papers was to gain popular support for the then-proposed Constitution and those papers have been numbered and are now prestigious grassroots authorities often quoted in Federal Pleadings. Below the Federalist No. 51 (J. Cooke ed. 1961), 350 (Madison) see also id., The Federalist No. 48, 332-334 re-enforces the meaning of a Republic, that is by definition in our Republic the Legislative authority necessarily predominates!

WE HAVE APPLE PIE LAW FOR CLEARLY SEEING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL STORY

Six Congressmen and 74 Concerned Law Professors stated in the Boston Appellate Court that the upcoming Iraq War will be unconstitutional during Doe v. Bush, 323 F.3d 133 (1st Cir. 2003). The six Congressmen: John Conyers (Michigan), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Jesse Jackson (Illinois), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Jim Mcdermott (Washington), José E. Serrano (New York) joined by active military soldiers & their parents. Doe v. Bush, was a Boston federal appellate in session case during the president's Declaration of War to Iraq on March 17, 2003. At that time we were into a longstanding United Nations Treaty that had made a Nuremberg promise that the USA would not use aggression as an instrument for making policy, a Treaty backed by a legislated United States Code, 22 U.S.C. § 287.

"We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war, for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy." U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson, Chief U.S. Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunals, August 12, 1945.

Yes! A Nuremberg U. N. Treaty Promise backed by a legislated U.S. Code and in our Republic, the legislative authority, necessarily, predominates by The Federalist No. 51 (J. Cooke ed. 1961), 350 (Madison) see also id., The Federalist No. 48, 332-334. And the United States by United Nations Treaty with the whole world carries enormous constitutional weight as our constitutional framers required a Treaty to be enforced pursuant to Article VI of our Constitution as quoted, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land." The Senate requirement to maintain their treaties is pursuant to Article II, so along with Article VI the U.S. government violated Article II.

Unconstitutional orders for aggressively invading Iraq and a continuing illegal occupation have been carried out from the president through the generals. Resisting those unconstitutional orders has fallen on soldiers willing to face a mighty unconstitutional Administration. Orders are Orders in the Military, however a constitutional oath is all a soldier has as Administrations come and go while the Constitution is forever! Resisting Soldiers of Conscience have chosen to defend the Constitution against a mighty overbearing unconstitutional Administration! An Administration that has mutated patriotism for making it very unpopular for a Soldier to maintain his or her oath to America's Constitution. It is time to give these unpopular Patriotic to our Constitution Resisting Soldiers of Conscience a USSC VOICE that should have been heard in 2003 by Doe v. Bush prior to the war; still waiting to be heard where the only valid jurisdiction & judicial independence exists for answering Bush breaching Articles I, II, III & VI of our Constitution. 

 “The Framers understood the need for judicial independence. Independent judges, as my colleague Justice Ginsburg recently put it do not act on behalf of particular persons, parties, or communities. They serve no faction or constituency, and they must strive to do what is right in each individual case, even if the case in question should find the least popular person in America opposed by the most powerful government in the world”-Justice Stephen G. Breyer, July 15, 2002.