The Institute of Judicial Conduct (“IJC”) is the nation’s only independent authority on the operation of the “Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980” (Act) (1). The Act created a system of 13 Judicial Councils, and the Judicial Conference that is effectively a national citizens’ review board to govern the conduct of the federal judges. The Act empowers any person to confront a federal judge or group of federal judges with a complaint about their conduct. The Act created a simple system outside of the US Courts to protect Americans from the federal court rules and procedures that judges and lawyers can use to fabricate ineffective, time confusing and costly litigation that yields preposterous outcomes.
IJC discovered that the chief justice of the US Supreme Court and the US Attorneys General have used Act to convert the Judicial Conference from a law enforcement agency to govern judges into a policy making organization that fabricates policies and enforces them on the American people through fraudulent conduct in US courts. In secret these two US officials over the 40 years since the Act was signed into law have turned the Act upside down. They have used the Act to lawlessly fabricate policies and to organize fraudulent federal judicial conduct in US Courts in order to impose these lawlessly fabricated polices on Americans. IJC discovered this during its investigation of the use of one such fabricated judicial policy to coerce Americans.
The policy that led the IJC to make its discovery is what the federal judges called the “domestic relations [and domestic violence] exception [DRE] to federal subject matter jurisdiction.” The federal judges defend the DRE in US Courts by falsely claiming that the DRE is “a legitimate judicial doctrine of deference to federalism in family law.” IJC coined the “DRE” abbreviation to refer to this lawlessly fabricated judicial policy or so called doctrine.
President John F. Kennedy famously said that “[t]he very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society; we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.” The DRE only exist through the secret proceedings of a secret society consisting of the US Attorneys General, the presiding officer of the Judicial Conference who is the chief justice, and certain members of Congress who consented to these secret agreements.
(1) Public Law 96–458 (S 1873),October 15, 1980, 94 Stat 2035, 18 USC. The “Judicial Council Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act” of 1980 (US Code, Title 28 Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, Part I: Organization of Courts, Chapter 16, titled “Complaints against Judges and Judicial Discipline” [§§ 351–364]). The “Conferences and Councils of Judges Law” and the “21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act” enacted under Pub. L. 107-273 and incorporates the “Judicial Improvements Act of 2002,” which enacts USC Title 28 Chapter 16 and amends §§ 331, 332, 372, 375, and 604. For the legislative history, see H.R. Rep. 107-459 (2002).