The Institute of Judicial Conduct (IJC) was formed to address fatal defects in the “Judicial Council Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980” (Act). The defects in the Act, and the rules that were enacted in 2008 to govern this Act, give the chief justice of the US Supreme Court absolute power over the policing of federal and state judicial conduct. The chief justice yields this absolute power privately as the presiding judge of the US Judicial Conference. It is an unalterable axiom of American liberty that no government office and no government official can have absolute power. Yet acting as the presiding judge of the US Judicial Conference, he chief justice of the US Supreme Court has absolute control the line between making policies of the US Courts and Americans’ fundamental liberty and rights, and judicial conduct.
The Act must be modified. We the People must be assured that Congress has effect power to take direct authority over federal judicial criminal and malicious conduct. We the People must have a verifiable guarantee that Congress fulfills its first and most important constitutional responsibly to preserve Americans’ Fundamental Liberty that cannot be codified, governed, regulated or administered by any government process, at all. We the People must have a verifiable guarantee that Congress has and will takes effective and absolute control of policing, investigating, governing, regulating, punishing and removing any federal judges based on the same process that any Americans faced if they engage in deliberate and malicious conduct to impose themselves on another’s liberty and rights, or if they engage in criminal and illegal acts.
The IJC is the first private tax-exempt organization dedicated to investigating and reporting, and taking action to oppose, deliberate and malicious federal judicial fraud. IJC’s is exclusively concerns with federal judges who are not acting illegally. IJC prohibits judges, lawyers, law professors, legal scholars on federal judicial ethics and federal judicial discipline. IJC’s is founded on the premise that only the American people, the holders of all Non-Enumerated rights have the power, intelligence and wisdom can disciplined federal judges and to determine the constitutionality of executive and legislative restrictions on the powers of the federal judges. IJC originates from the discovery that John Grover Roberts, Jr.’s the Chief Justice of US Supreme Court had used his position as Chief Executive Officer of the US Judicial Conference to meet with the federal judges and organize governmental intrusion by allowing state judges to engage in criminal acts against American’s Non-Enumerated Rights and then keep them out of federal court so they can’t protect themselves. The fraud was executed in concealment without authority or notice to the American People, Congress or the President..
The fraud is operated by Chief Justice in private with the 13 circuit chief judges of the 13 US Court of Appeals and 1 US District Court judge from each of the 13 US Court of Appeals circuit . All of them are federal judges. The 27 judges meet whenever the boss calls them. They meet without notice to the American people. They discuss what they want, what they like, what they believe, what they feel like doing. Then they make decisions and take actions without notice or authority. These secrete decisions always cost the American people, a lot. It cost them their money and all the things that they rely on to protect themselves from harm from corrupt state politicians and judges, to protect their children and their religious and moral beliefs. It cost them what they rely on to feel safe and secure in their families and home, and at their workplace. Then these 27 judges make deals with the 50 state chief judges to activate their decisions. In this way, 27 individuals, all lawyers, directly impose themselves on all Americans without notice, authority or Congressional or Presidential authorization. Who is the boss, what exactly is he doing and where, and how does he do these things and Why?
The boss is named John Glover Roberts, Jr. He is the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. The fraud has nothing to do with Chief Roberts’ leadership position of the US Supreme Court or how it affects the Court’s decisions and processes. The fraud is unrelated to Chief Justice Roberts’ partisan and ideological views, the composition of the court, or its decision making. Nor those the fraud have anything to do with how Chief Justice Roberts promotes unanimity among the associate justices on the US Supreme Court and in its decision making.
Chief Justice Roberts operates as the boss Administrative Office of the United States Courts at One Columbus Circle in Washington, D.C. There he works as the Presiding Justice and Chief Executive Officer of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Here Chief Justice Roberts makes all the appointments and calls all the shots. He is the boss with no equals and without any opposition. The Judicial Conference gets its jurisdiction and only exists through Chief Justice Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts supposedly only acts purely procedural matters. This is how Chief Justice Roberts presents his Judicial Conference work to the so-called nonjudicial players in the political system. But in fact it is here where Chief Justice can privately dictate what cases the entire US Court system will pay attention to and what case will get the go slow until they die and what cases will be disposed of through organized fraud. So which cases get fraud treatment? The ones that the hard-working tax-paying American people most rely on for security. And which cases are those?
IJC discovered the Chief Justice Roberts’ is giving the fraud treatment to cases the American people most need to defend their families, jobs, private property, peace, security and stability. It takes a lot beatings to keep the American people down and quiet. To be certain that Chief Justice Roberts’ keeps normal, God fearing, hard working tax-paying Americans down he allows the state to commit virtually any fraud they can muster on Americans before his federal judges given them the fraud treatment in federal court.
IJC origins are in its founder’s, Manuel P. Asensio, investigation of over 120 New York state seniors government officials that operate in the state justice department under rules that were secretly created and secretly promulgated by the state’s chief judge. These illegitimate rules do not exist in any of New York’s state legal text. Yet the governor and state attorney have allowed the chief judge to operate under these These 120 state officials then are sanctioned to operate outside of law, to use summary actions, including contempt actions, to force payment to politically appointed court operative in violation of law, to deprive state citizens of due process, their liberty and protection from illegal government action.
IJC was formed when Mr. Asensio learned, as incredible as it sounds, that the federal judge’s had fabricated without a trace of authority or foundation, a prejudicial Article III disclaimer of mandatory jurisdiction over create constitutional claims against states. The federal judges, and their advocates in academic and in the federal bar, refer to this outside of law scheme as the Domestic Relations Exception to Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction (“DRE”). The federal judges actually use their own invention, the DRE, to protect the state’s chief judge’s inventions. Namely, rules the create to operate state domestic relations processes without jurisdiction, authority or power, and without official disclosure to the state’s legislatures, executive or New York’s citizens.
The Declaration of Independence warns us that we as people “are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which [we] are accustomed.” The “evils” of which our Founding Fathers warned us are violations of our “inalienable” natural rights. Our natural rights are not dependent on law; they are given to us by our Creator, and not at all by government. There are no more powerful or more legally secure and protected natural rights than the right to teach our children our religious, moral and political beliefs, and to have access to a fair and impartial judge at the federal level to protect us for state judges that dare infringe on our constitutional liberty.
Instead of being stricter constitutionalist, more vigilant and diligent in cases concerning domestic relations, the federal judges have invented the absurd and arsine DRE. Through the DRE has effectively allowed state chief judges to eradicate all widely held beliefs of due process rules in domestic relations.