Urgent Appeal IV

Following up here a little.  More after this.

You can begin reading about the outrageous underlying facts of the case at issue here:

http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/introduction/

Urgent Appeal (III)

Part of what I’m trying to do right now is to explain myself to lawyers, which is not to say that explaining myself to anyone else is less important, it’s just that when a case is important because of a legal issue, especially a constitutional issue, it’s tough for people who are not lawyers to get it.  Not that it’s impossible for non-lawyers to get it, of course.  I mean, feel free.

In any case below is the petition for rehearing that was filed in the SCOTUS in 2010.  I’m putting this up here because it outlines the legal issues pretty well, if I do say so myself.  For regular readers some of the language may be familiar, which is not a coincidence.  Also, it refers to exhibits, many of which have been posted previously, but many of which have not.  This is not quite so much a problem here, because we’re dealing with the legal issues and not factual ones, but if it does generate any misunderstanding I hope that can be addressed through questions, etc.

The opportunity to present this question to a federal court is quickly evaporating.  That’s why this appeal is urgent.