Supreme Ct.

Wrongly Convicted Disfranchised District Ct. 11th Circuit Supreme Ct. Georgia's Confederacy The Bush's War  KKK+FBI+DOJ=Apartheid






        Black Lives Matter Too, And We Are Gonna Hold The Powerful Accountable:    Equal Justice Under Law”  is chiseled in Stone on the front of the U.S. Supreme Court building. All men are created equal is one of the most important doctrines that our founders espoused. It means that no one is above the law. Kings are not above the law, groups are not above the law, no individual is above the law but there is “equal justice under law.”








   "What the people want is very simple. They want an America as good as its promise."... Barbara Jordan



  "America's Promise"... We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.    (1776)




July 04, 2009... What a turning point in history this statement was on the first Fourth of July 233 years ago. Yet this bold ideal was proclaimed long in advance of any practical chance of fulfillment. The author of these words was an owner of African slaves.


So 87 years later, another eloquent writer and speaker could appeal to these words to fight for the end of slavery in the United States:




Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. - Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. - It is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they have, thus far, so nobly carried on. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom; and that this government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. 

.And slavery did indeed end, yet legal equality for African-Americans did not arrive. So 100 years later, another great American would say:



I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."


And thanks to the efforts of the civil rights movement he led, African-Americans achieved legal equality.



U.S. Constitution: Article III Section 1. (1787) The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.



The U.S. Supreme Court's Dark Side...Past And Present


Now We Know Why Y'all  Can’t Get It Right




The Supreme Court, 1937. The man in the Klan robe was Justice Van Deventer, who

was soon to retire from the court. The photo appeared in the New York Sun on

October 2, 1937.

The Hughes Court, 1932–1937. Front row: Justices Brandeis and Van Devanter, Chief Justice Hughes, and Justices McReynolds and Sutherland. Back row: Justices Roberts, Butler, Stone, and Cardozo.





Thomas Garrett, American abolitionist: The chief justice of the Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney, had already shown that he was a supporter of slavery. In 1848, Thomas Garrett, a Delaware Quaker, was arrested for helping Maryland slaves flee from their masters. Taney sat as the judge in the trial and fined Garrett $5,400, then an enormous sum that left Garrett almost penniless. After hearing the sentence, Garrett used the Quaker way of speaking to say to the judge: “Thou has left me without a dollar....I say to thee and to all in this court room, that if anyone knows a fugitive who wants shelter....send him to Thomas Garrett and he will befriend him.” .



(Roger B. Taney) - Dred Scott v. Sanford: March of 1857, the United States Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, a former slave owner, declared that "beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." and all blacks -- slaves as well as free -- were not and could never become citizens of the United States. The court also declared the 1820 Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, thus permitting slavery in all of the country's territories.
The Dred Scott Decision - - Dred Scott was the name of an African-American slave. He was taken by his master, an officer in the U.S. Army, from the slave state of Missouri to the free state of Illinois and then to the free territory of Wisconsin. He lived on free soil for a long period of time.

When the Army ordered his master to go back to Missouri, he took Scott with him back to that slave state, where his master died. In 1846, Scott was helped by Abolitionist (anti-slavery) lawyers to sue for his freedom in court, claiming he should be free since he had lived on free soil for a long time. The case went all the way to the United States Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney, was a former slave owner from Maryland.

In March of 1857, Scott lost the decision as seven out of nine Justices on the Supreme Court declared no slave or descendant of a slave could be a U.S. citizen, or ever had been a U.S. citizen. As a non-citizen, the court stated, Scott had no rights and could not sue in a Federal Court and must remain a slave.

At that time there were nearly 4 million slaves in America. The court's ruling affected the status of every enslaved and free African-American in the United States. The ruling served to turn back the clock concerning the rights of African-Americans, ignoring the fact that black men in five of the original States had been full voting citizens dating back to the Declaration of Independence in 1776.

Anti-slavery leaders in the North cited the controversial Supreme Court decision as evidence that Southerners wanted to extend slavery throughout the nation and ultimately rule the nation itself. Southerners approved the Dred Scott decision believing Congress had no right to prohibit slavery in the territories. Abraham Lincoln reacted with disgust to the ruling and was spurred into political action, publicly speaking out against it.

Overall, the Dred Scott decision had the effect of widening the political and social gap between North and South and took the nation closer to the brink of Civil War.



  Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass Education Quotes - - Quote #4    "Learning would spoil the best nigger in the world. Now," said he, "if you teach that nigger (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave. He would at once become unmanageable, and of no value to his master. As to himself, it could do him no good, but a great deal of harm. It would make him discontented and unhappy."   ... I now understood what had been to me a most perplexing difficulty--to wit, the white man's power to enslave the black man. 



 EDUCATION PROHIBITED The Slave not being regarded as a member of Society, nor as a human being, the Government, instead of providing for his education, takes care to forbid it, as being inconsistent with the condition of chattelhood. CHATTELS are not educated! And if human beings are to be held in chattelhood, education must be withheld from them. “In Georgia, by Act of 1829, no person is permitted to teach a slave, negro, or free person of color to read or write. So in Virginia, by statute, in 1830, meetings of free negroes to learn reading and writing are unlawful, and subject them to corporal punishment; and it is unlawful for white persons to assemble with free negroes or slaves, to teach them to read or write. The prohibitory Act of the Legislature of Alabama, passed in the session of 1831-2, relative to instruction to be given to the slave or free colored population, or exhortation or preaching to them, or any mischievous influence attempted to be exerted over them, is sufficiently penal. Laws of similar import are presumed to exist in the other slaveholding States; but in Louisiana, the law is armed with tenfold severity. It not only forbids any person teaching slaves to read or write, but it declares, that any person using language in any public discourse, from the bar, bench, stage, or pulpit, or in any other place, or in any private conversation, or making use of any signs or actions having a tendency to produce discontent among the free colored population, or insubordination among the slaves, or who shall be knowingly instrumental in bringing into the State any paper, book, or pamphlet, having the like tendency,Shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment or death, at the discretion of the Court.”



Still Separate, Still Unequal: America's Educational Apartheid

JONATHAN KOZOL / Harper's Magazine v.311, n.1864 1sep2005


The Problem We All Live With by Norman Rockwell. Collection of the Norman Rockwell Museum at Stockbridge, Mass.

In Chicago, by the academic year 2002-2003, 87 percent of public-school enrollment was black or Hispanic; less than 10 percent of children in the schools were white. In Washington, D.C., 94 percent of children were black or Hispanic; less than 5 percent were white. In St. Louis, 82 percent of the student population were black or Hispanic; in Philadelphia and Cleveland, 79 percent; in Los Angeles, 84 percent, in Detroit, 96 percent; in Baltimore, 89 percent. In New York City, nearly three quarters of the students were black or Hispanic.




 Donny Hathaway~To Be Young, Gifted and Black



  Separate and Unequal: A structural analysis of educational inequality in America September 22, 2009  by Jeff Garrett -Fifty-five years ago, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case that school segregation policies are unconstitutional.  Yet despite the moral victory of the Brown decision, in the decades since 1954 we have failed to create educational equality in America.  Despite countless initiatives, hundreds of billions of dollars invested in various school improvement efforts, and the passage of a federal law that mandates that no child be left behind, we continue to see gaps in educational opportunity that disproportionately impact the lives of low income communities and communities of color across the fifty states.  

How can this be?  In the wealthiest nation on earth, that has professed its commitment to eliminating these gaps for more than half a century, how can such glaring inequities persist?  While we have gone to great lengths to experiment with education reform, we have done little to address the web of related social issues that together create the conditions necessary for educational success.  We have spent our time and money focusing on things like toughening standards for students, making it harder to become a licensed teacher, and holding failing schools accountable for poor performance.  And while many of these reform efforts have had some generally positive impact on the quality of education our children receive, all of these reforms ignore the fact that no matter what we do in schools, students still live their lives in communities that reflect the systemic economic, racial and environmental inequalities that our society has yet to resolve. 

Like a patient with pneumonia who takes larger and larger doses of cough syrup and then wonders why they’re not getting better, we find ourselves treating primarily the symptoms of educational inequality rather than the root causes.   If we hope to change our educational fortune, our society will need a cure that actually attacks the problem where it exists.  It is only through a structural analysis of education that we can understand how issues like housing, school funding systems, and employment interact to shape our children’s ability to succeed in school. 

Let’s start by looking at the issue of housing.  There is perhaps no single greater factor in determining one’s educational experience than where you live.  Despite the moral victory of Brown, for the average low income black and Latino student in America today, schools are only marginally less segregated than they were in 1954 and are growing more segregated every year.1  We have replaced the system of racial segregation with a system of residential segregation.  

To fully understand the structural connections between educational opportunity and housing, first we must understand how schools receive funding.  The primary source of funding for most school systems is property taxes.  This means wealthy districts with high property values not only have more to spend on education, they can actually tax themselves at lower rates than their less affluent counterparts and still raise more money for schools.  Even within school districts with diverse populations, providing equal per pupil funding for schools that serve populations with dramatically different needs can result in schools that reinforce, rather than reduce, inequality.  In New York City for example, where per pupil funding is constant3 in the public schools throughout the city, schools that serve students who come to school with a range of academic and social needs that are not being met at home are at a perpetual disadvantage when compared to schools that serve students from more affluent and less needy areas. 


Health Care - One of the more disastrous byproducts of poverty is many parents’ inability to support their child’s development and achievement in school.  With inadequate access to physical and mental health care, vision testing, and nutritional counseling, many parents in low income and minority communities are unable to offer their children the support they need to be prepared for success in school. We would likely see greater gains in educational achievement among low income and minority students by investing in community support services like universal health care, school-based vision clinics, and mental health services, than we see from the billions we currently spend on No Child Left Behind reforms. 5  

Housing Integration - Simply put, we will not likely be able to achieve educational equality without a dismantling of the new class and race based separate-but-equal school system being reestablished in America.  The best way to ensure school integration is through housing integration.  To achieve this we need rigorous enforcement of the long neglected 1968 Fair Housing Act, which contains provisions to ensure municipalities structure housing policy in ways that don’t reinforce racial segregation.  In addition, we need a comprehensive, national strategy to ensure that as affluent whites move back into city centers, and blacks and Latinos are priced out of gentrifying areas and into the suburbs, we don’t simply shift populations in still segregated schools.




Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs April 13, 2010 - WASHINGTON – A federal court has ordered the Walthall County, Miss., School District to eliminate policies that have resulted in significant racial segregation among students in the school district, the Justice Department today announced.




.Civil rights groups seek review of Texas schools 12/20/10 HOUSTON Two civil rights organizations are seeking a federal review of public school education in Texas, accusing state school administrators of violating federal civil rights laws after curriculum changes approved earlier this year by the Texas Board of Education. The request to the U.S. Department of Education made by the Texas NAACP and Texas League of United Latin American Citizens on Monday contended that the curriculum changes passed in May "were made with the intention to discriminate" and would have a "stigmatizing impact" on African-American and Latino students.



Homer Plessy (1863 – 1925) . Arrested, tried and convicted of a violation of Louisiana's racial segregation laws--his great-grandmother was black--he appealed to the Supreme Court. The resulting "separate-but-equal" decision against him had wide consequences for the U.S. civil rights for the next half century.


.In 1896 the U. S. Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling in Plesser v. Furguson. The Court asserted that Plessy's rights were not denied him because the separate accommodations provided to blacks were equal to those provided whites. It also ruled that "separate but equal" accommodations did not stamp the "colored race with a badge of inferiority."


.One-drop rule The one-drop rule was a tactic in the U.S. South that codified and strengthened segregation and the disfranchisement of most blacks...from 1890-1910. After Supreme Court decisions in Plessy v. Ferguson and related matters, White-dominated legislatures felt free to enact Jim Crow laws segregating Blacks in public places and accommodations, and passed other restrictive legislation. Legislatures sought to prevent interracial relationships to keep the white race "pure", long after slaveholders and overseers took advantage of enslaved women and produced the many mixed-race children.





American eugenics... Atlanta Ga . a powerful social movement based on the idea that society's problems could be solved if those considered "superior" were allowed to make more children while those considered "inferior" were no longer allowed to have children -- was going strong. Lawmakers from several states had already adopted laws making it mandatory to operate on people with physical, developmental and psychiatric disabilities, along with homosexuals and other "undesirables", to make sure they did not have children. Eight years earlier, The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the eugenicists in Buck vs. Bell (1927) . Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes speaking for the Court, wrote, "three generations of imbeciles are enough". Some Americans were worried that Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler was getting ahead of the U.S. in terms of purifying the "white race". Between 1937 and 1970, an estimated 3,300 Georgians were legally forced to undergo sterilization surgery.

On December 10, 1967, prior to Virginia High giving birth to our son George W. High, Jr. at St Joseph Hospital in Atlanta, and because she was black, she became one of the 3,300 Georgians who were legally forced to undergo sterilization surgery, as she fell under the category of "undesirables"...thanks to the U.S. Supreme ct., Justice Holmes, Adolf Hitler, The State of Georgia, American Eugenics and the kkk...





Supreme Court Justice, Hugo Black was Klan, his robes (with his name in them) were found in an old Klan Hall in the 1960's. Under political pressure, he superficially repudiated the Klan during its period of scandals



Hugo LaFayette Black (February 27, 1886 – September 25, 1971) was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (1937 - 1971)… In the 1920's, Black (like Chief Justice Edward Douglass White) was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and in 1921 he defended Klansmen accused of the murder of priest James Coyle. However, he later publicly disavowed the Klan, and his record on the Supreme Court bench contained some indications of support for the Civil Rights Movement.


The pastor was sitting on the rectory porch in his swing chair. Stevenson walked up to the priest and pulled the trigger. Father James Edwin Coyle was shot in the head; he died within the hour. On August 11 of 1921, Black was asked to defend the Reverend Edwin R. Stephenson a Ku Klux Klan member who had been accused of shooting to death Father James Coyle , leader of the large Catholic community at Saint Paul's Church in Birmingham. The presiding judge and several members of the courtroom staff were active Klan members and they helped to ensure that several members of the KKK were selected to jury service. According to page 87 of the biography by Roger K. Newman, no official records of this trial exist and their destruction is attributed to the power and influence of members of the Ku Klux Klan at that time. Accounts of some of the trial's events have nevertheless circulated. Black is reported to have communicated with the Klansmen on the jury through the organization's hand signals in order to secure a verdict of not guilty for his client.


Special to The New York Times. August 12, 1921 - BIRMINGHAM, Ala., Aug. 11.--Because he married Ruth Stephenson, a Protestant, to a Catholic, the Rev. James E. Coyle, for many years pastor of St. Paul's Roman Catholic Church here, was shot and fatally wounded tonight by the Rev. Edwin R. Stephenson, a Methodist Episcopal preacher and father of the girl.




. Edward Douglass White [Credits : Courtesy of the National Archives, Washington, D.C.] Chief Justice Edward Douglass White was a member of the Ku Klux Klan. White was a Supreme Court Justice under the Wilson administration, he was a member of the original KKK. In 1896 he sided with the seven justices whose majority opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson approved segregation.


 Justice John Marshall Harlan, a former slave owner who experienced a conversion as a result of Ku Klux Klan excesses, and champion of black civil rights, wrote a scathing dissent in which he predicted the court's decision would become as infamous as that in Dred Scott v. Sandford. Harlan went on to say:


  House Nigger # 1 - -  Thurgood Marshall -   while living was J. Edgar Hoover's "House Nigger...and is now just a plain “Dead House Niggers" - - In 1956, several years before he targeted King, Hoover had a public showdown with T.R.M. Howard, a civil rights leader from Mount Bayou, Mississippi. During a national speaking tour, Howard had criticized the FBI's failure to thoroughly investigate the racially-motivated murders of George W. Lee, Lamar Smith, and Emmett Till. Hoover not only wrote an open letter to the press singling out these statements as "irresponsible" but secretly enlisted the help of NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall in a campaign to discredit Howard.


Hoover was pleased when Marshall wrote back to agree that Howard had wrongly attacked the FBI with "misstatements of facts." And in a real stunner, Marshall said he knew the FBI had done a "thorough and complete job" in three recent cases where blacks were murdered in Mississippi.

Driving Marshall was his disdain for the communists, the radicals--even Martin Luther King Jr. King and his talk about nonviolence struck Marshall as childish. After Marshall was nearly lynched by Tennessee segregationists in 1946, the lawyer became convinced that nonviolent social protests would inevitably lead to "wholesale slaughter [of blacks] with no good achieved." Marshall was also concerned that the FBI might mix him up with the radicals and make him a target for its wiretaps and investigations. His alliance with Hoover was protection, Marshall hoped, against FBI interference with his ongoing legal work to defeat segregation. Hoover also had an agenda. Just as Marshall was worried about communists and subversives in the civil-rights movement, Hoover feared that the leftists might start a race war. He desperately wanted inside information from the NAACP--and Marshall was now the key.


Thurgood Marshall and the FBI : By IWB, World Socialist Web Site, 16 December 1996History shows that the major gains made in the period after World War II were achieved precisely through the methods of popular resistance, without which court decisions would never have been implemented. Despite the severe, and ultimately crippling limitations of Martin Luther King's reformist program, it is to his credit that he rejected the policies of Marshall and the rest of the NAACP leadership and set about organizing thousands of workers and youth to fight for the dismantling of legal segregation.

The FBI documents shed light on how deeply Marshall was opposed, at least initially, to the mass upsurge of workers against segregation. According to one FBI memorandum, in early 1956, while King was leading the Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott against segregation in public transportation, Marshall was meeting with J. Edgar Hoover to discuss “an unspecified matter in Alabama,” as well as “the Communist Party's effort to get into the NAACP.”


... This was the same Hoover who had informants in the South like Gary Thomas Rowe—men who participated in the beating of freedom bus riders and the murder of civil rights activists such as Viola Liuzzo, at the same time that they were working for the FBI. By virtue of his refusal to defend the constitutional rights of young people who risked their lives fighting to register black voters in the Jim Crow South, Hoover was complicit in such crimes as the 1964 murder of Schwerner, Goodman and Chaney in Philadelphia, Mississippi….



James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were murdered by the Ku Klux Klan on 21st June, 1964 while trying to get African Americans in the southern United States registered to vote. In the summer 1964, 30 black homes and 37 black churches were firebombed and over 80 volunteers were beaten by white mobs or racist police officers. .

FBI Records: The Vaults - Thurgood Marshall




Clance ("Uncle") Thomas, House Nigger #  2 - -  President George H. W. Bush appointed Thomas to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1990. When Thurgood Marshall retired from the Supreme Court in 1991, Bush decided to elevate Thomas to the Supreme Court.

Thomas's nomination met strong opposition from minority groups who opposed his conservative views on civil rights. Thomas weathered several days of questioning from the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. Like all recent successful nominees, Thomas was unwilling to express opinions about policies or approaches to constitutional interpretation. His questioners were unable to shake him.

His nomination seemed assured when a last-minute witness, Professor Anita Hill, came forward with charges of sexual misconduct when she worked for Thomas ten years earlier. ..After a marathon hearing to explore the Hill charges, the Committee failed to unearth convincing proof of Hill's allegations. The Committee reported the Thomas nomination to the full Senate without a recommendation. In the end, the Senate voted 52 to 48 to confirm Thomas's nomination to the High Court.

Since becoming a justice, Thomas has voted frequently with other conservatives. When Thomas began his tenure on the Court, many observers falsely predicted that he would simply echo the views of fellow conservative justice Antonin Scalia. From the start, however, Thomas has articulated his own conservative thinking.



Clerance Thomas is a "Comatose House Nigger" and has not spoken in over 5 years.: Supreme Court Justice's Job Performance Judged Negatively Based on Lack of Questioning By Alexis Stodghill on Feb 14th 2011 - - The New York Times recently noted that Tuesday of this week will mark the five year anniversary since Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has spoken during a case. Not only has Justice Thomas not spoken at all while hearing court arguments for the past five years; Thomas has also spent this lengthy period of silence "leaning back in his chair, staring at the ceiling, rubbing his eyes, whispering to Justice Stephen G. Breyer, consulting papers and looking a little irritated and a little bored." (The New York Times)

If most of us behaved that way while working, we would probably be fired. As a Supreme Court justice holds his job for life, there is no reason for Thomas to worry about being fired for poor performance. But he should be worried about leaving behind a terrible legacy. The Times notes that Clarence Thomas is the only Supreme Court justice to have maintained a five year silence for the past 40 years. His strange, disgruntled behavior is a pretty strong move in the "leaving a bad legacy" direction.


Clarence Thomas's silence on bench is anything but golden - By Earl Ofari Hutchinson 02/14/2011 He has waged relentless political and ideological war against civil rights, affirmative action, gay rights, abortion, prisoner rights, and a knee jerk defense of financial and corporate interests, gun ownership, broadening executive power on such issues as encroachment on civil liberties, and even upholding the government's right to engage in torture, the wild expansion of police power, and the strict upholding of the death penalty.

Thomas's silence, pitiable or laughable depending on how charitable one wants to be, is not the worst of Thomas's offenses. His abominable decisions on any and all cases that involve civil rights and racial matters have been a colossal shameful mock of the proud civil rights tradition and legacy of the justice who Thomas replaced on the high court, Thurgood Marshall. Thomas's retrograde, roll-back-the clock opinions in these cases have earned him much deserved revulsion and attack from civil rights leaders and organizations.

Thomas has been their public enemy number one. It's a designation that Thomas has not only accepted but revels in. He has gone out of his way to thumb his nose at civil rights leaders and uphold some of the worst civil rights and civil liberties abuses even when that means on occasion breaking ranks with Scalia and casting the lone dissenting vote. This was blatantly evident in the infamous case involving a black inmate beaten senseless by jailers in a Louisiana prison. Thomas was the only one of the judges to agree with Scalia that the beating was not cruel and unusual punishment.


3/29/12  Six Years of Silence for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas  As the Supreme Court Justices today fired questions on the ' Obamacare' mandate across the bench, one voice was notably - but perhaps predictably - silent. So far every Justice on the bench has spoken up on the health care law except for one: Justice Clarence Thomas.Indeed, if you search today's 126-page transcript of arguments, you won't find Thomas' name a single time. It has now been six years since the Justice has asked questions during oral arguments, although he certainly has read his opinions from the bench in his robust baritone.

Thomas has said that he goes into the oral argument sessions knowing how he will decide, a case so he doesn't ask questions."I refuse to participate. I don't like it, so I don't do it," he said in 2009, according to The Associated Press



Voting Rights Act Section 4 Struck Down By Supreme Court    Posted: 06/25/2013 10:19 am EDT  |  Updated: 06/25/2013 9:11 pm ED.   The Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act on Tuesday, the provision of the landmark civil rights law that designates which parts of the country must have changes to their voting laws cleared by the federal government or in federal court.     The 5-4 ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that “things have changed dramatically” in the South in the nearly 50 years since the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965.

Clarence Thomas compares affirmative action to Jim Crow laws.  Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court justice, explains his legal reasoning for rejecting affirmative action in the latest court ruling. Clarence Thomas admits that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action. -  Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas got into Yale Law School thanks in part to affirmative action, according to his autobiography. But that doesn't make him a fan of the laws designed to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women.







The Time is Always Right to do What Is Right...M.L. King, Jr.






 Petition for Writ of Certiorari On The Highs Civil Rights Action against Bill Morrison and Michael Abbott, Jan. 22, 2001

 Supreme Court Denied the Highs Petition June 25, 2001

 Petition for Writ of Certiorari- 11th Circuit Court of Appeals March 25, 2002

 Supreme Court Dernied the Highs Petition April 22, 2002

Petition for Writ of Certiorari - 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Lacked Jurisdiction Jan.. 18, 2005

Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis Denied, but Petitioner was allowed until March 21, 2005 to pay docking fee and re-submit petition February 28, 2005


 March 25, 2005 Just when "we" learn how to play the game, "y'all" change the rules. Oh! they now say that we were allowed 21 days until March 15, 2005, so the case is considered closed. But in fact according to the above letter dated February 28, 2005, we were allowed until March 21, 2005. No big deal cause "we" always get Fucked .


proof of timely mailing determine whether the Motion is late, and the date of mailing was 03-18/2005


[see] Platsky v. C.I.A. 953 F.. 2d 26 (2nd cir. 1991) Pro Se Plaintiffs are often unfamiliar with the formalities of pleading requirements. Recognizing this, the Supreme Court has instructed the District Court to construe Pro Se complaints liberally and to apply a more flexible standard in determining the sufficiency of a Pro Se complaint, than they would in reviewing a pleading submitted by counsel. see e.g. Hughes v. Rove 449 U.S. 5, 9-10, 101 S. Ct. 173, 175-76, 66 L.Ed 2d 163 (1980) (per curiam): Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S. Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L. Ed .2d 652 (1972) (per curiam) , see also Elliott v. Brunsom, 87 F. 2d 20, 21 (2d cir. 1989) ( per curiam) In order to justify the dismissal of a Pro Se complaint it must be "beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entile him to relief ".


Haines v. Kerner 504 U.S. at 521, 92 S.ct at 594 (quoting Con1ey v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41. 45-46, 78 S.Ct.99, 102, 2 L.Bd.2d 80 (1957). [1,2) In light of these principles, we think that the district court should not have dismissed Platsky's complaint without affording him leave to replead.


The kkk (men & women) 1928 March in DC, with the Stares & Stripes, to celebrate the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of the eugenicists in Buck vs. Bell.. to keep them "undesirables" in their place and to keep the "white race" pure..

"We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal" ... 1776

...."The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour"...1787

In 1848, Thomas Garrett, a Delaware Quaker, was arrested for helping Maryland slaves flee from their masters. Taney sat as the judge in the trial and fined Garrett $5,400, then an enormous sum that left Garrett almost penniless.

Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, a former slave owner, declared that all blacks -- slaves as well as free -- were not and could never become citizens of the United States - March 1857

U. S. Supreme Court in Plesser v. Furguson. ruled that "separate but equal" was the law - 1896

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes speaking for the Court, wrote, "three generations of imbeciles are enough" - 1927

On December 10, 1967, Virginia High became one of the 3,300 Georgians who were legally forced to undergo sterilization surgery, ...thanks to the U.S. Supreme ct., Justice Holmes, Adolf Hitler, the State of Georgia, American eugenics and the kkk...

Chief Justice Edward Douglass White, Justice Van Devanter and Hugo L. Black was all "Card-Carrying-Ku Klux Klan".

Chief Justice Roger B. Taney and Justice John Marshall Harlan, former slave owner's

U.S. Supreme fact according to the above letter dated February 28, 2005, we were allowed until March 21, 2005. No big deal cause we always get Fucked.

( January 10, 2006-- Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito Monday told the Senate Judiciary Committee that no one in the U.S. is above or beneath the law. He also said he believes a judge's only obligation is to uphold the rule of law.





  Page 5  Criminal Complaint (see below) - - The record will clearly reflect, and I have proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that from at least 1992, until this very day, the Executive and Judicial branches of the United States of America and their surrogates has engaged in a pattern of Racketeering and has colluded amongst themselves to maintain a united front and stonewall all the efforts of George and Virginia High in their quest for Equal Protection and Due Process of  Law as guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution. We were also deprived of our Civil Rights as guaranteed by the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Thirteenth amendments of the United States Constitutionand other laws and statues. Moreover, we were the victims of a government frame-up and racist conspiracy. A conspiracy (simply put) is a corrupt agreement of two or more individuals to do something, which the law forbids. In carrying out the conspiracy, members of the conspiracy performed different functions, each of which was significant to the achievement of the objective of the conspiracy. The objective of the conspiracy was to frame and imprison George and Virginia High because they would not “cut-a-deal”…



Under the circumstances, criminal and/or civil racketeering charges, or both, are legally justifiable and well within the statute of limitations against the named persons/entities who all had a part, directly or indirectly, in the "Racist Conspiracy, Framing and Wrongful Conviction" of George and Virginia High via the Investigation, the Indictment, the Trial, the Sentence, Incarceration and/or the Cover-up...




Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights

This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).


Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies-authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations. Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation's democracy. That's why it's a federal crime for anyone acting under "color of law" willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. "Color of law" simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.


Joe D. Whitley, Former U.S. Attorney

H. Allen Moye, Prosecutor

Barbara Brown, FBI,

West Johnson, U.S. Marshall

Lewis Valez, BATF

Dennis Tudor, U. S. Probation Dept.

William Salinski, IRS

Shelia Whipple, IRS

Terry Sosebee, GBI

Charles Boyd, GBI

William Morrison, Attorney for George High

Michael Abbott, Attorney for Virginia High

Judge Robert L. Vining Jr., U.S. District Judge

11 Judges from the 11th Cir. Ct. of Appeals

The Rehnquist Court (1986–2005


Racketeering and RICO: RICO stands for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. § 1961), a law that increases the severity of penalties for crimes performed in conjunction with organized crime. The law states that any person or group who commits any two out of a list of 35 crimes (known as racketeering activity in the U.S. Code) within a decade and can be determined to have committed them with similar results or similar intentions can be charged with racketeering. The maximum penalties for racketeering include a fine of up to $25,000 and up to 20 years in prison in addition to the forfeiture of all business interests and gains gleaned from the criminal activity. In addition, the case can be re-tried in civil court; plaintiffs are allowed to sue for triple damages. The law covers crimes such as bribery, extortion, money laundering, counterfeiting, gambling, murder, arson, robbery, kidnapping, harboring certain illegal aliens, obstruction of justice, slavery and others.
George W. High, Sr.
When it gets too tough for everybody else...its just right for me


8/31/09 Criminal Complaint (scroll up)

sent to these folks











Alexander Hamilton Stephens, (1812 - 1883) Ga. vice president of the Confederacy: Cornerstone Speech March 21, 1861 Savannah, Georgia …The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew." ...Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth…Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. "With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made one star to differ from another star in glory. "The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else."








8/31/09 Criminal Complaint (scroll up)

sent to these folks