TEXAS CHIEF JUSTICE JIMMY BLACKLOCK WILL FACE FEDERAL JUDGE ROLANDO OLVERA ON CONTEMPT OF COURT CHARGES.

ALSO INCLUDED IN THE SHOW CAUSE FILING IS THE ENTIRE TEXAS SUPREME COURT ON THE ISSUE OF ISSUING A RULING ON THE MANDAMUS, AND FOR DENIAL OF THE MOTION TO RECUSE OVER THE ISSUE OF GAY MARRIAGE, SAVE JUSTICE DEVINE WHO DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE RECUSAL ISSUE

ON ME REAL QUICK:  I AM IN SAN ANTONIO FOR TREATMENT ON MY HIPS.  AFTER THE MORNING PROCEDURE I WILL TRY AND GET AN APPOINTMENT WITH A PROSTATE CANCER SPECIALIST.  I WILL NOT WAIT UNTIL JUNE FOR THE BIOPSY

Federal Judge Rolando Olvera should have remanded the case to state court.  Based on everything I know he will not address any of the motions until the Pretrial Hearing on March 17th. had he simply remanded the case to state court the Chief Justice and the entire Court would not be in this mess.

OKAY I HAVE TO FINISH ON MY TABLET - THE MOUSE ON MY LAPTOP DIED

Here is the caselaw I originally promised at the bottom. 

Catholic Archdioces 589 US 57, 63-64 (2020)

For all I know Judge Rolando Olvera at the pretrial hearing was going to address the sanctions motion against the COB in my favor.  It does not matter.  The parties are now in a position they will have to expend a lot of time and money preparing for the pretrial hearing.  

In state court you file a request with the court for a hearing in court or by submission.  This is how you know your motion will be heard. I can prove that in state court all a judge has to do is refuse a hearing, and your motion is denied as a matter of law, and the ruling cannot be appealed.

In federal court Judge Olvera's local rules provide that once a motion has been completely briefed you notify him by filing and request the matter be heard by submission.  If Judge Olvera believes the matter should be heard in open court, he will notify the parties.

The city hired Helen Scott to handle the removal to federal court.  There is no issue her conduct is fully sanctionable.  I will get there.

But once I was ready to ask my motion to remand be heard by submission, which is Judge Olvera's preference, I emailed as allowed the case coordinator to verify that all that is needed is my filing the matter has been fully briefed by the parties and is ready for submission.  She refused to answer me.

But Helen Scott also emailed her and got into a substantive discussion with the case coordinator over whether I had to wait until the pretrial hearing.  The rule is pretty clear, and Helen was eventually told she was wrong.  Justice must have the appearance of justice.  When the court's staff is willing to have a substantive discussion with one of the lawyers but refused to acknowledge a request to verify the motion will be submitted for submission, there is no longer an appearance of justice.

BUT KARMA HAS ITS WAY

Helen Scott did everything she could to delay the court remanding the case to state court.  I do not say this lightly.  In fact, all of the case law which justifies my Moton to Show Cause to the Chief Justice and the entire court, is a simple copy and paste from Helen Ramirez's brief to deny my motion to remand.

My position was and remains that if the case is remanded the Texas Supreme Court regains its jurisdiction to rule on the pending mandamus.  I never suggested otherwise.  In fact, I notified the Texas Supreme Court of the removal to federal court and its loss of jurisdiction.  To suggest I was arguing while the case was in federal court the Texas Supreme Court still had jurisdiction is absurd.

But Helen Scott insisted on misleading the court and, in the process, did all the research I needed that the Texas Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the state case.

I will give you the case law as I cut and pasted it from Helen Scott's brief.

There is also the question of her argument.  She lies to the court and says there is no unique question which should be resolved by the Texas Supreme Court.  This was a lie and she knew it.  No court has ever ruled code enforcement is discretionary.  It was a question of first impression for the Texas Supreme Court.

She was so desperate to make the argument she just glossed over the rules of statutory construction.  You cannot argue the meaning of a statute without using the rules of statutory construction.  She did not because it could not be done.

In her brief as an act of desperation she argued in the alternative that it did not matter if there is no discretion because I never took Omar Ochoa's ruling to the City Board of Appeals.  There can only be a Board of Appeals if there is no discretion in enforcement of the code.  In her desperation she conceded code enforcement is not discretionary.

Whether I went to the Board of Appeals is a fact question which is not subject to a 12B6 dismissal.  My affidavit will say the issue of the Board of Appeals never became an issue because Omar Ochoa never responded to my request for code enforcement.  He just ignored me.  Then he and Helen Ramirez were party to telling Texas Lone Star they did not have to comply with the code violations.  They did same after I demanded a personnel review.  That my friends is a slam dunk Sec. 1983 lawsuit.  

Even on the sec. 1983 issue Helen Scott's motion does not align with my lawsuit.

I do not have to respond to the motion to dismiss because it must meet the legal requirements of a 12B6 dismissal, and it does not.  But I will respond before the pretrial conference.

MY HEALTH IS CAUSING PROBLEMS

I am focused on a final diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia.  The problem is that my free PSA results show a high risk for prostate cancer.  For BPH the number should have gone in the other direction.  I am not waiting until June for an appointment to decide if a biopsy is required.  It is.  I have done the research. 

All the research shows if caught early I could have a life span of another 20 years.  I am not sure I want to live to 88, but whatever. 

It is hard on days when you sleep for 16 hours.  The fatigue is really bad.  My insulin is at 80 units, the max allowed with the pen, and my BS remains at 161 or higher.  I am insulin resistant and the insulin may never work.  But if I have cancer, my BS could be artificially high.

Trust me this is taxing on my mobility.  Being caught up in litigation does not help. 

 WHAT WILL HAPPEN PROCEDURALLY? 

The clerk of the Texas Supreme Court can reject my filing.  It was filed and served late this morning.  It awaits acceptance by the clerk.  I will probably be in a procedure when the notice of acceptance comes through.  I will check before I go into the procedure and post at the top if it was accepted or rejected.

I do not care if it is rejected.  It is solid and I do not need the Supreme Court to respond to my motion to Show Cause in order to file the request with Judge Olvera, and the DOJ for obstruction of justice.

I do not care if Judge Olvera takes the matter seriously.  It will go to the federal court of appeals.  When a state judge not once but effectively issues three rulings in a federal case it needs to be addressed.  The US Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear such conduct cannot be ignored.

The three rulings are the denial of a motion to recuse Missy Medary which was made moot after the removal and the court lost jurisdiction Then as to the entire court save Justice Devine the court denied my motion to recuse the court over bias based on my LGBTQ+ status.  And finally, the court denied my mandamus in a merit ruling.  All are void based on a want of jurisdiction. 

I will also be seeking an immediate removal of Chief Justice Blacklock for retaliation based on my pending complaint with the commission on judicial conduct.

This mess is going to go on and on, and John Cowen, the mayor of the City of Brownsville will be a key player in this mess. He knows he is petty and vindictive, and his shortsightedness will play out for some time.

OKAY, HERE IS HELEN SCOTTS LEGAL ARGUMENT WHICH ALLOWED ME TO FILE THE SHOW CAUSE MOTION WITH THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT

She did this to confuse the court by alleging I was saying the Texas Supreme Court retained jurisdiction.  I never said such a thing, and my notice to the Texas Supreme Court about the removal and its options prove my point.

As I noted I cannot access my brief on my laptop, Monday night I will post Helen Scott's entire legal argument I used against the Texas Supreme Court.

 

 MY HEALTH STATUS AND OTHER ISSUES

As a patient I guess I see this differently than the doctors.  But we are talking it has been about a month and a half since the PSA pointed towards cancer.  Communication with the doctor's office is difficult.

I want to make a point clear, you can have the best available doctor, but if his staff drops the ball and fails to understand the message, you will be denied staff.  In the years I defended a lot of doctors on the issue of malpractice, the number one problem was a failure to control their staff.  Amazing doctors got caught up in malpractice because of the staff and not the actual conduct of the doctor. It was always sad to see this when it happened.

So, the advanced PSA came back indicting cancer.  There is no diagnosis until a biopsy comes back positive for cancer.  But I can tell you it is nerve-racking.  My brother tells me it was 1 month from the date the first PSA came back high to his biopsy.  His was a bit over 5, my initial was 18.4.

The advanced PSA is called Free PSA.  It takes several days for an outside lab to review the sample.

The key mark is 25.  Above 25 it may be an inflamed prostate.  If it is below 25 it points to cancer.  Mine came in at 18.  But it can still be very negative for cancer.  But it is nerve-racking there is no sense of urgency from the doctor.  For me it is urgent.  Most days I spend 16 hours in bed, The computer screen is no friend when you are this sick.

As to the doctor I have no way of knowing if his staff have him the lab results I brought to the office.  For a day and a half, I could not get through on the phone.

I think my doctor is very good, based on our initial meeting. But I cannot control his staff.

ON MONDAY I MAY BE ABLE TO PROCEED TO THE FIRST BIOPSY

I am being treated with an issue related to the bursa sac in the hip area.  This is commonly misdiagnosed as bursitis when in fact it is mediatized prostate cancer.  I am being treated for bursitis with injections.  I get another set on Monday.

I will discuss what is happening with the prostate to see of the orthopedic surgeon thinks he should do the hip biopsy to rule out mediatized prostate cancer. If he does and it comes back positive, it will ensure my further treatment will be in San Antonio and not locally. 

I want to stress I have a very good local specialist.  But in Brownsville, the quality of office staff is consistently really bad.  

I AM WORKING HARD TO HAVE THE CASE AGAINST THE COB REMANDED TO STATE COURT

The COB motion to dismiss the lawsuit is entirely without merit.  The city hired an attorney who makes lots of mistakes.  She has admitted in her pleadings the enforcement of the code is not discretionary, but mandatory.  She just does not know it. The city has a board of appeals according to her, which can reverse the decision of the code enforcement officer.  This means it is not discretionary., but mandatory. 

By Monday I promise a post which will be read throughout the entire state.  The COB will look really bad.  I am working on the federal filings.  It is hard because of the way I have to use PACER to reference specific claims by the city.  

I am off to a nap, and then to hopefully finish what needs to be filed in federal court.   There is no delay in finishing the federal filing.  It is a different process.  While moving between several screens of federal filings, and research, they tend to cause me to become fatigued very fast.  Typing this is just typing. 

 

SUPREME COURT ENDS TRUMP'S TARIFFS- MAYBE

The decision is 6/3 against Trump.  But on key doctrines non-delegation of power by Congress and major questions doctrine, there is no clear guidance.  I did not read the entire opinion.  I know how to do a cursory read to identify the differences of opinion by the justices.

What this means is anyone's guess.  The opinion is not helpful.  

Six agree the tariffs are unconstitutional.  But then the reasoning part breaks down.  The six are politely attacking one another as to the basis for their reasoning.  

This opens a big door for Trump to try and get around the opinion.

TARIFFS AS A WEAPON

I want to see how this impacts Cuba.  Trump's threats against Mexico and Canada to use tariffs if they help Cuba, may no longer be a weapon.

A survey of opinions of how this opinion will work, tells me no one knows.  We must wait to see how people act, and Trump responds.

MOVING FORWARD

There are two sides to this.  Do the tariffs issued by Trump become void immediately.

The second issue is, how do those who paid the tariffs recover the tariffs already paid.

The former should be the easiest to resolve.  The latter as the Court itself noted could take years of litigation. 

 

CLASSIC TRUMPIAN

WHILE REPUBLICAN MONICA DE LA CRUZ LEADS CRY FOR PROTECTION OF CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, DEMOCRAT VICENTE GONZALEZ REMAINS MISSING IN ACTION

" The Essential Workers for Economic Advancement Act, introduced in September, would offer non-citizens temporary, renewable visas for up to nine years to work in key industries where employers are struggling to hire.

“That would help us protect and get immigrants legally for those in the construction industry,” Rep. Monica De La Cruz (R-TX) told Nexstar." Click for full article

Starting yesterday this story went national.  The LRGV is being profiled for its loss of construction workers because of Donald Trump's policy.  Monica De La Cruz is not pulling a MTG anti-Trump diatribe because she dislikes some of his policies, Monica De La Cruz is acting as a reasonable policy wonk to educate the Trump White House.

I get the Democrats have to take the House if we are to stop Trump.  But elections are about jobs.  This is a key job issue in south Texas, and it is the Republicans leading the charge.  There is an old rule in politics.  

You effectuate change through the voice of the least plausible advocate. It was said because of Nixon's well-established reputation for being anti-China, only Nixon could open China to the US without being accused of being a sellout.  

Support for deporting criminals is a big part of the Politico article on the problem.  The Republicans never supported deporting hard workers, just criminals. See Politico

It will take a Monica De La Cruz to bring about a Bracero Program for construction workers. She is a strong voice for deporting the criminals, not the needed workers. She cannot be accused of being a sellout. The Nixon analysis comes from being educated and knowing how to develop analytical models, versus just typing to appear relevant. 

If you remember the Nixon model, you will always be able to predict who will be most likely to bring about the needed change. 

 

YES, THE SHORTAGE IS REAL - THANK YOU VERY MUCH TRUMP

For about three weeks I have noticed Walmart does not have Almond Milk.  Maybe they have it in the early morning and then run out.  The shortage is real.

The problem is multifaceted.  When Tony Martinez first announced for mayor, I demanded to know his water policy, as key to expansion of our economy.  Tony not really educated in such matters claimed he would promote conservation.  As if conservation would have prepared us for SpaceX demands.

On water policy, and it will cost us more than it already is costing us, we have none.  In the same way the city lied repeatedly about the airport runway expansion and then did nothing to stop the sale of the land needed for the expansion, the city and county have allowed for the development of the land needed for the weir dam. 

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE PRICE OF ALMOND MILK?

California has done nothing to address its water demand and droughts.  All over the world from Asia, China, Africa, Latin America, and even Russia, hundreds of millions of trees are being planted to expand the amount land good for farming.  The trees promote rain, which means water.  In the US we just cut down the trees without actually replacing them and in fact adding to the total number of trees.

Even Saudi Arabia is actively planting millions of trees to reclaim the desert.  Trees bring rain, which means water.  It is amazing the millions of trees being planted around the deserts in Africa. 

SO, BETWEEN THE LACK OF A WATER POLICY IN CALIFORNIA AND NOW WORKER SHORTAGES, THE SHELVES HAVE NO ALMOND MILK

The almond harvest in California is down because of drought and what harvest there is, is not getting processed because of a lack of workers. 

Here in Texas, we prefer to cut down trees for paper products than grow hemp.  If production issues can be resolved, bamboo may become the main source of plastic instead of oil.  In Mexico avocado seeds are already being used for plastic and in Asia they use the yuca root.  But here we prefer our limited trees and fossil fuel. 

 

IT SEEMS IMPROBABLE ANYONE WOULD FALL FOR THIS SCAM, BUT THEY DO

Look no state or federal official is going to call you and demand you pay a fine for anything.  Some fines may be referred to a collection agency.  They as a general rule will not demand you drive around town to pay the fine to BIT coin tellers.  [I say generally, because 20 years ago I had a parking ticket referred for collections.  I was not even living in Dallas at the time.  A well-known collection agency paid me I believe $5,000 to settle the suit.]

If you owe a fine, you will get notice through the mail.  Even then if you call them demand proof of the fine.  They have to give you proof or stop calling.

When I read this story, I could not believe people actually fell for the claim they owed over $20,000 for a failure to appear fine.

Click for Story