IF YOU DO NOT IDENTIFY AS A SOCIAL DEMOCRAT, YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE MY SUPPORT: IT IS TIME FOR CHANGE

Facebook

 

WHEN THE GRANGE GOVERNED TEXAS - TIME TO RETURN TO THE ORIGINS OF TEXAS GOVERNMENT

The Grange understood the value in socialized groups to advance the community.  Today they would be denounced as communists.  But they did not allow big business to control our lives.

They are best known for socialized education.  Without their push for socialized education, Texas would have fallen behind the other states.

History matters.  At UTEP I had a history professor and political science professor who made sure we knew the influence the Grange had on our history.

When I came to Texas there was still no branch banking, something opposed big time by the farmers, and a maximum interest rate of 18%.  It was under the rise of the Republicans both these policies came to an end.  It was also the Republicans who began the process of dissocializing education. 

Now I am the first to say I believe in choice.  BISD is such a failure as a whole.  I know a child on the verge of dropping out because there was no guidance. Endless complaints about the bullying got the parent nowhere.  Now every day is a challenge to get the child to go to school.  She is 16 and giving up.

Look, it is not BISD's job to guide the child.  It is the parents' job. But when you see the parent is not doing their job, the teacher needs to try an intervene.  Also, maybe the parent does not know how to guide the child.  My mom gave me faith I can do it.  But she also went to the school and told them I needed guidance to accomplish my dreams.  Without the social approach, I never would have received the education I received.  But also, it was my desire to actually learn and not merely getting passing grades which made me the educated person I am today. 

So how did we go from the socialist movement of the Grange movement to separatism and individualism?  The capitalist demonized socialism, thereby making it easier for the money makers to take control of the means of production.  

If you know the theory, family businesses are key to the socialist model.  They are not controlled by corporate entities.  They build our economy 

OKAY WHO WERE THE GRANGE?

Half of the membership of the Constitutional Convention of 1875 were patrons dedicated to "retrenchment" in government. Articles providing low salaries for public officers, homestead protection, railway regulation, and restrictions on taxing power show their influence on the convention. 

Laws encouraging immigration, checking land speculative companies, setting maximum interest rates, regulating railways by a commission, and requiring a six-month school term and the election of public weighers originated with the state Grange.

 The Texas Grange supported the national Grange in demanding free trade, an interstate commerce commission, a department of agriculture, a pure food and drug law, inflation, popular election of senators, and reduction of express and postage rates. 

The Grangers' crusade for better education was their most important work. The bimonthly Grange hall meeting was a school for the whole family; there they established libraries, sang songs, read essays, and developed speakers. They worked for free and uniform textbooks, nine-month school terms, consolidation of rural schools, a scholastic age of eighteen, capable teachers, and vocational courses. Granges organized schools under the "school community system."

 

A DEPICTION OF OUR INNOCENCE CELEBRATING THANKSGIVING

Analytically I look from the bottom up.  A sign someone is not an analyst is in their comments they use top-down analysis one day and bottom up the next day.  This means random thoughts not based on any theoretical base.  OMG top to bottom analysis is always wrong.  You cannot judge yesterday based on today.  You must look to the path of yesterday if you want an insightful understanding of today - without judgment.

I AM SO TIRED OF THE SIMPLISTIC MEME COMMENTS WHICH SEEM TO PROMOTE VIOLENCE

It is not that these simplistic meme comments directly promote violence, they just take away the need to understand why things are as they are. I hate the comment looking at Nazi Germany with, "and they said they were just taking orders."  Pure simpleton BS.

Order requires compliance with the command.  I learned that in the military.  If you want to know chaos, tell every soldier to decide if every order they receive is legal.  Our Republic will die.  Having said that I believe as part of our freedom everyone has a right to direct our soldiers to not follow illegal orders.  It is truly an empty statement by simpletons.  It only becomes dangerous when we have enlisted personnel claiming a war is illegal and they will not follow orders.  As if an enlisted person knows international law well enough to know when a war is legal or illegal.

I AM VERY THANKFUL FOR ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT AT ANY LEVEL WHO PUT THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE TO PROTECT US

I know firsthand what a spouse feels like when they night after night wait for their spouse to come home after their shift on the NYPD.  They never get used to it.  They suffer not knowing if their spouse will come home after the shift.

What happened yesterday in DC with the national guardspersons was terrible.  I have no use for Trump's national guard policy, but that does not mean I do not support our national guard.  They were given orders to be in DC, and they were keeping the oath.

I wish Thanksgiving could be as innocent as Charlie Brown sees it.  But it is not.  If we believe in Ordered Liberty, Thanksgiving becomes complex.  Law enforcement may not make sense to us at times, but we must be thankful every day they do their best to keep us safe.   It is for this I am thankful. 

 

ONCE AGAIN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR PROVES SHE BRINGS NO VALUE TO THE CONSTITUTION OR THE LAW

The Feres Doctrine is perhaps one of the worst doctrines of judicial activism in the history of the Supreme Court.  The original decision was dead wrong, but its reasoning would have made sense had it been the actual law.

In a very short opinion, the Supreme Court found because the VA effectively had a workers compensation system in place, such as in regular work-related injuries, the active-duty personnel could not sue the military for work related injuries.  We begin with how simple the decision was.  It was very short.

It had two flaws; Congress did not provide for this result.  It was judicial activism.  But it held because the reasoning made sense.  But even in worker compensation cases there are two options.  If you are self-insured the worker can still sue you for actual negligence and not mere work-related injury.  The second option is, regardless of whether you suffered a work-related injury, you were covered.  The latter is no longer true.  If you suffer a heart attack while in the military, you are not assured VA coverage when you leave the military unless you can show the heart attack was work related. 

First Sotomayor agrees Feres is hard to justify, then decides it must hold because of Stare Decisis."

"As my colleague rightly explains, Feres v. United States, 340 U. S. 135 (1950), is a difficult decision to justify.  ... .  Since it was decided 75 years ago, Feres’s atextual expansion of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U. S. C. §2671 et seq., has garnered near-universal criticism; has caused significant confusion; and has deprived servicemembers and their families of redress for serious harms they have suffered during service to this country."

Atextual means not in the written law but put there by the Supreme Court. 

"Even so, out of respect for the Court’s rules of stare decisis, and in recognition of the reliance interests that Feres has generated, I vote to deny this petition for a writ of certiorari. "

Sotomayor runs from the truth behind her decision to not hear the case.  She is really attacking the Dobbs Majority [reversing Roe v. Wade -abortion] She is doing it at the expense of our military.

Sotomayor could have written a very powerful dissent in Dobb's. showing the Dobb's Court could have gotten to the same result using Roe v. Wade, but it would have meant the truth.  Sotomayor hates the truth.  She plays the law to her own political agenda.

What you see here is, I do not give a pass to a so-called liberal justice.  I call it as I see it.  Also, Sotomayor is a Plantation Democrat, not a Social Democrat. 

Roe had two key components.  First, the court found a woman "does not have an unqualified right to an abortion."  This means the right to an abortion is not absolute but qualified.  The Roe Court went on endlessly about then known medical evidence about life.  The limitation being quickening, when you can feel the baby move, was based on then known medical evidence. 

Based on new medical evidence the Court could have used Roe to pull back when a women's qualified right to an abortion is cut off. 

It was inconceivable Sotomayor would concede Roe had a model which could result in further limiting a woman's right to an abortion.

WHAT WOULD SOTOMAYOR SAY ABOUT "PLESSY V. FERGUSON?"

Plessy v. Ferguson stood for the principle "Separate but Equal is Constitutional. But somehow 50+ years of courts relying on Plessy allowed the Supreme Court to toss Plessy and replace it with Brown v. the Board of Education. "Separate but Equal is Inherently Unconstitutional." 

Sotomayor desperation in her denial of the latest Feres case shows she has no loyalty to any constitutional principle. 

By her own words she could have reaffirmed the so-called liberal idea the law fluctuates with time and interpretation.  She did not.  She used the decision to create a quote for a future opinion we should not mess with Stare Decisis. 

If Sotomayor believed her words yesterday, which she does not, she would have denied certiorari in Brown v. the Board of Education and let stand "Separate but Equal is Constitutional." Sotomayor manipulates her opinions to get to the result she wants.  It is really that simple, and she remains a danger to our Republic. 

THE ORIGINAL JUSTICE JACKSON SAID IT BEST

" I see no reason why I should be consciously wrong today because I was unconsciously wrong yesterday." Massachusetts v. United States, 333 U.S. 611, 639-40 (1948) (Jackson, J., dissenting).

Liberty fluctuates and is not etched in stone.  These were the words of William Blackstone, who summarized the law at the time of our Revolution.  The stone part I added, but Blackstone used the word fluctuates when describing Liberty.

 

ONE HOUR AFTER TEXAS REQUESTED THE SUPREME COURT PUT A HOLD ON THE RULING WHICH BLOCKED TEXAS REDISTRICTING, JUSTICE ALITO EFFECTIVELY REINSTATED THE TEXAS 2026 REDISTICTING MAP 

This is pure BS.  It is not humanly possible Alito read the lower court opinion, reviewed the evidence and found Texas would prevail on the merits.  

If you do not see this as stealing the 2026 election you are just too corrupt and desperate to deal in facts.  All fair-minded U.S. Americans need to march on the Supreme Court and demand Alito's resignation.  When one justice can steal an election on their own vote, our Democracy has died.

Many in the news media are reporting the order was by the conservative majority.  The LA Times needs to hire someone who can read Orders, because they clearly have the story wrong.

The Order is clear; it was Alito by himself as the Circuit Justice for the 5th Circuit who signed the order.  He did not, as he should have, refer the matter to the entire Court.  I wonder if he knew he did not have the 4 votes.

 THE MANDAMUS AGAINST ART MCDONALD, AND MOTION TO REMAND THE CITY OF BROWNSVILLE SUIT TO STATE COURT REMAIN PENDING

As I have said in the past, Fridays are hard on me while I await the weekly orders from the Texas Supreme Court.  Well, the orders came out at 9 a.m., and my case remains pending.

I have a lot I am working on.  A question I have pondered for over 40 years is, are a public official's oath of office discretionary?  

The immunity doctrine says it is.  So, if the oath of office is discretionary what is the point of the oath?  Last week Congress waived immunity against officials who illegally obtain records from Senators. For this type of immunity there is nothing, and I mean nothing, in the constitution which provides for immunity.

In my mind immunity does not exist.  It is 100% judge made law.  Courts can compel public officials to do their job, but because the Oath of Office is discretionary, they cannot be compelled to uphold their oath of office. 

Just think about that. 

 A HUGE ISSUE, NO RIGHT MINDED PUBLIC OFFICIAL WANTS IS, IS UPHOLDING YOUR OATH OF OFFICE MANDATORY AND NOT DISCRETIONARY?

Trump has threatened several members of congress with sedition for telling our military to not follow illegal orders.  Our troops swear an oath to the Constitution.  The oath is meaningless.  This morning a lot of people learned from the Texas Supreme Court, notwithstanding violation of their constitutional rights, the Texas Supreme Court will not hear their case.  At the Supreme Court level, both state and federal upholding their oath is discretionary.  This is where the nightmare begins. 

This video is all anyone needs to listen to, to know county commissioner Joey Lopez and all other commissioners on the ballot need to be voted out.  Joey Lopez and all other sitting commissions during covid used their power to steal the Covid vaccine, from the people, for their own political ends.

Of course, social media whores are going to defend Joey Lopez because they were illegally given one of the vaccines which left a cancer patient or other high-risk patient without the vaccine. 

Just this week another person was indicted on Covid related fraud.  She is not the first.  All over the country numerous people have been indicted and convicted of misuse of Covid money or vaccines.

We all know unless you get the complaint to Washington nothing will come of it locally.  The local FBI is too entrenched with the local criminal enterprises to do their job.

Latest indicted Congresswoman.  

 IF YOU ARE NOT A SOCIAL DEMOCRAT YOU ARE UNFIT FOR TO HOLD OFFICE

I am tired of people saying I am secretly supporting certain people for judgeships.  This is false.  I will not vote for anyone who is not a Social Democrat.  End of Story.

If you as a judicial candidate have no comment on the corruption among the judiciary and DA Saenz, then why are you running?

It does not end with judgeships.  If you are running as a Democrat, you better announce you are a Social Democrat.  If not, I will not vote for your - end of story.

Cameron County is pathetic.  We have no public officials willing to stand with the people.  It is always Shiny-Object Gaslighting. 

If you follow the news, Social Democrats are now the leaders.  People accused NYC mayor elect of being a communist.  These were Democrats.  Now after the election they are running to Mamdani to be part of his agenda. 

Trump is so afraid of the "Affordability" issue raised by Mamdani; he is now trying to claim it as his own. 

I will actively work against anyone who refuse to stand with the people by announcing they are a social Democrat. 

If you are unwilling to campaign against the institutional corrupting in Cameron County, exactly what are you offering the people? 

THE PLANTATION DEMOCRATS HAVE RUN FROM MARRIAGE EQUALITY.  WHY?  THEY ARE COWARDS

 THIS MORNING I AWOKE TO MY BROWNSVILLE RECYLCE BIN

This is good because it saves me my twice a month trip to the recycle center.  I always have two big bags.  One is filled with plastic, and one is filled with paper and paper related products.

My only issue is, they will no longer accept plastic bags.  This is a big environmental issue for birds, turtles and such. 

I know I have seen plastic bad recycle bins at some store.  I will find it.

 

SO, I PROCEED ON SEEKING REMAND TO STATE COURT MY CASE AGAINST THE CITY OF BROWNSVILLE

First a correction:  I initially cites § 1441 as a basis for remand based on the fact the case is nearly 100% state law.  Well § 1441 was amended taking out the language for "predominantly state law."  

But the law did not really change.  § 1367 is actually stronger and in particular to the fact the Texas Supreme Court is poised to rule on the state law issues. 

It is extraordinary that any attorney would remove to federal court a case poised to be decided by the Texas Supreme Court on state law issues and thereby create a possible 5-year delay.

The Texas Supreme Court is poised to rule on its application of the Comment in Canon 4 concerning strongly held religious beliefs on marriage. The Texas Supreme Court has sole jurisdiction over the matter and can resolve it forthwith.  If the case is successfully removed, a separate lawsuit will be filed in Austin. 

The motion to remand would already be filed, except the statutory rules, Southern District of Texas rules and Judge Orlando Olvera rules are a burden.  To the seasoned lawyer in federal court, it is probably pretty simple and not burdensome.  But as a first-time filer under the new rules, it is very burdensome.

If I can file directly with the clerk, I will.

But I own the issue.  The question is getting it before Judge Olvera. 

THIS IS SO CAMERON COUNTY

a good lawyer vs a gran lawyer

Facebook

 JOHN COWEN GETS REAL DESPERATE AND AUTHORIZES THE LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF BROWNSVILLE BE REMOVED TO FEDERAL COURT - HE WILL FAIL 

Please understand the context of what is happening.  The COB is now paying a law firm to secure the ruling they do not have to enforce code violations.  This case is not about money as to the COB.  It is about the ability to tell homeowners you will be fined if you do not get a permit for the work. But, then COB has not duty to comply with the terms of the permit and enforce the code.  It is a con to raise money with a mandatory permit, while providing no code enforcement when the project is done.

If I were in Dallas, a law firm would jump on this and file a class action against the city for everyone who has bought a permit.  When the Dallas district clerk did the same thing with a filing fee, after the class action was filed, Dallas paid out millions in settlement.

THE REMOVAL APPROVED BY JOHN COWEN IS 100% IMPERMISSIBLE. WITH JOHN COWEN WASTING THE LIMITED RESOURCES OF THE TAXPAYER

CONTEXT:

The key issues in the case are already before the Texas Supreme Court.   For several weeks they have been working on the case. It is sanctionable beyond comprehension that a law firm would remove a case to federal court while it is pending before the Texas Supreme Court.

THERE IS NO REMOVAL AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN THE CASE IS MOSTLY IN STATE LAW

I will give you the clear and plain case law from the United States Supreme Court.

100% of the case before the Texas Supreme Court is state law; 100 % of the case against Texas Lone Star is state law; 100 % of the case against FTL is state law; 90 % of the case against the COB is state law.  The 10% or less is a § 1983.  Because the state court has concurrent jurisdiction with the federal court, under these facts it cannot be removed.

The move was pathic and an admission they fear a loss at the Texas Supreme Court level.

SO, THE CASE LAW

“Indeed, the congressionally edited version of section 1441(c), showing the deleted and added wording makes plain that a deliberate choice has been made from allowing a district court to remand "all matters not otherwise within its original  jurisdiction" to "may remand all matters in which State law predominates.

 "  Id at 50.  Whereas the district court formerly had no choice in retaining a federal claim, it now may remand an entire case, including the federal question

claim, if state law predominates.  See Maine v. Thiboutot  , 448 U.S. 1, 3 n.1, 100 S.Ct. 2502, 2503 n.1 (1980) (recognizing that federal courts do not have exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate section 1983 claims, since state courts have concurrent jurisdiction (citing Martinez v. California , 444 U.S. 277, 283 84 n.7, 100 S.Ct. 553, 558 n.7 (1980)”

JOHN COWEN IS ASKING THE FEDERAL JUDGE TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE OF THE ANTI-LGBTQ+ COMMENT EFFECTIVELY MAKING GAY MARRIAGE MORE DIFFICULT, AWAY FROM THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT WHO PUT THE COMMENT IN CANON 4

    We are on the verge of ending this last vestige of anti-LGBTQ+ rules and laws, and John Cowen jumps in and demands a federal judge divest the Texas Supreme Court of its jurisdiction and delay a ruling for years.

    The questions of state law which are not subject to disputed fact are before the Texas Supreme Court.  The Texas Supreme court can effectively end this matter.  What reason does anyone have to immediately divest the Texas Supreme Court of its jurisdiction other than they know they will lose, so John Cowen agrees to forum shopping in favor of a judge more likely to play along with his con job on the residents of Brownsville?

            

 

SO HAVING SLEPT WITH EXTREME ANXIETY ALL NIGHT, I AWAKE TO LEARN MY MANDAMUS AGAINST ART MCDONALD REMAINS ALONG WITH NOW MY CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT AUTHORIZING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY

A QUICK FYI, THIS MORNING TEXAS PAID 100% ON SNAP

My case remains pending.  I will not begin to speculate.  The anxiety is intense.  I have a lot more this morning on the case, the COB, and Adult Probation.  

What is happening is all too surreal for me.  But first understand my motivation. 

My life is guided by my faith in the Parable of JOB, [Old Testament] and Matthew 6 [New Testament].

JOB was challenged to hold his faith while GOD allowed him to lose everything.  JOB held to his faith and was restored.

Matthew 6, in the New Testament, speaks to the issue of JOB.  God knows everything you need and can handle.  Prayer other than the Lord's Prayer is impermissible.  When you pray for your health, for example, you are saying God does not know your needs so he can provide, or GOD has forsaken you.  That is not Faith.

I have my Purpose, and my Faith tells me if a constable shows up at my door and arrests me, it is GOD's will.  It is not a test on me, because I cannot be tested.

JOHN COWEN Is using a form of Gaslighting with Shiny Objects to avoid the truth about what he is doing behind the scenes.  I call it Shiny Object Gaslighting. This gets to the point without using meaningless inflammatory langue such as fascist. He is doing exactly what President Trump does with the MAGA supporters.  But to be clear, this is not new, it is as old as time.  It is how the people are distracted from the TRUTH.

In my case against the city over compelling them to inspect the AC work is now part of a national challenge to the Texas Supreme Court's overt discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.  If I win it, it will humiliate the COB.

John Cowen does not care if the COB looks like it supports discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.  He will not tolerate anyone suing the city.  He has agreed to spend an extraordinary amount of your tax dollars and rely on the homophobia of the Texas Supreme Court to avoid doing his job. 

It is easy to claim credit for things started before John Cowen was elected mayor.

WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS WHAT IS HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENES

Behind the scenes is John Cowen effectively relying on the Texas Supreme Court's homophobia to avoid being told the COB has to enforce code violations.   This is disgraceful.  

As of yesterday, the Texas Supreme Court who can handle the COB issues as part of the mandamus, was given the abusive pleadings by the COB.  It is so bad the COB claimed they did not have the code violations issued by the Code officer Omar Ochoa.  Also, the pleading is a kitchen sink pleading.  It is abusive and sanctionable.

If John Cowen is so confident in the legal acumen of the city attorney's office, why have they contacted a very expensive law firm to request all the pleadings from the clerk's office?

ADULT PROBATION, WHAT A MESS

Yesterday was basically uneventful.  But the probation officer tried to get John Doe to agree he had no objection to yesterday's hearing.  John Doe stood his ground and said very clearly, she knew I was not available, and he did not agree with what she was saying. 

IT IS WITH PURPOSE AND FAITH, I AWAIT THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT TO RULE

Thursdays are a day of anxiety.  Every Friday, the Texas Supreme Court issues its general orders.  It is most likely my mandamus will be decided in the Friday orders, and not a midweek ruling.

Most practitioners of mandamus filings fail to understand there are two forms of mandamus.  One involves an irreparable injury.   The other is as a matter of law, regardless of irreparable injury.

Mandamus practitioners make the mistake of asking the court for a stay in a case of as a matter of law.  In my case, the assigned trial judge, automatically stayed everything.  It is called deference to the court. 

You do not rush the court by asking for a needless stay.  These are the midweek orders denying the mandamus.  

So, the way I handled the mandamus, the Texas Supreme Court can take all the time it wants to decide it.  

But this creates the anxiety I experience knowing once the Friday orders are released, my request may be denied.

I cannot predict what they will do.  I know facts and law are manipulated to the result they want.  When reviewed most decisions can be taken apart to show they are contrived to get to a result.  This is why the result cannot be predicted.

Like I said before, I maneuver around the flanks, But I also know this can make the court angry. 

LAURA PEREZ-REYES

The request she produce the record remains before the 13th Court of Appeals.  Let there be no mistake, she will face a criminal complaint for obstruction of justice. If the court of appeals denies the Motion for Rehearing because there is no reference to the record, it will be on Laura Perez-Reyez

ADULT PROBATION

I can assure you the VA is not happy. I missed my appointment with my brain surgeon. The VA and dental school are angry I missed my 8:30 a.m. appointment this morning with the oral surgeon.  In an attempt for some relief, the VA is trying to find an ENT doctor who will remove the tubes in my ears which forms part of the problem. They are seeking emergency care.  Like tomorrow.

If the court of appeals agrees the criminal case against John Doe should be dismissed because there is no charging instrument it will cost the probationer officer, her job.  She clearly said in writing she was going to change the November 13th appointment because I would be in San Antonio with the doctor.  We could have still done it electronically which is how it was initially set. 

But after she told John Doe in writing she would change the date, she in fact changed it from online to in person.  She knew it meant me having to cancel my appointments in San Antonio,

I will be with John Doe today.  We will turn over certain medical records, which show the care he is receiving.  He likes his doctor and the care he is receiving. 

We are moving forward, and Adult Probation will see no rest as this moves through the courts.  The retaliation is even obvious to the blind. 

 CHIEF JUSTICE JIMMY BLACKLOCK STUDYING HIS NEXT MOVE

The Achillies Heal move of every party operating outside the law is, the myth they have the upper hand.  They inevitably fail to check their flank.  Adult Probation is playing the myth of the upper hand along with Chief Justice Blacklock.  I am on their left flank.

Strategy is found in the great treatise of chess, and War.  I hardly doubt anyone in Cameron County who works for the governing entities has ever read Robert Massey's "Peter the Great."  To a strategist it is a great read.  Mr. Massey details Peter the Great's every move in his many wars.  Peter the Great may be one of the greatest strategists in history. He is certainly in the top 3. 

He understood all too well never rely on the myth of the upper hand.  

So where are we? 

BELOW IS IN A BRIEF CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKLOCK WILL SEE AS SOON AS HE GETS TO WORK IN THE MORNING.  IT IS ALSO IN THE COMPLAINT TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT.

He will play it simple on the notion he has the upper hand.  He knows AG Paxton has zero regard for the law.  He knows AG Paxton will fashion an argument the doctrine of "sincerely held religious belief," remains unresolved, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's decision on Monday to not reverse the caselaw that no such doctrine exists. 

I will be honest.  The lawyers for Kin Davis were pathetic.  Literally, the opening sentence in her Brief was to say five lawyers on the Court decided the case.  That is an insult to the Court not even I would lodge. On both key points of law, "sincerely held religious belief", and the awarding of damages based solely on emotional distress, Kim Davis's lawyers agreed they could find no Supreme Court authority to support their argument.  It was hardly a brief based in law.  So maybe the issue remains open for a better case which supports "sincerely held religious beliefs."

But as I have noted, marriage is merely an act of civil contract and carries no religious impediment to enforcement of the contract. 

THE ARGUMENT BEFORE THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, AND COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT

We begin with the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges , ––– U.S. ––––, 135 S. Ct. 2584, 192 L.Ed.2d 609 (2015), Davis took matters into her own hands.

“[T]he right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. The Court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them.” @ Obergefell , 135 S. Ct. at 2604–05.

But as a learned jurist well studied in the laws, Justice Blacklock knew or should have known Blackstone established Liberty as preserved in our Constitution as fluid and subject to fluctuation. On this subject Sir William Blackstone well remarks: ” The absolute rights of every Englishman (which taken in a political and extensive sense, are usually called their liberties) as they are founded on nature and reason, so they are coeval with our form of government, though subject at times to fluctuate and change; their establishment (excellent as it is) being still human.” Book 1, Ch I. pg. 123

The law at the time of the comment to Canon 4 was so well-established Chief Justice Blacklock had to have known within weeks the Supreme Court would uphold the law of no religious accommodation but nonetheless ordered the religious accommodation into the law. [Based on the denial of Kim Davis’ Petition for Writ of Certiorari, the matter is clearly resolved and this court’s Comment in Canon 4, clearly violates the constitution, and the well-established law at the time Chief Justice Blacklock agreed to the comment in Canon 4.]

The comment in Canon 4 is as follows: “It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief.”

Not only does the directive in Canon 4 comment section violate all known law at the time it was ordered published, but it also negates an actual Canon, without any compliance with the law for amending a Canon of Judicial Conduct.

Canon 3B6 provides: (6) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not knowingly permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.”

Chief Justice Blacklock has no known constitutional or statutory authority to negate a Canon on Judicial Conduct.

From Kim Davis Writ of Certiorari, page 2: The Writ is readily available on the Supreme Court internet page under cause no. 25-125.

“If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it.”

Kim Davis conceded to the Supreme Court that her issue of religious accommodation was a question of first impression.  Therefore, Chief Justice Blacklock had no legal basis to put religious accommodation into Canon 4 as a comment, especially days before the Supreme Court refused Kim Davis’ request to provide religious accommodation.  The Sixth Circuit had already held there was no expectation of religious accommodation for anyone who opposed Marriage Equality.

“As the Sixth Circuit acknowledged, Davis’s contention “that the Free Exercise Clause provides her an affirmative defense to liability” is “an issue of first impression.”

Petition for Writ of Certiorari page 4."

We shall see how the Chief Justice Responds.  Every major LGBTQ+ organization in the country awaits his response.

I know full well if I ask federal judge Orlando Garcia, to issue an injunction he will, but then Ken Paxton will seek an emergency appeal.  Given the current well-established status of the law, judge Orlando Garcia will not stay his injunction against Texas.

I do not believe the federal court of appeals will give Ken Paxton the relief he will seek.  Paxton will then seek relief in the form of a Stay from the Supreme Court.

When I file the lawsuit, I expect the self-anointed LGBTQ+ organizations in Texas and the country will oppose me, claiming I am exposing every LGBTQ+ person to reversal of Marriage Equality.  There is nothing new in this nonsense.  

Why should LGBTQ+ people in Texas suffer this indignity for the entire LGBTQ+ persons in the U.S.? I will be shocked if Chief Justice Blacklock does not fight back.  But he does have a simple out, withdraw the comment in light of the Kim Davis order from Monday. 

 I AM FINALIZING MY COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT COMPLAINT AGAINST  CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKLOCK ON HIS BLATANT VIOLATION OF THE MARRIAGE EQUALITY RULING ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS

LAURA PEREZ-REYES AWAITS A RULING FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS ON A MOTION TO COMPEL HER TO RELEASE A CRIMINAL APPELLATE RECORD

I have dealt with this issue before. The pro se criminal defendant is entitled to the record via email in searchable format.  Otherwise the DA has an advantage through access to the attorney portable where the record is in searchable format.

If the court of appeals finds yet another reason why John Doe has no rights before the court of appeals, Laura Perez-Reyes and Jaime Tijerina, Chief Justice, will be joint defendants in the formal criminal complaint and federal lawsuit.

Again if Laura Perez-Reyes is on the ballot come March, this is an easy win for a qualified candidate.  If no one runs against her, any qualified candidate will regret their decision.

THE CASE AGAINST ART MCDONALD REMAIMS PENDING BEFORE THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT

Of note I think the COB has now hired a private law firm and is no longer representing itself.  Now  think about this, to avoid code enforcement, John Cowen has authorized use of your limited tax dollars to pay a private law firm.

JOHN COWEN, A FAILED STEWARD OF OUR RESOURCES

This is John Cowen being a failed steward of your tax dollars.  John Cowen is the face of why the BISD bond issue failed.  He is a horrible steward of our resources.  He dishonors his oath of office by refusing to enforce the constitution and laws as he said he would.

The people do not trust elected officials with our tax dollars.  

 TEXAS SUPREME COURT WITH 10 A.M. ORDERS COULD DECIDE MY MANDAMUS AGAINST ART MCDONALD

UPDATE:

At 9:20 a.m., my phone rang waking me up.  The caller wanted my reaction to the Supreme Court's decision TO NOT revisit the Marriage Equality case.  I said, they are picking their fights, and this is a fight they do not want.  They are using their political capital to insure Trump can reshape this county on more important issues.

HOW THIS RELATES TO ART MCDONALD

If by the end of the week the Texas Supreme Court does not rule on my Motion to Recuse them based on an undisputed fact an LGBTQ+ person cannot get a fair hearing before the court because 8 of  the Justices added a comment to Canon 4, that based on religious objection they can refuse to perform ANY marriage they find objectionable. 

This morning the Supreme Court made clear in refusing the Kim Davis decision, sincerely held religious beliefs is not a basis to deny LGBTQ+ equality.

It is so bizarre in the comment they overruled Loving v. Virginia, interracial marriage, and the Marriage Equality case.

So what will happen in the Art McDonald case is, I will move the discrimination part of the case to federal case, which will effectively put into question every case I am involved with.

THE SIDE ISSUE:

 The main defendant in my case is Texas Lone Star AC. The owner signed a consent decree he violated the codes.  He is paying $11,250 to the state as a penalty for his actions.

The owner too has no rights.  He has no representation.  His bonding company, Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company is in court not only in the owners name denying the state sanctions, but also demanding I be sanctioned for bringing the state complaint and Motion to Enforce the consent decree.

The state can take his license because of my Motion to Enforce.  They can order he pay upwards of $350,000 for the loss value to my home.  In the case law by the Texas Supreme Court, I have no right to try and fix this mess with him directly.  I am expect to file my Motion to Enforce against the owner of Texas Lone Star AC.  

The owner of Texas Lone Star needs to hire an attorney now to sue the bonding company and the lawyer the bonding company hired to defend him.  This is his only defense against the Motion to Enforce.  He has to clearly allege the lawyer and the bonding company conspired against him.  I have the email from the lawyer he represents the interests of the bonding company.  I demanded a signed waiver of conflict of interest signed by the owner of Texas Lone Star AC, and the lawyer refused, because he does not have one.

ORIGINAL POST

It is expected that at 10 p.m., Monday the Supreme Court will indicate if it intends to revisit marriage equality.  It is extraordinary the Texas Supreme Court assumed the Supreme Court will reverse itself on marriage equality.  Just extraordinary

Because the then 8 sitting justices added a comment to Canon 4, that refusing to perform any marriage based on religious objections, they by their act indicated they believe discrimination based on sexual orientation is permissible. 

I am seeking recusal of all the Justices unless they aver in writing they do not have religious beliefs against marriage equality.  It goes beyond that and raises the specter they as a judge cannot be fair with any LGBTQ+ party before the court.  

Actually the way the comment is written a judge can refuse to do an interracial marriage based on religious objections.  This is a reversal to the 1967,  ruling in Loving v. Virginia.

As I have already established, marriage is strictly a matter of civil contract.  The authority to not oversee a civil contract based on your religious believes makes a mockery of all our laws.

 

WE SUFFERED FOR 40 DAYS AND 40 NIGHTS FOR NAUGHT

Millions of Americans will not be without healthcare.  Trump and the Republicans killsed Obama Care, without a court fight.  

The Democrats who folded should never be forgiven.  So much suffering for 40 days and 40 nights, for what. 

Unless you are a verified Social Democrat, you have zero chance of receiving my vote.

Gina Hinojosa has remained mostly silent during these trying 40 days and nights.  Why? her daddy Gilberto Hinojosa told her it was safer that way.

Gina Hinojosa is the most selfish narcissistic candidate for 2026.  Why?  We have a chance of picking up a Senate seat.  The Democrat who will be on the November 2026 ballot needs every penny they can raise.

Gina on a failed run for governor is drawing from the limited funds needed for the US Senate seat.  She is  the face of all the Plantation Democrats who care nothing for the people.

Since November 1st, I have been feeding a family a day.  

One day I had a 5 year old boy, while I was sitting at my desk, ask me if I had food.  I said yes, why?  We do not have any food.  I stopped what I was doing and took the family to HEB.  I asked the boy what he wanted and he said, strawberries, carrots, and watermelon. We bought more than that, but he got what he wanted.

In this country a 5 year old boy should never have to ask if someone they know has food, because there is none in his house.

For what did this child suffer?  

It will be a strong no on every DINOLINO, and Plantation Democrat. 

 ANYONE WHO THINKS VIOLENCE OR THREAT OF VIOLANCE HELPS THE REPUBLIC IS DEAD WRONG AND SHOULD BE SHUNNED

Look, the primary source of the attack on the Republic is the Supreme Court.  They are aided by the press.

The headline you did not see, because the press is worthless.  Biden appointee ends SNAP payments. How the news media came to be the voice of ignorance is beyond my comprehension.

Had 4 Republicans voted to allow Trump to withhold full SNAP benefits, the press would have made the Republican jurists the headline.

But it was Biden appointee Jackson-Brown's Court order to halt the full SNAP  benefit. 

Why is Jackson-Brown not he headline?

I GET EVERYONE IS EXHAUSTED

Violence is never an option.  We should be targeting the Supreme Court as the treacherous entity it is.  We should demand they kneel to the true Sovereign, the People.  I am doing a separate piece for the Herald on true Original Intent.  There is zero question the Supreme Court has zero respect for Original Intent and our laws.

Peaceful protest is the only real option.  It is bad enough law enforcement is the object of attacks every day, but what about the families of law enforcement? Do you understand how the families are at home hoping their loved one comes home?

We can protest loud and clear the actions of law enforcement.  But we cannot use violence or threat of violence against any form of law enforcement. 

No elected official should ever be the object of a threat of violence.  When this happens if the evidence is there there must be swift justice.

Given Trump's total contempt for our democracy when he pardoned the January 6th criminals, it is hard for anyone to believe law enforcement matters. 

If we really want to defeat Trump we must organized a 2 million person march on the Supreme Court.  We must demand they kneel to the People.

We must also send a message to law enforcement, we stand with you, will you stand with us? 

 LAURA PEREZ-REYES DEMANDS TO BE SUED BEFORE SHE WILL RELEASE A CRIMINAL APPELLATE RECORD

John Doe is on a clock countdown to file with the Court of Appeals.  The court has designated him indigent and pro se.  Laura Perez-Reyes is refusing to release the record via email, which is standard practice.

Three times we have offered to pick up the record, and Silvia Mata three times has refused to provide an address and time to retrieve the record.  Laura Perez-Reyes keeps on demanding John Doe's address so she can mail it.  That will run out the clock.  This is a clear felony criminal obstruction of justice.

I am working 12-hour days.  She is delusional if she thinks this will not land her in federal court.  Even the most contemptuous federal judge cannot be so jaded at to ignore the endless obstructions by the judges, lawyers, Laura Perez-Reyes and Sylvia Garza-Perez.

Assuming she is on the ballot come March, she needs a challenger.  She needs to learn she works for the people and not Luis Saenz.

The ADA violations are endless.  Cameron County until hit with a major judgment will never honor the ADA.  These are your Plantation Democrats who are DINO-LINOS, to a person. Democrat and Latino in name only.

Silvia Mata for the 4th time just refused to release her address for retrieval of the record.

I can prove law firms send curriers to drop off documents and retrieve documents every day.  Silvia Mata is playing dumb. 

TEXAS SUPREME COURT CONTINUES TO CARRY MY MANDAMUS AGAINST ART MCDONALD

The order in his case will come down as part of the general orders on Fridays.

I cannot predict the outcome.  I cannot rely on the law.  But I expect some activity if the Supreme Court on Monday at 10 a.m. enters an order denying review of the Davis Petition.  She is the county clerk held accountable for refusing a gay couple a marriage license. 

There is no predicting what the Supreme Court will do.  They can take it on the primary issue that holding her accountable is a violation of her religious beliefs.  The Court can twist this by saying they must revisit the Marriage Equality ruling.  I wish I can say there will be outrage if they do same, but I cannot.

ADULT PROBATION CANNOT HELP ITSELF SO LONG AS JUAN GONZALES IS THEIR COUNSEL

MANNY TREVINO BEING NAMED IN TEXAS RANGER'S COMPLAINT

Upon learning I have to be in San Antonio on the 12th and 13th, adult probation changed the next reporting date for John Doe just 15 days after the last one.  This is an abuse.

The VA has been notified I need to cancel the appointments.  A formal complaint against the county and specific probation officer is being filed with the VA.

I am forwarding an amended criminal complaint against the probation office based on further obstruction of justice.  I am going directly to the Texas Rangers alleging Manny Treviño refused to meet his ethical duty by recusing himself from the investigation and forwarding same to the Texas Rangers. I am now taking Manny Treviño to the Texas Rangers under a special provision which gives them jurisdiction over probation officers.

IS COUNTY CLERK SYLVIA GARZA-PEREZ PLAYING FREE AND LOOSE WITH THE COURT FILING RULES?

I have kept this quiet.  I sued Louis Sorola for defamation per se, a few months ago.  I want to be clear, even if I win, I will never collect a penny from Louis Sorola.  When that time comes, I believe he will not have it.

The other day I checked the filing system, and it shows he filed an answer, but I was never served.  Sorola certainly knows better.  I am seeing things online which do not match what he is serving me through the EFile system.

Sylvia Garza-Perez's staff is telling me I have to write a letter and pay a fee to receive copies of everything filed.  I will need to do this on a regular basis.  No Sylvia that will not happen.  The district clerk posts all filings online so I can download them.

The ones throwing Judge David Gonzales under the bus are Louis Sorola and Sylvia Garza-Perez.  I have discussed this via email with Sorola once.  This is a simple case.

So now I will ask Judge David Gonzales to compel Sorola and Sylvia into court and to bring all documents related to filings and efile notices.

I am not going to waste time.

JUDGE DAVID GONZALES

I have zero basis to seek recusal of Judge Gonzales.  If he just follows the law without bias, all will be fine.  But before he tries to recuse himself sua sponte he better check with Art McDonald.  My mandamus to compel him to hold onto my case against the COB remains pending before the Texas Supreme Court.  That can end tomorrow when the long list of orders issue which could contain a notation of denied.

In all cases in which I am a party I will ask the judge to verify they do not hold a religious believe which impairs their ability as a judge in civil matters.  This is squarely before the Texas Supreme Court in the Art McDonald case. 

 

EARLY VOTING ONLY - FAIR TO SAY THE BOND ISSUE CRASHED

What does it say about BISD leadership that they chose to run a vote for a tax increase while people were getting their tax bill, and the economy is crashing?

Limited Election Day results show the Against vote holding more than 60%.

NEWSFLASH: NEW VOTING PATTERN

For the first time in years more people voted on election day than early.  This could change how we predict elections in the future.

There is one precinct still out, but the against vote remains overwhelming.

FINAL:

PROP 1:

    FOR             4017

    AGAINST    5847

PROP 2:

    FOR:            3656

    AGAINST    6199

My analysis was spot on for two reasons.  It is not bought and paid for, and I work in the trenches and not from a bar stool.

We know from the many arena votes, the anti-tax vote will always outperform pro -tax vote.

Even if the pro vote group got a lot of people to the polls at the last minute, they faced the reality they were being asked to vote for a tax increase.  Informed voters are not going to vote to give a school district even more money.  The people do not trust school districts.  There is a long history of mismanagement.