Petition to Barack Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch
Exonerate our Mother, Ethel Rosenberg
Our parents, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, were executed on June 19, 1953 during the anti-communist hysteria of the Cold War Era. They had been convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage, in what was called “the crime of the century.” We were six and 10 years old when they were killed. Our mother was not a spy, and her execution was wrongful. Her conviction was based on perjured testimony and prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. The charges against our mother and the threat of the death penalty were meant to intimidate her and our father into cooperating. The U.S. government wanted Julius to falsely confess to passing “the secret of the atomic bomb” to the Soviet Union, and name others involved. Their trial took place during a time of widespread panic about communism. The sentencing judge went so far as to blame our parents for the Korean War. In denying clemency, President Eisenhower accused them of causing future nuclear wars. These outrageous statements and our parents’ execution helped fuel a dangerous climate of fear and intolerance in our country which permitted political opportunists like Senator Joseph McCarthy to poison our society. Today, we face a similar climate of hatred which targets immigrants, Muslims, LGBTQI individuals and others. A formal acknowledgement of the wrong done to our mother and our family will help prevent similar injustices in the future. A healthy democracy requires that the government acknowledge and correct its transgressions. The government cannot return our mother to her loving family. But it can admit this miscarriage of justice. Please, join us in calling on Attorney General Lynch and President Obama to formally exonerate Ethel Rosenberg before they leave office. More than 60 years after her unjust conviction and execution, now is the time to clear her good name.
Petition to Alaska State House
Reform Alaska's broken asset forfeiture laws - pass HB 42 this session!
House Bill 42 protects the private property rights of innocent citizens by requiring that Alaska’s revered and dedicated law enforcement agencies, convict individuals of a crime before permanently seizing private property. Alaska’s “civil asset forfeiture” laws have been reported to be among the worst in the country, allowing private property to be permanently taken from individuals suspected of crimes, even if they are never charged, much less found guilty. Across the nation, civil asset forfeiture laws have gained notoriety in recent years for rampant abuse and deliberate circumvention of due process. Well-documented cases of policing for profit have sparked a wave of reform nationwide. In Alaska, local law enforcement only need to show probable cause to seize property. Failure to challenge a seizure within a given timeframe results in an automatic and permanent forfeiture. These problems are compounded by an incentive for law enforcement to seize as much as possible, since 75-100% of the revenues generated from civil forfeitures flow back to the local agency. Moreover, there is no requirement that Alaska authorities collect or report data on their forfeitures. While assets may be reclaimed, civil asset forfeitures places the burden on individuals to fight the bureaucracy to prove that their assets were not gotten through ill means, or that they did not consent to using their property for an illegal purpose. Civil cases do not provide for free legal assistance, so for individuals that cannot afford private representation, the process is intimidating at best, and ill-fated at worst. HB 42 would require that an individual be convicted of an actual crime before forfeiture proceedings can take place, and would protect guiltless spouses and family members from property loss as a result of the process. The bill would also impose transparency and accountability for civil asset seizures and reduce financial incentives for abuse, by providing that any revenues that do flow back to the state as a result of federalized proceedings, are deposited in the General Fund. This bill reaffirms our confidence in local law enforcement, as well as the most basic tenets of Constitutional law and values. Convicted criminals will still see the fruits of their crime confiscated by the state, but innocent Alaskans can rest easy knowing they will no longer be deprived of property without due process. Learn more here: http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_bill.asp?session=30&bill=HB0042 Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/akforfeiturereform
Petition to Eric Jewell
Stop Hermitage Pennsylvania Police From Violating Civilian Civil Liberties
I myself, and many others in the Hermitage and surrounding area have been placed in situations by patrolman Jonathan kudelko of the hermitage police department that have went against our constitutional rights as American citizens, and that have violated our civil liberties assigned by law to protect our rights. He has acted out side of his jurisdiction on multiple incidents, and lied to justify his actions. He has came onto private property, with no request for him, or any other public servant to do so. He had even issued citations outside of his jurisdiction for traffic citations without notifying the police department of the jurisdiction he was in, and trespassing on civilian owned property without permission to be on said property to issue the citations. He has treated civilians completely horrendously, and unprofessional. He needs to be suspended pending an investigation on whether he is fit, and mentally sound to be a public servant. Several complaints have been attempted, without any result, now other means to stop the harassment need to be addressed. One he needs to be relieved of duty, until a mental health evaluation can be done deciding if he is fit for duty. Two he needs to be suspended until he is investigated by the right departments to decide if he has acting in a way that goes against the way a public servant is expected to act towards citizens.
Petition to AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, President of the United States, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate
Stop Corporal Punishment
Proposal for a Bill to protect against corporal punishment in all settings of a child's life Preface: At present, more than fifty countries throughout the world prohibit corporal punishment of children in all settings. We seek to make the United States the next country to fully recognize the rights of a child. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child requires states to prohibit corporal punishment of children in all settings of their lives. As the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children states, "Corporal punishment of children is a violation of their rights to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity. It's widespread legality breaches their right to equal protection under the law." As a society, we have legislated against corporal punishment in most schools in a majority of states. However, all fifty states allow parents to "reasonably" spank their children under the guise of "discipline." While studies are mixed on the value of spanking and the lasting effects of corporal punishment and while many parents engage in such activity with the best intentions, we hold it to be self-evident that a child is inherently defenseless and therefore unable to protect themselves from being physically harmed by a parent, guardian, or caregiver. We hold that since a child is not fully developed in their physicality, mental faculties, psychological processing abilities, and emotional coping mechanisms, they are unable to deal with the trauma of being hit by someone who is supposed to protect them. We claim that no argument can be made in favor of intentionally inflicting pain on a child, nor can any valid reason be given to justify hitting a child in any way. Children are entitled to equal protection, not sanctioned violence. Thus, we call upon the members of our government to act. To achieve this goal, this petition will be delivered to every member of the United States Senate, every member of the United States House of Representatives, and to The President of The United States. It is our hope that with enough support and awareness the provisions of this proposal will be enacted into law. Proposal: The fourteenth amendment establishes citizenship and equal protection to all persons born or naturalized in America. The thirteenth amendment abolishes involuntary servitude to all citizens. The eighth amendment prohibits cruel punishment to all citizens. The fourth amendment guarantees the right of citizens to be secure in their persons and the ninth amendment upholds all implied, natural, and fundamental rights of citizens not otherwise enumerated in the Constitution of the United States of America. We believe these rights apply to all citizens at the moment of birth and remain inviolable. As such, we believe children are entitled to the protections these constitutional rights grant and imply. Explicitly, we believe these protections include the following: (1) No child shall be subject to any infringement of their fourth amendment right to be secure in their person. (2) No child shall be subject to any infringement of their eighth amendment right to be safe from cruel punishment. (3) No child shall be subject to any infringement of their thirteenth amendment right to be free from subjugation and involuntary servitude. (4) No child shall be subject to any infringement of their fourteenth amendment right to equal protection. (5) No child shall be subject to any infringement of their ninth amendment right to all implied, natural, or fundamental rights not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. (6) Infringements include, but are not limited to, any instance of physical, emotional, or psychological harm such as bullying, intimidation, coercion, forced actions, hitting, spanking, beating, cutting, slapping, pulling, pinching, burning, grabbing with force, starvation, deprivation, neglect, isolation, torture, servitude, or any similar intended or unintended act that inflicts pain, punishment, stress, or harm in any form or manner where the child feels threatened, scared, helpless, vulnerable, degraded, demeaned, and/or any situation in which a child is unable to defend their person form such actions taken against them. (7) Infringements may also include any teaching, indoctrination, instruction, or direction that produces an intended or unintended harm against a child’s physical, mental, or psychological well-being, takes advantage of a child’s lack of development, or exploits, humiliates, or demeans a child in any way. (8) Parents, guardians, caregivers, and teachers retain the rights and responsibilities of making decisions on the behalf of children to safeguard and educate children in any realm so long as such decisions made on the child’s behalf do not infringe upon the child’s rights enumerated above or cause harm to the child in any way. (9) Any violation of the rights enumerated in this bill – explicitly stated or otherwise implied – and any failure to report such violations will result in criminal penalties. Epilogue: Those who advocate for the right to life believe that a child's rights supersedes the rights of the mother. So why should those rights end after being born? It is illogical to grant rights in the womb and then strip those rights the moment a first breath is taken. Those on the Pro-Choice side believe that a woman's body should not be legislated or violated by the government. So why is it okay to legislate violence against a child? Those who have ever been enslaved, subjugated, dehumanized, or marginalized due to skin color, religion, sexuality, gender, race, or ethnicity should recognize that allowing children to be hit by anyone is immoral and unjustifiable because it makes them property of those who are allowed to hit them. We hold that it is the responsibility of society to protect children, not harm them. It is time to join the world and end corporal punishment. If we do not defend our children, who will?
Petition to Barack Obama
What happens when a bill, HB 2793 is introduced with Plagiarized and Infringed information from my Unpublished Work on 5/12/1999 which is well documented and protected in 1998? Then when I sent a handwritten Cease and Desist on 6/10/2010 The Texas Citizens Participation Act was passed. I am asking that President Obama help me Protect my First Amendment Rights and Envoke my rights under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States to request that the State of Texas, Texas Sure, and all 36 States that implemented it's policies CEASE AND DESIST and order them to file a .Petition For Temporary Restraining Order And Injunction To Enjoin Interference With Property Rights. Since I am not allowed in court. This is a sad day in Black History!! Lets turn it into a great Legacy. This is all being placed in The Circle Of Insur Gard Transparently Clear. I had your back and helped you make Change, I'm asking you as a Black man to help me to bring change. This is a Back Room Good Ole Boys deal that needs to be addressed and resolved. #BLACKRIGHTSMATTER. 511. Liability of States, instrumentalities of States, and State officials for infringement of copyright10(a) In General. — Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity, shall not be immune, under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal Court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for a violation of any of the exclusive rights of a copyright owner provided by sections 106 through 122, for importing copies of phonorecords in violation of section 602, or for any other violation under this title.(b) Remedies. — In a suit described in subsection (a) for a violation described in that subsection, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for the violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in a suit against any public or private entity other than a State, instrumentality of a State, or officer or employee of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Such remedies include impounding and disposition of infringing articles under section 503, actual damages and profits and statutory damages under section 504, costs and attorney's fees under section 505, and the remedies provided in section 510. Legislative Session: 76(R) Council Document: 76R 8833 WP-F Add to Bill List Last Action: 05/12/1999 H Failed to pass to engrossmentCaption Version: House Committee ReportCaption Text: Relating to motor vehicle insurance verification and creating the motor vehicle insurance verification program; providing administrative and criminal penalties.The Texas Citizens Participation Act is a legally cognizable First Amendment Right Violation. It was created to cover up the Infringement of a Plagiarized Unpublished Work submitted on 1-8-99 to Ex Governor George W. Bush and Lieutenant Governor Rick Perry without my knowledge or consent, And without Due Diligence!!It is an Intentional, Malicious, Malevolent, Gross Negligent, Abuse of Power for Unjust Enrichment and Intentional Tort in response to 6-16-10 Cease and Desist letter to Victor Vandergriff and Texas Sure. It violates my Human Rights, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. It also goes against The Golden Rule."Take not from others to such an extent and in such a manner that you would be resentful if they took from you." (McDonald, Non-Infringing Uses) 9 Bull. Copyright Society 466 1962.It ignores the fact that my Unpublished Work is protected, I am the author and Ex Governor George W. Bush and Lieutenant Governor Rick Perry by publishing and creating HB 2793 without my authorization Infringes on my right to decide if my Unpublished Work be made Public.The Supreme Court has held that the fact that a work is Unpublished weighs heavily against a finding of Fair Use. (Harpers & Row V Nation Enterprises, 471) US. 539 (1985)Unpublished Works can never be a Fair Use. (Salinger V Random House, Inc., 811 F2D (1987)The statute applies to lawsuits or “legal actions” (which includes claims and counterclaims that implicate First Amendment rights) filed on or after June 17, 2011.511. Liability of States, instrumentalities of States, and State officials for infringement of copyright10(a) In General. — Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity, shall not be immune, under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal Court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for a violation of any of the exclusive rights of a copyright owner provided by sections 106 through 122, for importing copies of phonorecords in violation of section 602, or for any other violation under this title.(b) Remedies. — In a suit described in subsection (a) for a violation described in that subsection, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for the violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in a suit against any public or private entity other than a State, instrumentality of a State, or officer or employee of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Such remedies include impounding and disposition of infringing articles under section 503, actual damages and profits and statutory damages under section 504, costs and attorney's fees under section 505, and the remedies provided in section 510.The statute provides for mandatory fee shifting when a party wins an Anti-SLAPP motion so that the person or entity wrongfully filing a lawsuit must pay the defense costs.The Texas Constitution article 1, Section 17 States that no persons property be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to Public Use without Adequate Compensation being made.The burden of proof is initially on the party who files the Anti-SLAPP motion to establish (by a preponderance of the evidence) that the lawsuit was filed in response to the exercise of his First Amendment rights. Then the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish (by clear and specific evidence) a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim.Prima Facie. [Latin, On the first appearance.] A fact presumed to be true unless it is disproved.