It will be denied. And that will be that for the Donofrio case.
Only twice in its modern history has the Court accepted a typewritten, not printed, brief. The second one was mine, and I got that right because I politely pointed out to the Clerk that in US v. Nixon his office had accepted such a brief with a promise to print it later.
You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. This is a basic truth of human nature that Donofrio has ignored. He doesn't know what he is doing, and he is fouling the nest.
John / Billybob
I surmised that there might be such a thing as a “too aggressive” approach to the SCOTUS, but this is a subject which unavoidably engenders great passions.
I am hoping against hope that the Justices see the need for public disclosure, in spite of the awkward way in which it might be presented to them.
~~PING to #69
God bless and protect our country.
Congressman Billybob:
Would you explain please the difference between “typewritten” and “not printed”? And what courts you’ve had these dealings with?
If you’ve listent to all his prarie radio and Lam Lamphere interviews, in there - the first three days Mon17/Tues18/Wed19 before he went blotto Friday Nov 21 on the NY appellate judge’s clear misconduct as was becoming evinced by LD’s callback to NJ to assure sanctity of records passable to USSC , he was advocating and practicing respect in NOT lobbying the USSC. He didn’t want people to continue writing letters, making calls to USSC early in week.
I recall he was most informative on problems with Danny “ I AM the Supreme Court” Bickell on both Monday shows. Friday I’m sure as well he ASKED FOR HELP from lawyers who had routinely worked w/ USSC and/or historian so familiar, the STAY being so unusual and his requests for assistance from USSC clerks being entirely ignored. He cited as I recall a Sec 22.1 of the manual for such and that such STAY request be IMMEDIATELY forwarded by the clerk.
I went a dite daft trying to transcribe some of this given the way one can’t scroll back and forth thru the shows to get it straight and am not a lawyer. Maybe there is greater transcription available now.
In any case I repeat question and further query what precisely you mean and to what you are referring in the USSC submission. Has Donofrio submitted a single original without printed COPIES (you are obviously missing a word here)? I find this very hard to believe given this being near-exact problem he had with the obstructionist NY appellate judge and his clerk – they attempting to get LD to submit improperly thru their own offices as I recall originals WITHOUT sufficient copying etc. Sure wish someone would transcribe these broadcasts.
I’ve certainly followed these things enough to realize it is key to know when additional materials may be added to an original action with two prominent examples: LD (being blocked) by the NJ appellate and Berg with excess additions (coming late). Now you have forwarded this contention, and rather flatly and without clear reference.