Support this Bill to GET JUSTICE for ALL COURT VICTIMS Nationwide

Support this Dr Richard I Fine Los Angeles County California Corrupt Members ignores judicial corruption victims

History of SBX 211 and AB 2960 SBX 2 11 Commencing in the mid to late 1980s California Counties and State Superior Courts began paying State Superior Court judges (Trial Court judges) payments in addition to their State Compensation. These payments were called “Supplemental or Local Judicial Benefit Payments” (payments). California Constitution, Article VI, Section 19, required Judicial State Compensation could only be set by the California Legislature. The payments were held to violate the California Constitution in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 167 Cal.App.4th 630 (2008), Review Denied, 2009). In response, the California Legislature approved and Governor Schwarzenegger signed SBX 2 11 on February 20, 2009, Effective May 20, 2009: (1) allowing the payments to continue in Section 2 and adding such as Section 68220 to the California Government Code; (2) defining the payments to include salary, compensation, benefits 401K and 457K plans in Section 3 and adding such as Section 68221 to the California Government Code; (3) stating nothing in SBX 2 11 requires the Judicial Council to pay for judicial benefits or previous benefits in Section 4 and adding such as Section 68222 to the California… Read More

QUICK EASY SHARE OPTIONS PRESS + FOR MORE

5/12/2023 US Supreme Court Petition for Rehearing filed Petition not Opposed Supreme Court Conference Set For June 8, 2023

Los Angeles California Supreme Court ignores judicial corruption victims ignoring Amend SBX 2 11

The petition for rehearing is one of the most important cases before the Supreme Court. It will require the state government executive branch, legislative branch and judicial branch to uphold their oath of office to obey the U.S. Constitution and not “war against the Constitution”. It requires the U.S. Supreme Court to follow its precedents of Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. School Board and Cooper v. Aaron requiring the Supreme Court sets the law, due process must be followed and violating the oath of office is “war against the Constitution”, respectively. To deny the Petition for Rehearing, will be to overturn these cases interpreting the Constitution from its outset. May 12 US Supreme Court Petition for Rehearing filed Loading… Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new tab Download [499.20 KB] READ THE PETITION HERE Actual Supreme Court Document location MORE ON DR. RICHARD I. FINE AND AMEND SBX 2 11 What is Wrong with the County Payments to Judges? TODAY OUR CHOICE IS: (1) VOTE “NO”; or (2) CONTINUE TO LIVE UNDER A CORRUPT JUDICIAL SYSTEM! The Dirty Truth Behind California’s $400 Million of “Supplemental Judicial Benefits” The… Read More

QUICK EASY SHARE OPTIONS PRESS + FOR MORE