Climate refile 17-1042- added meet

US Court of Appeals

Addenum to existing Complaint

 

 

Darrell Prince                                      : Case Number 17-042

(347)286-8248

 

  1. USA

 

Plaintiff’s Direct Plea to the Court

 

Your honor(s). With the permission of the Court, I will address it directly. As the Court is no doubt aware, the Constitution is conspicuously sparse on anything that can be construed as environmental, nor the Commons (air, water) nor anything about any resource management at all- representative of the problems with basing the core root of a bureaucracy now similar in size(2.8 million) to the Constitution’s citizenry (3.9 million) the 1790 census enumeration. Not as surprising when at the time, Manhattan was still home to lush original forest, and served lobsters from the Hudson Bay. California and Texas were years away from the floods of illegal immigrants that would come, Americans sneaking across the border into Mexico to steal Mexican prosperity. To be honest though, it was not even unknown at the time our common trust doctrine is pretty much adopted as stare decisis from the English common law

Despite this very serious deficiency in a foundational document, this document will, very eloquently, demonstrate passages both oft-used and novel in the text that responsibility  of the government is to protect it’s people from great threats, and the government itself has already determined that this is a great threat, and this complaint is simply asking the Court to do it’s part, necessary at this critical juncture,to determine the government’s status in terms of dealing with this threat on a reasonable focus to the scope and the scale of the threat that may threaten the species of Homo sapiens.

For the motivation for the people of this Court, I would ask, for your relief, that you instead of looking to find reasons not to act, that you look for reasons to act. As this is a test for you, for the function for which you have sworn an oath to the United States, and more importantly, to it’s people. You have become, literally one of the most powerful human beings on the planet Earth

These are facts:

 

It is 70 degrees in February, after the 3rd consecutive hottest year on record.

 

Scientists, who are on a mission for truth that can be proven, who predict the weather days and weeks in advance, have been saying that this was going to happen for decades, and in fact, it turns out that the less vocal it’s way worse people, are more right than the over exposed it’s not a big deal people.

 

Snake oil- excuse me, your honor, Oil salesman, who are focused, and on a mission to make sure oil sales are as high as they can be, and all words truth or otherwise exist to serve that goal, as are all of the people they work with, or contribute money to stand on the other side of those scientists. Once there was no change, and now, it’s always been changing, much like the story.

 

It is, at this moment, more likely that catastrophe is coming, that we will not be able to stop it, and that either global warming is here early, or the apocalyptic end of days is upon us or both.

 

In either event, I would suggest erring on the side of positive action to the best of your abilities and choosing actual powers over standard conventions. Because when someone asks about what is going on right now, this time this era, whether it turns out for good or for bad, I would like you to be able to say you took action to preserve your country, your people your family and friends, rather than court conventions.

 

Because to have a real chance, we must cut through the nonsense, now, and focus 100% on what must be done.

Questions

  1. Can the government issue permits, or continue to allow behavior, found to be very risky to citizen health?
  2. Do citizens have a positive right, to expect the US government to take positive action, and any and all steps to guarantee the safety of the Republic itself? Is there a threshold for guaranteed action?
  3. What is the allowable standard for permitting risky behavior by the federal government, that includes the deaths of millions, and the loss of trillions of dollars in public property?

1%?  5%? 50%?

  1. What constitutes definitive appropriate action to protect preventable death, in terms of legal coverage, and budget applied?
  2. What percentage of consensus amongst the experts, constitutes facts, or actionable intelligence that no competent member of the government should question?
  3. What constitutes dereliction of duty, or treason, in terms of actions taken, or refusal to act in the clear best interests of the country, at the paid, or unpaid bequest of another party or parties?

 

 

 

Summary

CO2 releases since the industrial revolution have increased CO2 to a level not found since 10 to 15 million years ago, when the global average surface temperature was up to 11°F warmer than now and almost all ice had melted, raising world sea-levels to about 100 feet higher than today’s.[26]

 

Jurisdiction

 

This action is brought pursuant to the United States Constitution. It is authorized

by Article III, Section 2, which extends the federal judicial power to all cases arising in equity

under the Constitution.  It is a Controversy directly involving the United States “The identification and protection of fundamental rights is an enduring

part of the judicial duty to interpret the Constitution.” Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ____, slip.

  1. at 10 (2015). That grant of equitable jurisdiction requires Article III courts to apply the

underlying principles of the Constitution to new circumstances unforeseen by the framers, such

. An actual controversy has arisen and exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants because Defendants have placed Plaintiffs in a dangerous situation, continue to infringe upon Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights, and have abrogated their duty of care to ensure Plaintiffs’ reasonable safety, among other violations of law. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to redress the harms herein, which are of a continuing nature and which, if left unresolved, will be irreversible.

This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), 28

U.S.C. § 2201 (creation of a remedy), and 28 U.S.C. § 2202 (further relief)
28 U.S. Code § 1651(all writs) as this action arises

under the laws of the United States.

 

Jurisdiction will come from of course, as always from Article III powers as interpreted from (Marbury v Madison). The relevant portions of the Constitution are due process from the 5th and 14th amendments- no citizen should be harmed by U.S. or state action, directly or indirectly. Finally most importantly and directly, article 4 section 4- the Guarantee clause. It is one of the few positive rights listed in the Constitution. There is a standard from Luther v. Borden of saying it is non enforceable as a “political question”, and refers complainants back to Congress.  Good idea. Let’s keep the courts on non political matters like, religion in schools, desegregation, abortion, but don’t wander into controversial political topics people might be hardened against reasonable debate on and could potentially come up with an out of control Congress. Especially when the complainants want a ruling on something completely outside what federal courts do,  like judge from the bulk of American history and documents, what the definition of what a republican government is, and the duties of the federal government in enforcing that guarantee to the citizens of every state.  The dominant and countervailing argument is in the given name of the clause- the GUARANTEE clause. If you talk to a car salesman, and he says he guarantees a car will operate for 10 years, and you ask well, in the event of the break down, what would be the process, and he says, oh, not my department, Plaintiff makes the recommendation that you buy elsewhere, and humbly suggests a higher standard for the American Republic  It is the strongest language in the Constitution, and names the entire government, not just Congress, with the responsibility of providing a republic government, and to protect the country from external destruction, naming specifically invasion. It’s easy to see why this portion has never been used- the United States is nearly uninvadable by foreign powers; the last time a foreign soldier at war with the United States set foot in the United States was 1812, or perhaps, a careful study might yield a debatable scenario that occurred in the Spanish American war. In any event, 3000 miles of ocean to each side, nuclear weapons and satellite technology make foreign military invasion approximately as likely as alien invasion, for the near immediate future, without serious treason and dysfunction of the elected officials.

The important part, is that the entire US government is committed, by law, to preserve the shape of a republic, in form and in function and to maintain it against dissolution.

This is remarkably consistent, and provides a straight line from providing for the common defense, domestic tranquility, and the role of government, being, to protect the fundamental rights of the people, amongst those being life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, with a requisite duty of the people to alter or abolish said government should it fail to do so.

 

Plaintiff claims that climate change is the single greatest threat to the American Republic that it has ever encountered.

Plaintiff claims that the US government has knowingly, aided and abetted in the permitting, technology development, subsidization of the fossil fuel industry.

Plaintiff alleges that the US government has clearly acted, and spent more in defense of potential future sources of fossil fuels, than it would have taken to develop renewable sources of the same energy quantity that would produce dozens if not hundreds of times the energy out put.

Plaintiff accuses the US government of being the largest single emitter in the world, and spending more on fossil fuel expenditures than it does on renewable technology development.

Plaintiff claims much of Congress fails to act due to illegal emoluments in the form of campaign finance.

 

Plaintiff claims that to the best of his knowledge the timeframe, the window to act, to preserve  is now, after more than 40 years of inaction, small enough that all urgency is due to this and all actions.

Plaintiff claims that the Guarantee Clause, the Preamble, and the Declaration of Independence state a clear responsibility and definition of government as that body empowered by the will of the people to defend the people from any harms it finds restraining the life, liberty or pursuit of happiness, or property.

 

 

 

 

____________ _________                                                       _________________

Darrell Prince                                                                                                  Date

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A Arrhenhius publishing a Global Warming book 1906

 

Världarnas utveckling (1906) (German: Das Werden der Welten [1907], English: Worlds in the Making [1908]) directed at a general audience, where he suggested that the human emission of CO2 would be strong enough to prevent the world from entering a new ice age, and that a warmer earth would be needed to feed the rapidly increasing population:

 

“To a certain extent the temperature of the earth’s surface, as we shall presently see, is conditioned by the properties of the atmosphere surrounding it, and particularly by the permeability of the latter for the rays of heat.” (p46)

“That the atmospheric envelopes limit the heat losses from the planets had been suggested about 1800 by the great French physicist Fourier. His ideas were further developed afterwards by Pouillet and Tyndall. Their theory has been styled the hot-house theory, because they thought that the atmosphere acted after the manner of the glass panes of hot-houses.” (p51)

“If the quantity of carbonic acid [ CO2 + H2O H2CO3 (carbonic acid) ] in the air should sink to one-half its present percentage, the temperature would fall by about 4°; a diminution to one-quarter would reduce the temperature by 8°. On the other hand, any doubling of the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air would raise the temperature of the earth’s surface by 4°; and if the carbon dioxide were increased fourfold, the temperature would rise by 8°.” (p53)

“Although the sea, by absorbing carbonic acid, acts as a regulator of huge capacity, which takes up about five-sixths of the produced carbonic acid, we yet recognize that the slight percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere may by the advances of industry be changed to a noticeable degree in the course of a few centuries.” (p54)

“Since, now, warm ages have alternated with glacial periods, even after man appeared on the earth, we have to ask ourselves: Is it probable that we shall in the coming geological ages be visited by a new ice period that will drive us from our temperate countries into the hotter climates of Africa? There does not appear to be much ground for such an apprehension. The enormous combustion of coal by our industrial establishments suffices to increase the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air to a perceptible degree.” (p61)

“We often hear lamentations that the coal stored up in the earth is wasted by the present generation without any thought of the future, and we are terrified by the awful destruction of life and property which has followed the volcanic eruptions of our days. We may find a kind of consolation in the consideration that here, as in every other case, there is good mixed with the evil. By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind.” (p63)

 

 

Exhibit B Global Warming Feedback loops

Understanding Positive (increasing warming) Feedback Loops That May Promote Runaway Global Warming

 

Rather than define feedback loops (or reciprocal associations), and positive versus negative feedback loops in general terms, below are simplified, key examples of positive (increasing warming) feedback loops that may promote runaway global warming.

Note: For these purposes, where the term “posivitive feedback loop” is used, it indicates “positive (increasing warming) feedback loop.

(Key for reading the diagrams: an arrow pointing up = increase; an arrow pointing down = decrease; a horizontal gray or curved blue arrow = causes)

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #1

Our burning of coal and oil releases CO2 which traps heat in the atmosphere. That extra heat puts more water into the atmosphere in two ways: the warming accelerates the evaporation of surface waters and, also, as the air warms, it holds more water – thus creating a positive feedback “loop” between water vapor and temperature, initiated by an increase in atmospheric CO2.

Example #1 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #2

As the increase in atmospheric CO2 increases air temperature, it promotes the thawing of the permafrost (frozen ground in the tundra) which contains large quantities of CO2 from the bacterial decomposition of previously frozen vegetation and animal life. Briefly, any increase in atmospheric CO2 leads to an increase in temperature which leads to further increase in temperature due increase release of CO2 from the thawing permafrost – thus creating a positive feedback “loop” between increased atmospheric CO2 and temperature.

Example #2 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #3

A related feedback loop from the warming atmosphere and the thawing of the permafrost is the release of previously frozen methane into the atmosphere. Methane traps about 30 times more heat than CO2, although it stays in the atmosphere for on the order of decades as opposed to centuries for CO2 -thus atmospheric warming initiates a feedback loop involving previously frozen methane.

Example #3 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #4

Another feedback loop involves the release of methane from the deep sea beds. At sufficient depths, large amount of frozen methane are stored on the sea beds as methane clathrates – frozen clumps of methane.  But as the atmosphere and, hence, the seas warm, they will eventually melt the clathrates which will escape into the atmosphere, further warming the atmosphere – thus atmospheric warming initiates a feedback loop involves the release of previously frozen methane clathrates.

Example #4 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #5

A different type of positive feedback loop coming into play as the atmosphere and bodies of water warm involves the melting of the north polar ice (and land glaciers) that reflects 90% of radiant energy to expose water that absorbs 94% of the solar energy and thus increases warming which in turn reduces arctic ice and so on. The same sort of “decreasing reflectivity” loop is occurring where land ice glaciers are melting and exposing much more heat absorbent surfaces which in turn increase atmospheric warming and so on.

Example #5 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #6

Another different kind of positive feedback loop coming into play as the earth warms is the decline of forests which absorb CO2 from the atmosphere , i.e. constitute CO2 “sinks”, reducing warming, because (i) of die offs once the temperature exceeds a species’ thermal maximum, (ii) increasing forests fires caused by increasing storms’ lightning – especially for dead forests, drought affected forests, and insect infestations that kill off forests or otherwise make them more vulnerable to burn more easily.

Example #6 Diagram

 

Positive Feedback Loop: Example #7

A unique case of a warming feedback loop promoting forest decline that can cause rapid, dramatic warming involves warming to a level that will result in the collapse/disappearance of the Amazonian forest and release of CO2 because of increased bacterial decomposition at the “floor” of the great forest. The Amazon rain forest is such that it fosters its own precipitation level to sustain the forest. As warming increases, it reduces the rainfall in the Amazon and forest will, effectively, begin to dry out and take less CO2 out of the atmosphere. When temperature has increased enough the Amazon rain forest (and great CO2” sink”) will collapse and the warmed soil and bacterial decomposition will yield an amount of carbon (CO2) greater than that in all living vegetation.

Example #7 Diagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emergency Injunction- Climate II

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se                    Case Number      17-1042

IN THE UNITED STATES EASTERN DISTRICT COURT FOR PENNSYLVANIA

DARRELL PRINCE, Plaintiff in Pro Se

V.

Defendants

Majority Leader of United States Senate;

Mitch McConnell

317 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

The President of U.S. Senate;

Vice President Joseph Biden

1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Washington, D.C. 20510

President Pro Tempore of U.S. Senate;

Orrin Hatch

104 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Minority Leader Of U.S. Senate;

Charles Schumer

322 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Speaker of United States House of Representatives;

Paul Ryan

1233 Longworth House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515

Minority Leader of                                                                                                                                    United States House of Representatives;

Nancy Pelosi,

233 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515

Scott Pruitt

2777 Crystal Dr,

Arlington, VA 22202

Jeff Sessions

50 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW Washington, DC 20530-0001

Rex Tillerson

Donald J Trump,

1400 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC 201515

US Government et al;

Request for Emergency Accelerated Hearing on

Application for an Ex Parte or Temporary Restraining Order

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65 (a)

Order to Show Cause Why This Temporary

Restraining Order Should Not Be Granted

Emergency Request to enjoin United States Government Officers from engaging in further behavior arresting or impeding environmental protection processes

Temporary Restraining Order against Officers of

United States Senate, Senate Officers

Mitch McConnell Majority Leader,

Joseph Biden President of United States Senate,

Orrin Hatch President Pro Tem United States Senate

Charles Schumer, Minority Leader of U.S. Senate

And against Officers of United States House

House of Representative

Paul Ryan, Speaker of the United States House of

Representatives,

Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader United States

House of Representatives,

Donald J Trump, Jeffrey Sessions, Scott Pruitt ,

And any officers of environmental or scientific organizations to preserve any data, processes , programs, or staff as are currently in place as necessary to the functioning and the Defense of the Republic, to protect and preserve life as unpolluted with the wastes of Interstate Commerce

MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

UNDER F.R.C.P. RULES 65 (a)

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff moves this court for the entry of an ex parte or  temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo pending hearing and resolution of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Respectfully Submitted,

__________________________________

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se

AFFIDAVIT OF URGENT NEED OF ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER,

Plaintiff, hereby states that there is an urgent need for this U.S. Appellate in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to issue this proposed ex parte or, failing that,  temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo until this court, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court give rulings on the merits of substantial claims made in the civil complaint of this case. The issuance of the temporary restraining order is necessary to protect the citizens of the United States of America from  a clear and present danger to the Republic. The wastes of interstate and international  Commerce, regulated by the US Government, (defendants) are causing irreparable harm to citizens in the form of early deaths (estimated at 200,000 per year) and the current degredation of the atmosphere, and threatening the integrity of the Republic itself, as well as that of human civilization at large.

  • it has no adequate remedy other than an injunction (such as money damages);

This truly not relevant to the scope of this requested order; the apparent election of these officials gives them leave to radically alter policies in the US government, and they have promised to do so, in

a manner that has been demonstrably proven to be the exact cause for this complaint, detrimental to the life, liberty and property of the citizens of this country, en masse, and thus ask

(2) truly irreparable harm will occur in the absence of an injunction;

Various members of this administration have taken very deliberate stance with the potential for harm  to environmental data, the subject of Climate change. One of the members of the administration, the person occupying the office of the Secretary of State is still party to the lawsuit as the chief Executive of Exxon Mobil for deliberately deceiving the public as to the dangers of global warming.

The prospective EPA chair has a court order requiring the release of emails with the oil and gas industry, and denies that man-made global warming is a real thing.

The person occupying the office of the President,  has publicly denied the existence of man made global warming, promised to pull the United States out of the Paris peace accords.

Congress has passed a bill slashing climate change funding at NASA

It’s 70 degrees in February in the Northeast, in the 3rd consecutive hottest year ever. We have no more time to deal with people who deny the existence of obvious problems.  Especially because there are feedback loops. The pace of warming will continue to accelerate, and the warming of today, may be the result of Reagan era emissions at worst, and Bush era emissions at a minimum.  See exhibit B in the Addendum.

(3) it is more likely than not that the moving party will prevail on the underlying merits when the matter ultimately goes to trial;

  1. The issue of CO2, and methane’s effect on warming the lower atmosphere, is literally a subject of no debate amongst serious scientists, including people who deny that it is a major factor today(Richard Lindzen, Prager U, MIT (https://www.prageru.com/courses/environmental-science/climate-change-what-do-scientists-say @ 2:20), as it has been accepted as fact,  by the scientific community for nearly 200 years, that without which, life on earth would not exist.
  2. Just the United States, just from Oil, from puts 15 billion pounds of CO2 (calculated from the 33 million barrels of oil burned per day statistic, available and widely used by the oil and gas industry). into the atmosphere, each, and every day of the year, not counting coal, and not counting methane, which is an under reported factor-having 86 time the warming effect over a 25 year time span- we literally are not measuring it- so the total man made effect of greenhouse gases is not fully quantitated
  3. CO2 levels in 1950 were at 280 PPM, close to the record high, over the last 400,000 years. 2017 they are at 410 PPM, the highest in 4 million years

source: NASA.gov

Match of CO2 data, and Antarctic Temperature

  1. The reputation of weather prediction service is unassailable in the public opinion, and is perhaps the most regularly checked service in the world, predicting with accuracy days and weeks ahead, what the weather will be like. This service is a large subset of the oft quoted 97% of scientists believe in man made global warming

“Science distinguishes itself from all other branches of human pursuit by its power to probe and understand the behavior of nature on a level that allows us to predict with accuracy, if not control, the outcomes of events in the natural world. Science especially enhances our health, wealth, and security, which is greater today for more people on Earth than at any other time in human history.” 
Neil DeGrasse Tyson
From Skeptical Inquiry magazine Sept/Oct 2016

  1. Recent effects. The world has just experienced the third consecutive hottest year on record, as a fact.  Anecdotally, it has been noticed, that for three consecutive Christmases, temperatures have exceeded 60 degrees in the Northeast United States. It’s been warming, as predicted, by people who generally do a good job of predicting the weather weeks and months out- and denied by people who do a lot of selling of fossil fuel and fossil fuel products.

(4) the benefit to the party seeking the injunction outweighs the burden of the party opposed to the injunction;

(5) the moving party’s right to the relief sought is clear.

The risks posed to the populace at large are beyond significant, they are catastrophic. Famine,  loss of cities,  20+ millions of refugees from coastal cities, all of them in the United states, trillions of dollars lost. Disease becomes more likely in these scenarios, as does wars, and the possibility for dissolution of the Republic.

The chances of it happening? As good as they can be –warming was predicted, warming is clearly happening. 97% percent of the relevant scientific community has spoken. It is highly doubtful that you could get 97% of humans to agree that they breathe air.  For argument’s sake, let’s call that 85%. That would be an 8-1 Supreme Court decision, or an election in which 1 candidate won 85% of the vote.  The best technical term for such a clear victory is actually a colloquialism “beatdown”.Simply unimaginable.  While all branches of human learning relies on prevailing opinions of the day- subjective to the whims and tides of prevailing thoughts of the day- the work of scientists

The risk here, is as clear as can be- and the associated risks- like the 200,000 early deaths per year in the US attributed to pollution, which would be solved in the same set of processes that gets  CO2 and methane  emissions  reduced significantly.

Contrast this with the annual numerical American death toll due to foreign born terrorists- less than 25 per year going back to 9/11, and nearly 3000 on 9/11. So provided hear is the overly kind to opposing ideas doctrine. 10% of the pollution deaths EVERY YEAR is 5 times the number of Americans who have died from foreign born terrorists in the LAST FIFTEEN YEARS, and we spend maybe a billion on the former and at least 150 billion on the latter.

  1. Does the US government have a responsibility to take actions- appropriate measures to act to protect the citizens, from major threats? To protect them from it’s own actions, and those of the businesses it regulates?
  2. Does the consensus opinion of the previous President, the scientific agencies with in the Government, the Pentagon, as well as the consensus opinions of every major scientific body on the planet constitute a threat?
  3. What constitutes a real action to preserve those citizens, on the scale of the threat?

(5) the moving party’s right to the relief sought is clear.

For greater length exposition into the doctrine of Standing- see Civil Action 16-6702.

John Marshall, who stated in the Virginia ratifying convention: “Congress is empowered to make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction, as to law and fact, of the Supreme Court. These exceptions certainly go as far as the legislature may think proper for the interest and liberty of the people.” However, this was prior to the adoption of the 1st Amendment.

Pursuant to the 1st Amendment right to Petition for the right to redress of Grievances, for which Congress shall make no law (implying thusly that court doctrines, approved by Congress) restrict the right of, Plaintiff submits this grievance.  Pursuant to the Guarantee Clause, in which the entire United States Government is pledged to provide a Republic in perpetuity, pursuant to the 5th amendment due process clause which states that neither life liberty nor property shall be taken from,  nor threat of same, without due process of law, Plaintiff claims that due process. Pursuant to the official document that began the American Experiment, the very definition of a legal document, Plaintiff claims the right to alter or abolish a government that has become detrimental to his rights as a citizen.

Pursuant to the Actual text of Article III, this case directly relates to a Controversy involving the US federal government, involving the stability of the Plaintiff’s   life,  life’s work and  passions(see 2-12-cv-03787) and the future of all of Plaintiff’s  family members.

___________________________ Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se     date

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se                    Case Number      17-1042

IN THE UNITED STATES EASTERN DISTRICT COURT FOR PENNSYLVANIA

DARRELL PRINCE, Plaintiff in Pro Se

V.

Defendants

Majority Leader of United States Senate;

Mitch McConnell

317 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

The President of U.S. Senate;

Vice President Joseph Biden

1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Washington, D.C. 20510

President Pro Tempore of U.S. Senate;

Orrin Hatch

104 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Minority Leader Of U.S. Senate;

Charles Schumer

322 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Speaker of United States House of Representatives;

Paul Ryan

1233 Longworth House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515

Minority Leader of                                                                                                                                    United States House of Representatives;

Nancy Pelosi,

233 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515

Scott Pruitt

2777 Crystal Dr,

Arlington, VA 22202

Jeff Sessions

50 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW Washington, DC 20530-0001

Rex Tillerson

Donald J Trump,

1400 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC 201515

US Government et al;

Request for Emergency Accelerated Hearing on

Application for an Ex Parte or Temporary Restraining Order

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65 (a)

Order to Show Cause Why This Temporary

Restraining Order Should Not Be Granted

Emergency Request to enjoin United States Government Officers from engaging in further behavior arresting or impeding environmental protection processes

Temporary Restraining Order against Officers of

United States Senate, Senate Officers

Mitch McConnell Majority Leader,

Joseph Biden President of United States Senate,

Orrin Hatch President Pro Tem United States Senate

Charles Schumer, Minority Leader of U.S. Senate

And against Officers of United States House

House of Representative

Paul Ryan, Speaker of the United States House of

Representatives,

Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader United States

House of Representatives,

Donald J Trump, Jeffrey Sessions, Scott Pruitt ,

And any officers of environmental or scientific organizations to preserve any data, processes , programs, or staff as are currently in place as necessary to the functioning and the Defense of the Republic, to protect and preserve life as unpolluted with the wastes of Interstate Commerce

MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

UNDER F.R.C.P. RULES 65 (a)

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff moves this court for the entry of an ex parte or  temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo pending hearing and resolution of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Respectfully Submitted,

__________________________________

Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se

AFFIDAVIT OF URGENT NEED OF ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER,

Plaintiff, hereby states that there is an urgent need for this U.S. Appellate in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to issue this proposed ex parte or, failing that,  temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo until this court, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court give rulings on the merits of substantial claims made in the civil complaint of this case. The issuance of the temporary restraining order is necessary to protect the citizens of the United States of America from  a clear and present danger to the Republic. The wastes of interstate and international  Commerce, regulated by the US Government, (defendants) are causing irreparable harm to citizens in the form of early deaths (estimated at 200,000 per year) and the current degredation of the atmosphere, and threatening the integrity of the Republic itself, as well as that of human civilization at large.

  • it has no adequate remedy other than an injunction (such as money damages);

This truly not relevant to the scope of this requested order; the apparent election of these officials gives them leave to radically alter policies in the US government, and they have promised to do so, in

a manner that has been demonstrably proven to be the exact cause for this complaint, detrimental to the life, liberty and property of the citizens of this country, en masse, and thus ask

(2) truly irreparable harm will occur in the absence of an injunction;

Various members of this administration have taken very deliberate stance with the potential for harm  to environmental data, the subject of Climate change. One of the members of the administration, the person occupying the office of the Secretary of State is still party to the lawsuit as the chief Executive of Exxon Mobil for deliberately deceiving the public as to the dangers of global warming.

The prospective EPA chair has a court order requiring the release of emails with the oil and gas industry, and denies that man-made global warming is a real thing.

The person occupying the office of the President,  has publicly denied the existence of man made global warming, promised to pull the United States out of the Paris peace accords.

Congress has passed a bill slashing climate change funding at NASA

It’s 70 degrees in February in the Northeast, in the 3rd consecutive hottest year ever. We have no more time to deal with people who deny the existence of obvious problems.  Especially because there are feedback loops. The pace of warming will continue to accelerate, and the warming of today, may be the result of Reagan era emissions at worst, and Bush era emissions at a minimum.  See exhibit B in the Addendum.

(3) it is more likely than not that the moving party will prevail on the underlying merits when the matter ultimately goes to trial;

  1. The issue of CO2, and methane’s effect on warming the lower atmosphere, is literally a subject of no debate amongst serious scientists, including people who deny that it is a major factor today(Richard Lindzen, Prager U, MIT (https://www.prageru.com/courses/environmental-science/climate-change-what-do-scientists-say @ 2:20), as it has been accepted as fact,  by the scientific community for nearly 200 years, that without which, life on earth would not exist.
  2. Just the United States, just from Oil, from puts 15 billion pounds of CO2 (calculated from the 33 million barrels of oil burned per day statistic, available and widely used by the oil and gas industry). into the atmosphere, each, and every day of the year, not counting coal, and not counting methane, which is an under reported factor-having 86 time the warming effect over a 25 year time span- we literally are not measuring it- so the total man made effect of greenhouse gases is not fully quantitated
  3. CO2 levels in 1950 were at 280 PPM, close to the record high, over the last 400,000 years. 2017 they are at 410 PPM, the highest in 4 million years

source: NASA.gov

Match of CO2 data, and Antarctic Temperature

  1. The reputation of weather prediction service is unassailable in the public opinion, and is perhaps the most regularly checked service in the world, predicting with accuracy days and weeks ahead, what the weather will be like. This service is a large subset of the oft quoted 97% of scientists believe in man made global warming

“Science distinguishes itself from all other branches of human pursuit by its power to probe and understand the behavior of nature on a level that allows us to predict with accuracy, if not control, the outcomes of events in the natural world. Science especially enhances our health, wealth, and security, which is greater today for more people on Earth than at any other time in human history.” 
Neil DeGrasse Tyson
From Skeptical Inquiry magazine Sept/Oct 2016

  1. Recent effects. The world has just experienced the third consecutive hottest year on record, as a fact.  Anecdotally, it has been noticed, that for three consecutive Christmases, temperatures have exceeded 60 degrees in the Northeast United States. It’s been warming, as predicted, by people who generally do a good job of predicting the weather weeks and months out- and denied by people who do a lot of selling of fossil fuel and fossil fuel products.

(4) the benefit to the party seeking the injunction outweighs the burden of the party opposed to the injunction;

(5) the moving party’s right to the relief sought is clear.

The risks posed to the populace at large are beyond significant, they are catastrophic. Famine,  loss of cities,  20+ millions of refugees from coastal cities, all of them in the United states, trillions of dollars lost. Disease becomes more likely in these scenarios, as does wars, and the possibility for dissolution of the Republic.

The chances of it happening? As good as they can be –warming was predicted, warming is clearly happening. 97% percent of the relevant scientific community has spoken. It is highly doubtful that you could get 97% of humans to agree that they breathe air.  For argument’s sake, let’s call that 85%. That would be an 8-1 Supreme Court decision, or an election in which 1 candidate won 85% of the vote.  The best technical term for such a clear victory is actually a colloquialism “beatdown”.Simply unimaginable.  While all branches of human learning relies on prevailing opinions of the day- subjective to the whims and tides of prevailing thoughts of the day- the work of scientists

The risk here, is as clear as can be- and the associated risks- like the 200,000 early deaths per year in the US attributed to pollution, which would be solved in the same set of processes that gets  CO2 and methane  emissions  reduced significantly.

Contrast this with the annual numerical American death toll due to foreign born terrorists- less than 25 per year going back to 9/11, and nearly 3000 on 9/11. So provided hear is the overly kind to opposing ideas doctrine. 10% of the pollution deaths EVERY YEAR is 5 times the number of Americans who have died from foreign born terrorists in the LAST FIFTEEN YEARS, and we spend maybe a billion on the former and at least 150 billion on the latter.

  1. Does the US government have a responsibility to take actions- appropriate measures to act to protect the citizens, from major threats? To protect them from it’s own actions, and those of the businesses it regulates?
  2. Does the consensus opinion of the previous President, the scientific agencies with in the Government, the Pentagon, as well as the consensus opinions of every major scientific body on the planet constitute a threat?
  3. What constitutes a real action to preserve those citizens, on the scale of the threat?

(5) the moving party’s right to the relief sought is clear.

For greater length exposition into the doctrine of Standing- see Civil Action 16-6702.

John Marshall, who stated in the Virginia ratifying convention: “Congress is empowered to make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction, as to law and fact, of the Supreme Court. These exceptions certainly go as far as the legislature may think proper for the interest and liberty of the people.” However, this was prior to the adoption of the 1st Amendment.

Pursuant to the 1st Amendment right to Petition for the right to redress of Grievances, for which Congress shall make no law (implying thusly that court doctrines, approved by Congress) restrict the right of, Plaintiff submits this grievance.  Pursuant to the Guarantee Clause, in which the entire United States Government is pledged to provide a Republic in perpetuity, pursuant to the 5th amendment due process clause which states that neither life liberty nor property shall be taken from,  nor threat of same, without due process of law, Plaintiff claims that due process. Pursuant to the official document that began the American Experiment, the very definition of a legal document, Plaintiff claims the right to alter or abolish a government that has become detrimental to his rights as a citizen.

Pursuant to the Actual text of Article III, this case directly relates to a Controversy involving the US federal government, involving the stability of the Plaintiff’s   life,  life’s work and  passions(see 2-12-cv-03787) and the future of all of Plaintiff’s  family members.

___________________________ Darrell Prince, Plaintiff in Pro Se     date

Decertify 2016 Election and Revote Suit

We have initiated a petition for redress of grievances, with a formal ask for a decertification of the election results, and a revote. Overwhelming evidence exists that the whole election has been spoiled beyond saving, as the only thing proven was that illegal voter suppression tactics work. We will be filing a motion for emergency injunctive relief based upon these findings to halt any actions by the people previously believed to have been elected.

(1)Illegal electors- This election should never have been certified. There are confirmed reports of dual position electorships, up to 50, notably Pam Bondi, Florida’s Secretary of State, and several from North Carolina outside of state law mandated electoral districts. Without these as legitimate elector votes, the electoral college vote failed to meet the threshold for victory. Seeing this as other, is de facto ordering clemency for election crimes. The votes MUST be retallied. https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=788otalK
(2)Crosscheck program-a Republican party initiative single, cross state program purging voter rolls, of apparently 7 million voters out of 110 million- 6%, which has been shown to disproportionately affect Asian black and Hispanic voters, violating the 15th amendment. THis has hopelessy polluted election results http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890
(a)7 million is an extraordinary number of voter purges- even if less than 40% actually voted, it is easy to see how careful planning of the sort associated with gerrymandering could turn that into an election day victory
The burden of proof in denying voters right to vote is on the state. The state has no proof these people have, or were planning to vote in multiple states, nor even, if these really are the same people, so no crime is committed to warrant removal of the voting right.However a 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights, or 18 U.S. Code § 242 under color of law, are certainly crimes to commit intentional deprivation of voter rights

(b)A cross state program, may not be legal without Congressional oversight
The alleged slanting of voter purges against Black, Hispanic and Asian voters is a clear 15th amendment violation.
(c)The failure to adjust electors via 14th Amendment Section 2- if states deliberately implement vote stripping, so too must electors and House Reps be stripped to match- and this must be considered BEFORE implementing such a widespread program.
(d)This cross state program was conducted primarily by one party, with no oversight, and no accountability to the public, one which has publicly over decades, admitted a goal of suppressing votes
(e)Such a program demands a public accounting of the formulas used-any court or legislative body must be aware of Murphy’s law, that anything that can happen, particularly with regards to money and power shifts, will happen. The maintenance of such a program in the dark is essentially a formal request for malfeasance.
(3)The election fails the State department’s own certification processes. Exit polls in 24 of 28 states displayed a consistent shift towards Trump in numbers far exceeding the margins for error up to 8%. Handcounted ballots in Europe average 1% of exit polls.
(4)Voter rights act unnecessary theory, put forth by the court, proved to have been incorrect and overly optimistic:
(5)14 section 2 prisoner reapportionment- the text of the Constitution, and the one person, one vote principle, as well as event the 2/3 compromise suggest that having a large body of disenfranchised voters who make the remaining voters more powerful was specifically something the Constitution has again and again attempted to prevent, and likely far outside the boundaries of what was intended- with nearly 6 million people in this circumstance, it seems likely In the present locked 435 convention, the lack of apportionment is likely a large shift of several electors from red to blue states. This is certainly not a matter to be decided by
(6)Alleged Russian involvement in hacking- external influence must always be monitored, and in this case there seems to have been very close ties- and large financial transactions in the 10’s and perhaps 100’s of millions of dollars, lied about, publicly
(7)Emoluments clause- Both The President elect and are deeply invested in businesses that are hopelessly entangled in international affairs.
The President elect’s Washington DC hotel has already benefited from his new status. What is the function of Blind Trust, foundations with regards to investments? Declaratory Relief is specifically sought in this, as well as historical analysis of the financial transactions of t
the incoming Secretary of State’s relationship and stock in reflect a deep commitment to an industry –oil- whose future must be considered as a matter of great national security risk to the future of the republic, national interests, and the lives of the American people.

Darrell Prince

Motion for immediate action on Climate Change filed 12-30-2016 US Court of Appeals Pennsylvania Eastern District

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DARRELL PRINCE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND ACCOMPANYING MEMORANDUM OF LAW
COME NOW Plantiff Darrell Prince, pursuant to Constitutional law here move this Honorable Court for emergency injunctive relief, and in support would state as follows:

1. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
1. The federal government of the United States of America, has been aware of a massive threat to the Republic for nearly 40 years- dating back to the Nixon administration, there were memos about losing cities. The observations, and theoretical framework have been built upon since before the Civil War, by scientific founding fathers like Tyndale, Fourier, and early 20th century Arrhenius(Nobel prize laureate)
2. CO2 levels have increased by 43% over the last 50 years- the US, just from oil, puts 15 billion pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere, every day. Methane has increased by similar amounts, and is 86 times more powerful a greenhouse gas.
3. Global warming is, the heating of the Earth, because of fossil fuel burning, releasing heat, and CO2, and methane, which act as insulation for the earth. It is the insulation due to gases that allows temperatures on the earth to support life on it.
4. Global warming is a man-made acknowledged threat, to the stability of life in the United States, currently, by the US government, the President, EPA, NOAA, NASA, DOE and DoD, as well as the UN, and every major scientific organization on the planet, and the subject of remarkable consensus in the field of study of >90%
5. In the Northeastern United States, evidence of a clear and unmistakable shift have occurred, in the form of two consecutive 60 degree Christmases, in the third consecutive hottest global year on record.(NOAA)
6. Nature estimates the potential threat at 60 trillion dollars
7. There are several likely feedback loops, from albedo, to permafrost, methane clathrates, that would make the rate of global warming increase exponentially faster- in other words, the more it warms, the faster it would warm, because at a certain temperature- more methane and CO2 than is currently in the atmosphere could be released.(Clathrate Gun)
8. The purpose of this lawsuit is to assure that the elections have proceeded according to the various laws, and potential for conflicts of interest, never before seen in a presidential election are resolved, without the conflicts of interest possible post swearing in, as the powers of the Presidency to confound such an investigation combined particularly in light of a Congress demonstrably willing to pull out all the stops on a partisan basis (the recent refusal to even hold hearings on a Supreme Court spot)make this a priority.

11. BASIS FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF

IMMEDIATE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IS APPROPRIATE
(1) Plaintiff claims have a substantial likelihood of success on merits because the role of government in protecting natural resources, and the lives of the people (American interests) is well established, the threat is nearly universally accepted by appropriate and near appropriate scientific bodies. Similar to a satellite detection of foriegn troop ships setting sail for America, the onus should be on Congress, and the President to demonstrate why with such a dire threat to American prosperity, they would risk inaction.
(2) Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law because no money damages are involved; though money for corrective actions are sought if appropriate bodies cannot be compelled to acknowledge and deal with a threat well established.
(3) Irreparable harm will occur unless immediate injunctive relief is granted; all emissions at present time must be considered irreversible. We cannot know the tipping point for runaway change occurs- much like radiation sickness, by the time the symptoms make you sick, you are likely already dead but still walking. Currently the trend is clear, that warming is happening is clear.
(4) The relief will serve the public interest; long term societal stability is obviously in the public interest. In addition- the rapid deployment of energy resources, upgrade and the necessary retrofits to every single American structure, would act to bring millions of non outsourceable jobs to every town, city, state in the United States, and primarily the sorts of hands on work that is currently the cause o f low workforce participation rate.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully request this Court to enter a writ of mandamus or order to show cause for failure to address these issues in a public forum, and failing the ability of the government to come to a decision/ plan to address this at an appropriate scale we ask for 250 billion to be directed towards appropriate actions. The US has been proactive with much less official consensus threats, than 95% of the appropriate bodies concurring, and directed $100 billion per year, and over a Trillion to the Iraq War and subsequent Occupation. Were China or Russia to be sending troop ships towards the United States, and Congress or the President refused to address them, I would expect there to be a demonstration of the reasons for ignoring the safety of the public announced.
Contingent upon the Defendants willingness to develop and implement a plan that has a chance of addressing these pressing issues, we seek 250 billion dollars in budget (5 billion per state, mitigated somewhat by population size) to begin the process of developing the projects and plans capable of
Ramping to a level that could address the threat, and make the US a leader (currently lagging China, Germany, Sweden and France in renewables development and energy usage.) Plantiff will confer with other appropriate bodies as to other appropriate items for relief than sought in this and the original petition (enclosed)
Plantiff also seeks to hold in all current government staff in place to deal with climate change- as the incoming administration has demonstrated hostility to Climate Change science, but not cause or credible disagreement with such science.
Plantiff asks leave to present other forms of relief sought at the time of hearing.
Plaintiff further seeks all such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.

Respectfully submitted this 30th day of December 2016 by:

Darrell Prince
(347)286-8248
Prince.darrell@gmail.com

Fundraising email

The Call for
Unity

View this email in your browser
Happy New Year- I wish you a great one.

But I am asking you to get involved with us, focused on social change, with what I believe to be a fresh, and necessary approach to creating a better system. I need your help to get us to the next phase of these bold plans.

There are three things in the Call for Unity dynamic we need to accomplish as soon as possible:

1. Weekly voting- providing connection to state city local and national officials and citizens, giving you power to influence them weekly, with only 15 minutes, and to know what’s going on with them(starts this week)
2. Movement of movements- Groups need to find a way to work together, to get things done- not for profit complex is too huge to be getting beaten this bad.
3. Access to tight, formatted information, with access to top rated perspectives, and stories from different angles- once you have the core facts.

Commit to 15 minutes a week, to answer questions from us and your groups

Donate, to support the further development and promotion of an application to do so.

Apply- to be a part of a team working to pull together the groups,the components building a movement of movements, and deep, but simple to access research, and citizen issue education programs.

Our situation is serious, right now we have choices between fake news- literally false reporting on events, and much of mainstream media, often slanted biased usually about real events, but without perspective or historical context, completely missing some issues for example:

65 degree Christmases two years in a row in the Northeast
Third consecutive hottest year ever

Scope+ Priority: 1
Potential for global catastrophe affecting all 7 billion people, and also the only source of mass jobs- requiring millions of non-outsourceable blue collar jobs.

New information this year:
Permafrost feedback loop confirmed: not in the models, as permafrost melts, release of massive quantities of carbon, warming further, causing more melting, and also not in the models is the most massive source of carbon on the planet: clathrates.

Yet this is thought of as a hoax, by an incoming administration planning to dismantle research altogether.

Despite having instant access to several 24 hour news stations, Facebook, Twitter, and thousands of media sources, and thousands of “social change” groups- most Americans feel less informed,more misinformed, and disconnected from the political process than during the American Revolution, when news traveled via horseback.

We have thousands of social change groups, acting independently, but never achieving critical mass 7000 groups talking about 700 government agencies on 70 different issues, all at once.

I’d call it information pollution.

We don’t have time for this- we need focused discourse- because there are very real problems, which are not being discussed, and when they are, they are through a funhouse mirror.

We need a revolution, in terms of the outcomes, in terms of the values of this country, and how they are applied.

Part of our solution set:

Better issue/movement synchronization: The American people cannot focus on all the different issues of the day, breakthrough the noise with all of the background chatter.

How about we talk about problems in order-
week of the 15th- Criminal Justice system,
week of the 22 -Climate Change
week of the 30th Education

When 30 conversations are going on at once, you cannot get information from all of them. When one person stands up to talk, or two people debate, you can take away more information. If we could block these into focused conversations, where people listened to one another, and supported we could definitely get more traction on issues.
We need a movement of movements- where the mic is passed between movements who get together and decide on the core facts, everyone needs to know to discuss, and puts together their own content pieces and the messages are boiled down to the need to know core facts.
Is it better to keep talking to your core audience of 50k, every week of the year, or to plan for 1 week a year to talk to 20 million, and support + really learn about all of the work other people are doing?

Help us get to where we need to be.

Commit to 15 minutes a week, to answer questions from us and your groups

Donate, to support the further development and promotion of an application to do so.

Apply- to be a part of a team working to pull together the groups,the components building a movement of movements, and deep, but simple to access research, and citizen issue education programs.

THanks for your time an attention.


Cordially yours,

Darrell Prince
Facebook
Facebook
Follow us on twitter
Follow us on twitter
Website
Website

Unity

To further advance evolution of the human species, by improving communication between nodes through greater shared definitions

A disjointed information and pathway to action for social initiatives, full of silos and failure to agree on common goals. Makes participation in solving problems easy and simple.

Think tank that sets goals, and finds solutions to them + 2 tools – instant polling on issues, as well as a history of positions. Gameified to provide greater benefits, and larger reach, based upon user inputs.

Donors,activists, voters, not-for-profits, and the actively aware of political process and discussions.

It is an effort to smooth the pathways to good decisions, like a myelin sheath for human species level decision making. Rational, consistent thought is rewarded, ideas are tested, and the conversations are between people who have a shared understanding of the issues, making resolution possible.

Copyright © *|2015* *|The Call for Unity|*, All rights reserved.
Personal email list of Darrell Prince
for next day responses by phone, and an invite
to the long overdue actual call for Unity.

email thecallforunity@hotmail.com

unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

The Call for Unity- steps to Revolution in outcomes

and I am asking you to join me, in commiting to do the self work to ensure a better future for us all.
My name is Darrell Prince- I’m an American citizen, with a background in science, marketing and operations at the corporate level, and much of my life involved in causes for the betterment of humanity. I am reaching out to people, because I believe your country needs you, humanity needs you, and the future needs us, to find a better path, a way to work together better, and so I am asking you to be a part of us helping each other, to do the self work necessary to bring about a bright bright future.
We need a better system of governing, of connecting, of deciding what to do, and actually achieving it. We need a better republic, a more engaged democracy- one that lives in the people is the biggest government, and the smallest at the same time. We are in a time of upheaval, change, and like any change, it will work out better if we prepare even if it doesn’t go exactly our way. The old models are bursting
Our society is too complex, too powerful to not be governed by reason, compassion for the many, and conservation of our resources, from air, water, food, land. We need a more educated, fact based civil discourse on the issues, based on core principles. We need to have context- some perspective on situations, how they have been handled in the past. We need more people engaged in the process, much more often than every 4 years. We need to figure out how to focus our energies, our discussios, so we have time to learn, to process to discuss, to decide, to debate, and to act while still being able to carry on our day to day, and know with certainty, that things are moving in the right direction. We won’t always agree or get our way but we can make sure we are heard, and make sure we are all moving in the right direction.3
We need a better national conversation- to have a democratic republic, or a robust and healthy society, we must speak the same language, have common understandings of the principles behind the laws of the society.
We need more focus in the national conversations 7000 groups agencies government officials speaking on 700 issues through a 1000 different information sources, biased news and fake news, from twitter to tv to facebook and email, about Syria vaccines elections Russians Chinese climate change police crime Social Security. TOO MUCH NOISE.
We need to talk about one thing at a time, do some research come back, talk some more, ad infinitum. We need to start from the same set of facts, and have easy access to well thought out theories from many perspectives
We also need better interaction, and to be able to hold our politicians accountable, for what they do and what they don’t

The Call for Unity is asking concerned citizens to, at a minimum
Participate:
1. Commit to making your voice heard/micro education via weekly position voting/communication with your group, city, state, and national officials 15 minutes per week
2. Commit to listening, to learning what the other view points are out there
3. Commit to treating others with respect
4. Commit to getting it right- as if it were your own decision- until the next meeting

Engaged Citizen:
5. Commit time to learning- 1 hour .5 hours/week
6. In person meetings general, 1.5 hours/month
7. Issue group meetings of your choice, 1.5 hours/month
Active members:
8. Paricipate in the development and choosing of content, and interacting with other groups at the city state and national levels
The Call for Unity is asking activists in movements
1. To find ways to work together, to come to agreements, content and solutions that can be shared with strength and certainty, both locally and nationally- that means coalitions, and a movement of movements
2. To que the public discussions across movements, to allow space for discussion of other issues, so your issue will get it’s due attention when it is time
3. To engage your constituents more, ask them questions, and ask them for more than just money
4. To construct, whenever possible, your language,demands, etc, in language around the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, because it narrows the debate, and provides a common language

Specifically,
1. Donate. I am asking you to donate to the cause if you think this is as good as something or someone else you have donated to. I’ve spent a lot of time, effort and money on this, and I need support to be able to take this further. Link here
2. Volunteer- I am definitely asking for help in developing the tools, and the policies the interface between issue groups, help in developing specs, and template content, setting up fundraisers, events as well as connections, contacts. Link here
3. Vote on core principles, see how this is going to work, learn a little, and give me measurable feed back. Link here.

Context of my outreach

Hello- I am reaching out you, and people who are concerned about the best possible direction of society, and I am asking you to join me, in commiting to do the self work to ensure a better future for us all.
My name is Darrell Prince- I’m an American citizen, with a background in science, marketing and operations at the corporate level, and much of my life involved in causes for the betterment of humanity. I am reaching out to people, because I believe your country needs you, humanity needs you, and the future needs us, to find a better path, a way to work together better, and so I am asking you to be a part of us helping each other, to do the self work necessary to bring about a bright bright future.
We need a better system of governing, of connecting, of deciding what to do, and actually achieving it. We need a better republic, a more engaged democracy- one that lives in the people is the biggest government, and the smallest at the same time. We are in a time of upheaval, change, and like any change, it will work out better if we prepare even if it doesn’t go exactly our way. The old models are bursting
Our society is too complex, too powerful to not be governed by reason, compassion for the many, and conservation of our resources, from air, water, food, land. We need a more educated, fact based civil discourse on the issues, based on core principles. We need to have context- some perspective on situations, how they have been handled in the past. We need more people engaged in the process, much more often than every 4 years. We need to figure out how to focus our energies, our discussios, so we have time to learn, to process to discuss, to decide, to debate, and to act while still being able to carry on our day to day, and know with certainty, that things are moving in the right direction. We won’t always agree or get our way but we can make sure we are heard, and make sure we are all moving in the right direction.3
We need a better national conversation- to have a democratic republic, or a robust and healthy society, we must speak the same language, have common understandings of the principles behind the laws of the society.
We need more focus in the national conversations 7000 groups agencies government officials speaking on 700 issues through a 1000 different information sources, biased news and fake news, from twitter to tv to facebook and email, about Syria vaccines elections Russians Chinese climate change police crime Social Security. TOO MUCH NOISE.

Justice reform policy proposal as submitted to the US federal Govt.

Petition for redress of grievances

 

 

Government attention: Justice, (courts and enforcement), United States Congress

 

Case Reference:

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Civil Action No.15-1917

 

In: Effective immediately

Wide Spread Due Process violations

As the issue of rampant police violence and extralegal use of force clearly is part of a national set of patterns and practices, violating Constitutional amendments, and is, according to the Declaration (aka THE founding document) literally cause for legally abolishing the government,  I am seeking immediate action. Further, sincere readings of founding documents suggest that the land of the free cannot be the largest jailer in human history. These issues are undermining the confidence of Americans in the system of Justice, and making the jobs of our officers of Justice  much more difficult, as people cannot be expected to take seriously moral accusations from system that ignores unlawful killings and assaults by members of their own.

Court Action sought, Immediate:

A national, simultaneous oath giving for all law officials, emphasizing their role in protecting the lives, the liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all of the people. This is both to reinforce the basic image of the law in the minds of all law officials, but also to restore full faith of the American people in law officials and their government

 

A national, and immediate injunction against single officer use of force(wait for back up in danger situations), especially deadly force without specific cause such as the immediate threat to citizens or a firearm, more than a political stand, it’s also basic officer safety.

 

Immediate and consistent documentation of use of force, and unexpected injuries at all levels  (including prisons) to be reported in a consistent format, in less than 12 hours, open to public with perhaps officers names substituted for an identification number. This should include immediate supervisors, witnesses.

Immediate process tracking of any cases that arise involving agents of law including judges, court employees, as well as police, but especially regarding police use of force cases, and the development of a rubric to identify and track current methodologies, best and worst examples of same, and the noting of any irregularities, that may arise due to conflict of interest.

 

 

 

Court Action sought, as part of full restitution:

 

Recognition of federal responsibility for oversight on governmental actions on individuals life liberty or property via  Declaration, and due process clauses of  5th, 14th ,

 

Recommendations from this court on correcting the de jure vs de facto chasm in American law, including civil forfeiture, mass incarceration, multi year waits for trial and other expensive and clearly deviant outcomes from the intent.

A national Constitutional minimums set up, clearly defining the current best practices for law enforcement as a minimum for standards of officer behavior, to Constitutional training, to what a speedy trial entails, what cruel and unusual punishment entails.

 

Possibly normalizing the state codes, to be fitted on top of Constitutional codes, to simplify the overall legal system

 

Review of all cases pending trial for “speedy trial” violations.

 

Cold case review of cases involving legal profession, especially the last 10 years.

 

Review of all prisoners in the United States, and look to free people who are not likely to hurt others, with a tight eye for security.

 

Rule voter ban for formerly incarcerated unconstitutional.

 

Process put into place for oversight of government official cases

 

 

Opening note:

It is important to note that in no way is this specifically a criticism of the individuals named in this suit- largely, in my opinion the men and women do their best to make sure there is as much justice as they can. in a system, we do our best, working with those around us, and shiny new parts get tarnished by soot and poor function of a system long ago in need of an audit and update.  The greatest criticism, is one of human behavior; there are law enforcement, lawyers, judges, who perpetuate the worst of behaviors, that go on, unchallenged despite evidence that would trigger jail sentences or even death penalties in any other profession, but, people are not prone to outing their own, whistle blowing is usually frowned upon.

Introduction:

This document calls for a full Rebranding of America, legally, the formal re-swearing of the oaths and the principles to which this country was founded, and the elevation of the execution of the law to scientific precision, by reigniting the flame of national, legal debate, and re-engaging the consent of the governed,  expired long before any still living, culminating, in a new Constitutional Convention, and a government better suited to the future of our nation using means already provided to us by the Founding Fathers.

 

Scope:

The scope of this case is expanded twice. First from the individual to the national,  as the problem to be properly understood, and fixed, must be dealt with as part of a systemic, national issue- similar to how doctors rarely treat individual bumps of chicken pox. Second, from use of force by law officers to a greater malady, the gap between defacto and dejure law, as a common thread running through out our systems of government.

 

 

 

Standing invoked:

As noted in the PA case, as a person who has been attacked by police officers without cause, I am a member of a class of people who have been adversely affected by the failure to address a serious concern with how many police officers in this country behave.

I would note that 1st amendment, Congress shall make no laws prohibiting the right to petition for redress of grievances, suggests that standing should be applied liberally at best and at worst, any notion of rejection of a clear Constitutional violation by the government, could be construed as one of the Declaration’s legitimate reasons for revolution, “In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms, our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”

Venue Shift Rationale:

An issue of this magnitude,  addressing as it does the foundation of American law,  supersedes regional district conventions; and requires examination by courts in every state.

Relevant Statutes and Case Laws:

14th amendment (life liberty and property shall not be infringed  due process and equal protection)

8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment)

Declaration of Independence(repeated violations of right to life as reason for altering or abolishing government, refusing assent to laws, for protecting them (military) by mock trial from punishments for murders they commit on inhabitants)

Harris v.  City of Canton(deliberate indifference)

Spell v. McDaniel (Municipal liability)

Walker v. City of New York (Failure to Train)

Vann v. City of New York (deliberate indifference)

1st Amendment(the right of the people to petition for redress of grievances)

 

Legal Theory Advanced:

  1. That the ultimate responsibility for enforcement of US code, is the US federal government, and that the code of conduct, that stems from US code is applicable to law enforcement at ALL levels, and are responsible to train, maintain and adjust process for the outcomes in Constitutional cases. That the 5th and the 14th amendment due process clauses, apply to any and all government officials at any level, and thus, give the federal government both jurisdiction and duty to monitor cases involving government officials, and to develop a process that can avoid the inherent conflicts of interest that exist, as well as oversight for themselves, as the same conflict of interest principles would apply at the national level.

 

2.That when an issue, becomes national in scope, particularly in regards to Constitutional issues that it is the duty of the federal government to act, and to set up such safeguards as to disarm the threat, regardless of the source, and  provide for safe guards, structurally. (equal protection under,and  from the law.) Expansion of scope, but similar concept as municipal responsibility. The courts have consistently held, that municipalities can be held liable for the actions of their actions of their employees, especially when “deliberate indifference” has been shown or acquiescence in unconstitutional practices.

 

  1. The current problem with police brutality, is not in fact, a problem at the city level, and seems to be the same nationally, from New York, to Philadelphia, to Denver, Oklahoma, San Francisco and LA. What happened to me was symptomatic as a single bump of chicken pox; treating it individually makes as much sense as sending the child to a different doctor for each chicken pox bump. The total number of excessive use of force cases is unknown as it is not currently tracked. Police in the United States kill between 1100-1400 people per year, (killedbypolice.net, the guardian) by contrast, the next highest country for citizen deaths by police is Canada with 25, making the US death by police rate 70 times that of the next highest country. It is reasonable and perhaps conservative to say that for every death, there are likely 20+ brutality cases.  Since physical abuse is a crime, no matter who commits it, this is a major issue that will only continue.

 

  1. Given that there is 99% indictment rate for citizens(DOJ); Taken by itself, the federal grand jury indictment rate is cause for major process review- what value can an expensive, secret and time consuming process that filters less than 1% of the cases have? But when the indictment rate of <5% for police officers(no official statistics exist) it is safe to say clemency for extra legal killing, and brutality have become a de facto part of the American Justice system. These cases involve a violation of due process, cruel and unusual punishment and equal protection under the law as well as simple murder, and conflict of interest issues will prevent proper legal advancement of cases as we see from the numbers involved hence the responsibility o the failure to correct systemic issues by the federal government represents responsibility via Haynesworth V Miller, and Owen v. City of Independence. this also looks similar to “For protecting them, by mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these states“

 

  1. Further, as prosecution of police officers requires the buy in from co-workers (other police and prosecutors), it is unlikely that there would ever be a reasonable or fair proceeding with regards to police. Thus is in need of a change of venue, and likely a permanent community review board because nearly any one involved in a legal system at the city or state level is going to have a conflict of interest, and indeed, that is seen in the prosecution rates of police, nearly non-existent, despite the relative eruption of such cases in our mass media. In fact, even with a prosecutor outside the direct sphere of the officer, professional mindset, or cultural mindset is likely to still be a significant factor.

The more radical part of the legal theory put forward, is that the ratification of  Constitution’s (legality) is in stare decisis  or based on the precedent set by Declaration’s ratification legality, and that the official definition, scope, and use of government as it relates to individuals in the United States is given in that documentation, and is always, a valid petition for redress of grievances as per the 1st Amendment.

There is little doubt in the historical record; the precedent for the Constitutions Supreme legality comes from the ratification methodology used with the Declaration. The divorce from one set of laws, the definition of what government is and should be, and the creation of said government can be defined as the most legal of acts. Further, the treatise duly voted upon by every district in a new country, and the reasons, paid for with the blood of the citizenry, for said change in government and founding of a new one, and signed by several of our early presidents, and the official designated date of a new country can hardly be said to have no legal weight.

It was referenced by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, and ironically enough in the secession letters of the Southern states, though blatantly failing the test of legitimate government’s duty to protect the liberty of people. According to a Constitutional scholar and current President of the United States, Barack Obama “The Declaration is the lens through which the Constitution should be viewed”.

In this particular case; it is useful, because if the core of responsibility of government is to protect 1 life 2 liberty and 3 the pursuit of happiness, being the largest jailer in human history is a problem, having the largest death by police rate in the civilized world is cause for a rapid and immediate change, and the focus on ensuring the pursuit of happiness for the individual, may have a startling effect on the current crisis of shootings, and mental health in this country.

A republic will be stronger if the constituents hold a strong image of the law in their collective understanding, supplemented by a stronger image by those who enforce it (Cicero).

The general principles around the Declaration can be more simply and easily explained and taught than the relative specifics of the Constitution, and out of alignment outcomes are more glaring when viewed from a Declarational framework.

 

Restitution sought:

Is that the responsibility for Constitutional conduct be proactive, creating a framework, training, and data collection methodologies for the expectation of federal audits of practices, defining, standardizing and broadening conflict of interest standards for police, prosecution, prison, and the courts.  Review of legal practices; courtroom technologies, wait times, and processes, also kept, transparently as part of a national database, and an experiment begun with the states to establish new court room norms for speedy trials. Also as the adaptation of a framework that is lighter and simpler for both enforcement agents and citizens to understand, the basics, the Declaration of Independence, which contains the official definition of government in US code, as well as it’s core functions with regards to the rights of the individual, to be trained and oath sworn at any level of employment or engagement in government activities, with the urgency being with law enforcement.

In addition, as poverty is a clear factor, rarely argued, in crime rates,  a more focused attempt to reduce crime by poverty elimination requires a systemic review of all poverty programs, the elimination of ineffective ones, and promotion of those that work well.

Further, the larger gap between de facto and de jure law needs to be addressed in such a manner as is not currently proscribed in our frame works.

Particularly right to a speedy trial, (people waiting 2+ years for  non violent offenses?)and the 4th amendment – civil forfeiture seems to be a clear violation this, and the mass incarceration for non violent crimes while the financial felonies of the past 10 years have been formally waived, creating 14th amendment conflicts. If innocence until proven guilty is a US legal principles how can so many people be incarcerated pre-trial, dependent on financial status to obtain release (debtor’s prison?)

While rights to life and liberty have been specifically addressed though poorly enforced by later documents like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and case law, the pursuit of happiness has never been formally explored or examined by government; and it is likely that a happier per capita populace would not lead the world in mass shootings.

Is it strictly legally necessary to address these case by case?

According to the decision to found this country, the answer was clear; NO. Their methodology was to abolish the government that disobeyed, flagrantly it’s own rules and create a mostly new one. We are at another such time, and while the form of the government has taken on is one which is a brilliant adaptation of regional governing principles, the shortcomings cannot be ignored behind a blatantly unconstitutional doctrine of sovereign immunity.

We can and must take actions addressed to the heart of the issue- which is the de facto, de jure gap that has expanded until threats to domestic tranquility become regular. the failure to have expressly written  frameworks for what acceptable actions are or are not according to guidelines, i.e. how many days is a “speedy trial” what is cruel and unusual punishment (waterboarding, etc.)

While it is understood that this court cannot provide all of the answers sought in this case, it is clear that these deficiencies in the current de facto set up threatens the bedrock of Union to slow decay, and worse, open to facist dictatorship- while there is no single definition of facism, agents of the state being able to kill at will is a component of all of them. The failure to understand fully these princples has Presidential candidates running on promises to torture, and to discriminate based upon religion, effectively campaigning on grounds for impeachment.

It would serve the American people and it’s legal system to recognize formally the Declaration, the Constitution, and the US Code as successively more detailed from principles to ruling frameworks, simplifying the overall code, and making it easier to address and prevent further unhealthy dissonant gaps between de jure and defacto law.

Likely, it would be best also to re-engage the consent of the governed, as no one alive consented to this government, and that can only be done through Constitutional Convention.

 

This petition is made with the sincerest attempt to restore full faith in police officers, the legal system, government agencies of the United States of America, and re establish Justice and a more perfect Union.

 

 

 

 

 

_________________________                                                                                        ________________

Darrell Prince                                                                                                3.14.16

 

Letter to a judge re the big questions of justice in the United States

I am writing you directly, after several (rejected) attempts to push through wide scope pro se cases. I am seeking your permission to proceed through to appeal as timely, despite having missed the deadline. I will attempt to address some very legitimate concerns, especially in the light of standard operating procedures.

You cannot be un aware of the acquittal and protests yesterday in Baltimore, the most recent case of healthy people dead after an encounter of with law enforcement. The trend noted in the case- the true legal questions, of which there are several, are critical at this juncture, and if they are unanswered, will lead to further civil unrest. Are infractions being treated evenly for people working with the law, or are they a protected class, expressly forbidden by the Constitution? Are there due process violations occurring? What are the federal government’s responsibilities in ensuring Constitutional baseline for the states and the municipalities? To what extent is the current morass a bug in the system? And most importantly, how do we restore justice, and faith in the legal system, as one that works fairly for all?

 

Questions you raised-

Standus locii-   I was beaten by police, in an incident that you have confirmed occurred,constitutes credible standing to seek a solution for addressing this problem more than a “general interest in the functioning of government”.

Addressing the federal government instead of the state- This is a core, Constitutional issue, involving the federal government’s role and responsibility in administering justice.  While state courts can handle Constitutional cases, this would seem to be the definition of a Federal question case.

I do believe municipal liability, and extending that concept to the federal gov/ vs the states relationship is quite apt. If a multinational beverage company with fully owned subsidiaries had dozens of settled cases for the same category of complaint, expressly forbidden by the parent companies’ by laws, a patterns and practices complaint against the parent company, rather than the fully owned subsidiary would be possible, particularly if the subsidiaries had a greater number of settlements than entire beverage companies of comparable or even larger size.  Further, I would think the failure of the parent company to even track the number of such settlements, would be worthy of notice, and somewhat damning in it’s own right.

But the statistics- and here I use police killings as a representative statistic that is non-controversial as to the outcomes, if not the reasons, have the US as 1200+ police killings per year, 50x that the next highest country, Canada, at 25.

That there is a blue wall of silence, is not something I would presume to prove to an esteemed leader of the legal system, anymore than I would suggest brands of black robes to you. That the rest of the legal system seems to have a predictable bias in these matters that involve sending co-workers to jail, is also unlikely to be revealing to you, but the statistics are eye-popping. Grand jury indictment rate is 90% for citizens, in of itself potentially problematic in that it seems to a time consuming and expensive process of limited utility, until you get to the indictment rate of law enforcement officers, which is <1%, which would seem to be the creation of a legally protected class, by de facto law, expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

There is a question here, of how, if not through wide scope cases, would these disturbing trends in the American legal system be addressed? Is it necessary to address each narrow slice of a legal question, or can some greater principles be decided as a whole? When do issues occurring in multiple states, that are addressed in the Constitution itself become national priority, and what bodies should be addressing them? Are these matters to be left to the discretion of the office holder? Which is of a higher priority, the court’s self decided processes, dates and deadlines or the well documented and widely accepted violations by the government of it’s own principles, of which it was at least in large part, founded to prevent?

The question of my usage of the Declaration of Independence, was specifically to address some of these questions, and seems consistent with the following.

In Cotting v. Godard, 183 U.S. 79 (1901), the Court stated:

The first official action of this nation declared the foundation of government in these words: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. “While such declaration of principles may not have the force of organic law, or be made the basis of judicial decision as to the limits of right and duty, and while in all cases reference must be had to the organic law of the nation for such limits, yet the latter is but the body and the letter of which the former is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. No duty rests more imperatively upon the courts than the enforcement of those constitutional provisions intended to secure that equality of rights which is the foundation of free government.”

So the passage that forms the spirit of the answer to the questions posed,  addressing as it does, life and liberty, as well as at the very least due process of the 5th and 14th amendments, cruel and unsusal punishment of the 8th, as well as equal protection under the 14th, is below.

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

I hope that this provides some context to the very reasonable objections you raised in your prior closings of my case, and will allow you to recommend my case as timely based on the larger context of the issues at hand, as well as providing your thoughts on the best way to address the larger systemic issues in play.

I thank you for your time, and careful consideration,

Sincerely,

 

 

Darrell Prince

An elemental dream of Unity

Dear People of Earth,

I had a dream, a simple, but far reaching dream. That our Air and our Water were being polluted by Fire and Earth, and scientists who study Air Water, Fire and Earth, said it was dangerous not to change, not to upgrade to make better. So we did, we focused in, and we transformed communities, people working side by side to make the places we live and work and play better at using resources wisely, better places to be that represented us served us and educated us. The best part was, when we did one, it happened everywhere, not the same, but different, but starting with the same idea of quality. We never had a problem with money, because we all agreed there was enough, but we had to center ourselves, and decide what was best for us, and how we could best use our resources of Energy and Time, Land, People and Goods. We found ways to express information without opinions, and came to our own decisions before discussions, which were preludes to actions, usually building.

We Educated ourselves, as part of taking care of People.