Might is not Right
IN THE MATTER OF preventing the genocide caused by the obstruction and ignoring of the constitutional question of jurisdictional law alone of Indian tribal sovereignty asked and answered and invited into the Supreme Court of the United States by its Associate Justice Clarence Thomas in the case of United States v. Lara, 541 US 193 (2004).
Case Objective To re-instate constitutional democracy under the rule of law for all purposes in order to serve the particular purpose of preventing the genocide that is being caused by the judicial branch’s recent obstructing and ignoring of its previously settled answer to the constitutional question of jurisdictional law alone of Indian tribal sovereignty pending treaty of relinquishment as required by the Constitution’s amendment, defense, treaty and original US Supreme Court jurisdiction clauses. MODUS OPERANDI OF THE GENOCIDE The case is in limbo because the US Supreme Court Clerk refuses to docket and deliver it to the US Supreme Court Judges to affirm the previously-settled answer to the constitutional question on the ground subsequently-enacted federal legislation blocks access to the Court. The Clerk prejudges the conflict of laws by blindsiding the constitution and applying the manifestly unconstitutional federal law. The constitution guarantees to the tribes the same access to the Court as foreign Nations whereas the federal legislation repeals tribal access which irrefutably is unconstitutional since the federal legislation clearly and plainly does not comply with the constitution’s amendment clause. www.mightisnotright.org