A historic case has been docketed by the United States Supreme Court. Case number 22-380 titled Brunson v. Adams has reached the highest court in the land by a Writ of Certiorari from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The petitioner of the case, Raland J. Brunson, is suing 388 federal officers, including former Vice President Mike Pence, President Joe Biden, and Vice President Kamala Harris, for “violating their oaths of office,” where they swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic. Brunson claims their refusal to investigate an alleged attack (voter fraud) on the Constitution on January 6th, 2021, violated the oaths they swore just one day prior as they were sworn in as members of the 117th Congress.
The case itself is not alleging electoral fraud occurred in the 2020 election. Instead, they cite the 147 members of Congress having their request to investigate (after hundreds of affidavits alleging fraud) denied signals that all other members defied their oath of office. In connection with Brunson’s “breach of duty” argument, it should be noted that the last phrases of the House and Senate Oath of Office read “… that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” The remedy sought by Brunson would result in the removal of all respondents from their current positions and would bar them from ever holding public office ever again.
A significant number of Americans believe the results of the 2020 election were impacted by “unethical activity,” to put it mildly. Those in this camp are told their beliefs have been “debunked.” But in order for something to be “debunked” it must have been proven untrue. However, these allegations were not actually “debunked” but instead ignored or dismissed, which is precisely what this case seeks to address.
The 147 members who objected to the results cited “concerns brought by constituents and legal questions that had been raised about the state’s election process.” Despite this, the vote was certified without investigation. Senator Ted Cruz had proposed a ten-day audit of the election in contested states to investigate claims. In support of this proposal, Senator Cruz noted that:
“The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states-Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina-were alleged to have been conducted illegally.
“In 1877, Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission-consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices-to consider and resolve the disputed returns.
“We should follow that precedent.”
He went on to propose:
“Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission’s findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed…we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given’ and ‘lawfully certified’ (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.”
Had this request been granted, this case would never have been filed, regardless of the findings in the ten-day audit.
The defense being deployed by the respondents is that they are protected by Article 11 of the Constitution’s “sovereign immunity.” However, Article 11 reads: “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.” Brunson is not targeting states, but rather individual members of government.
Brunson’s case cites many Constitutional Articles that, in his estimation, explain why his case is Constitutionally sound despite respondents – both Republicans and Democrats – believing sovereign immunity grants them full protection from prosecution for their conduct during their time in office. Article 1 reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Brunson feels this proves his attempt to have this case heard is protected.
Additionally, Brunson uses Article 6 of the Constitution to attest that members of government are bound to the oaths they swear upon entering office. It reads: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made Pursuance thereof; . . .shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.” In conclusion, it does not say anywhere in the Constitution that extenuating circumstances can annul their sworn oath, which includes the day’s events of January 6th, 2021.
In interviews, Loy Brunson, the brother of the petitioner who has an identical case in the lower courts under his name, makes it a point to categorize this case as bipartisan. Since the 2020 election, beliefs and disbeliefs about election fraud have fallen among party lines for the most part. But this case reveals how several members from both parties ignored inquiries and certified the election. Because of this, both Democrats and Republicans are being accused. For all Americans, it was concerning to see so many members of a newly “elected” government refuse to consider the possibility of foul play in the process that put them in their positions of power.
Brunson has a website that outlines the history of the case in its entirety, but here is a brief summary:
Prior to the case being docketed by the Supreme Court, the case had been held up in the 10th Circuit Court of appeals. Fearing it would never move past this crucial step, Brunson successfully invoked rule 11 of the Supreme Court, which states “A petition for a writ of certiorari to review a case pending in a United States court of appeals, before judgment is entered in that court, will be granted only upon a showing that the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this Court.” In other words, a case of such strong national importance – an emergency – could bypass a circuit court decision and be heard and ruled on by the Supreme Court at any time they deem necessary. Brunson revealed that the Supreme Court clerk had been reaching out to them to get this case brought under the proper format and prior to it being submitted had asked it to be brought as soon as possible, showing an interest in the court to consider the case.
This case undoubtedly contains the strongest allegations in U.S. history to ever be docketed by the Supreme Court, so could they really rule to move it to the final stage? First, consider the case making it this far is extremely rare, if not unprecedented. In addition, prior to the 10th circuit giving their decision, the court alerted Brunson that the case would be accepted as a national emergency if the lower court did not release a ruling, signaling at least moderate interest on their end in looking at the case.
The conference date is set for this week — Friday, January 6th, 2023, exactly two years to the day that Brunson is alleging this breach occurred. In conference, the 9 Supreme Court Justices will decide whether or not to move the case to an official hearing, the final step in adjudicating the case. One would think a case of such historic and national significance to the United States of America would certainly be on every mainstream news channel as we approach the pivotal decision date, but as we all know we are not living in normal times. No matter, mainstream media coverage does not decide what is real or not. The official Supreme Court website cited above proves how real this case is. How they decide to act on it is yet to be determined, but we will soon find out.
Our court systems are corrupt to their core
What was today’s decision?
Denied of course.
I’m all for this case on the docket we the people need justice
Get it together man! There is no case. It’s 2023
Just stopped by to check in. A reality check
Keep up the good work of God he is with us. This is crucial!
The case is already over Lisa.
What we believe to be our government is a corporation. Read the Organic Act of 1871. The court won’t hear the case because what a corporation does is none of their concern.
SCOTUS doesn’t hear crackpot cases. Has nothing to do with corporations.
It’s not over. Everyone who cares about this country needs to send a letter to the Supreme Court urging them to reconsider hearing the case.
See link ralandbrunson.com/History/Letter.html
Let’s keep up the pressure. It’s the least we can do for the Brunson brothers and our country.
Stop your complaining and use your voice.
Can the Supreme Court reconsider a case? Is that even possible?
On very very rare circumstances – and then only if *NEW* evidence comes up that wasn’t available previously.
Just resubmitting the same crap will get nowhere.
Because all those letters did so much good previously.
Keep at it – feel free to help fund the USPS with your stamps.
They all will get trashed though as they have zero bearing.
SCOTUS even threw out the three Amicus Curiae briefs that accompanied the case!
Meanwhile the appeal has an even less chance of getting anywhere than the case did. SCOTUS at least accepted Brunson to Conferance. It’s an absolute guarantee that the appeal won’t even get that far.
That’s not how the Supreme Court works. They are above popular opinion. Hence, overturning Roe v Wade despite a 68% approval rating. The Brunson case was crap and the brothers are con artists. Stop sending dumb stuff and money to this Brunson dude.
Trump attorney admits SCOTUS was right
That actually almost makes me question the decision.
I agree that there were a lot of different situations that brought about fraud in the election. I watched the Pennsylvania hearing in it’s one of the most unbelievable things I have wittnessed in my life. Real people with sworn affidavits, a truck for of votes driving around for days.
And we are to believe because this trial was not taken seriously by the democrates and ruled not to have enough evidence, thrown out of court, we are just to roll over and accept this fraudulent behaviour….my rights as a citizen were violated. It was a sham, a farce, there were real people who say and wittnessed a lot of malarkey. I am embarressed to be called an American, I have watched the news around the world… it was all sweept under the rug. Just like the criminal activity of the Biden family. Just like the Clinton’s and their crimes.
The hearings were dog-and-pony shows with partisan kooks playing “witness” and nobody placed under oath.
The truck driver story was sheer rubbish.
“Real people” say lots of things. When looked into, their claims were almost always the result of partisanship or more often ignorance.
Real people with sworn affidavits? With ammo like that, why has it taken Trump’s team two years and counting to collect the evidence and take it to court? We don’t expect you to roll over, we expect you to be an American and try again in 2024 – that’s it.
“Most unbelievable things I have witnessed in my life”. 100% correct. A bunch of liars testified to a bunch of lies. Come on. Get it together
A “sworn affidavit” is of absolute zero value UNLESS the person is willing to stand up IN COURT and say the same thing.
And that’s why all the cases FAILED – because when it came down to it, most the people who signed this affidavits suddenly realized that they were going to commit perjury and discovered that that would not be such a great idea after all.
The ones that did follow through where found to have been basically lying under oath.
So, that is one possibility, the other is that these people feared reprisal from the deeply corrupt, crime infested political machine! How’s is it that is not given extreme consideration? WAKEUP AMERICA!
What would you folks do without excuses?
So, you are saying that : When they submitted their “sworn affidavit” (that only aledge that they saw “something” …that was later debunked/explained) …..
Yea, …. that makes a lot of sense ! …. NOT !
JANUARY 6 HAS COME AND GONE AND NOT ONE WORD OF ANYTHING BEING DONE ON THE CASE IN THE SC. WHY WERE PEOPLE GIVEN SO MUCH HOPE ABOUT THIS CASE. WAS IT A FRAUD OR NEVER TO BE CASE? WHY HAS THERE NOT BEEN ANY NEWS ON WHAT IS GOING ON. IS THERE REALLY A FAMILY OF 4 BROTHERS THAT PLAY THE TRUMPET. IT SOUNDS LIKE ANOTHER STORY MADE UP TO DRAW ATTENTION FROM A BAD THING GOING ON WITH DEMOS AGAIN.
Correct. It was a fraud. There was no case, there is no case, and there will not be a case. There is zero legal mechanism to overturn the 2020 election. It is 2023. SCOTUS is not hearing the case and they were never going to
No it is not a fraud. It is a real case. Look it up at the SCOTUS website, Case number 22-380. Do not know why no word on it yet.
It was a petition and word came down yesterday that said petition was denied cert which means it is done and dusted.
There was word – it has been in the news. It failed as it always was. Better just grift some more money to trump. ;-). You do know what they say about a fool and his money right.
Dude. Get it together man
The case isn’t about overturning the 2020 vote.
Maybe that’s the reason why the mainstream media is not showing the unrest in Brazil. The people there are taking us to school as to how to get attention regarding their election grievances from the government.
Oh, they’re showing it all right.
Just not on Fox.
It’s all over main stream media
I dont see FOX covering Trump’s ongoing legal FAILURES in every court case he is currently involved in !! Like the ongoing theft and hiding / shell game with his “Secret Papers” …he really wanted to keep those “Love Letters” and the “Bejewled Dagger” from Saudi …!!
…or his lies about Jan 6th ….
If its so important that he get the truth out…. why would he not testify for the Jan 6 Committee ? Is he afraid of telling his story on camera in front of the American People …UNDER OATH ??
…or just afraid of the Committee ???….. what, his “Truth Telling” skills are failing him ? He is afraid he wouldn’t be able to present reason and facts … he said he would / could/ that he wasn’t afraid of them !!
NO….. the Media is not covering it…. is BS !!!
FACT IS….. The BIG LIE…. Was just that… A BIG LIE ….. Sedition, and Insurrection !
this has been the biggest sham in the united states from the courts on down we know all are corrupt, hope fully one day this will all come to light
well this finding proves the supreme court is corrupt also and need to be tried for treason
This finding proves that Brunson has no standing to file his claim. You have to stop with this insanity and believing the BS being sold to you by liars and grifters.
LOL …… the renown ‘no standing’ that is used by EVERY court so that they DON’T have to judge the evidence, and can continue to burry their heads in the sand.
No Standing is used by every court. That is correct. It is a rule of law. You have to be a party to the injury to bring the lawsuit. That seems like a pretty simple concept and basic starting point
It’s amazing how so many backward hicks like yourself think they have the first clue as to how the law works.
What next, you going to tell quantum physicists how wrong they are as well?
Pay attention. The comment above is a problem for this country. It can very easily be interpreted as, “the Supreme Court does agree with me so they should be tried and murdered”. Every time a government agency, court or individual goes against Trump, they get labeled as corrupt. How ridiculously long does that list have to get before it dawns on you that, maybe he’s wrong?
Brad Raffensperger – must be corrupt
Brian Kemp – corrupt
Doug Ducey – corrupt
Rusty Bowers – corrupt
John McCain – corrput
John Kelly – corrupt
John Bolton – corrupt
William Barr – corrupt
Anthony Fauci – corrupt
Mitch McConnell – corrupt
Jim Comey – corrupt
All media that disagrees with Trump
Mary Trump – corrupt
Michael Cohen – corrupt
Robert Mueller – corrupt
Jack Smith – corrupt
Marie Yovanovitch – corrupt
Liz Cheney – corrupt
Adam Kinzinger – corrupt
Chris Christy – corrupt…
I think you’re missing the point in a big way. A bit too simplified and in one direction, you are.
Every f*cker you just named, almost, is a piece of sh*t career politician who has sold our country out for their own personal gain. That’s right. THEY ARE ALL CORRUPT DUMMY. ITS NOT HARD TO SEE WITH 5 MINUTES OF RESEARCH!
There are a few more that you need to add to that list.
Like the whole corrupt Biden Family. The Clinton’s and the Obama’s. And the list could go on and on.
“…here on Prison Planet!”
Absolutely MILITARY is the only way..
See how that worked out in Brazil? The military is not coming to rescue you from an imaginary thing in your head. If you don’t like it, bring in the military. If the left doesn’t like it, they should shut up and sit down. This is a democracy. Not everyone is going to agree. You need see that this is all BS designed to grift money
The. military has ZERO involvement in this. This is a civilian matter and the military are expressly prohibited from getting involved.
Agree, but NOT going to happen. Too many WOKE there. ????
Stop saying woke. It’s so dumb. Especially in this context.
Cert denied. Next case.
Even this Supreme Court is going to see through that nonsense. I don’t know exactly how many states reviewed the voting, but I know that Minnesota did. The numbers on the machine matched the marks on the ballot, no serious fraud. The multiple lawsuits that followed also reviewed the numbers, and were thrown out.
If you count fraudulent ballots over and over, you will still get the same number.
You don’t understand how voting works, do you don’t understand the checks that are place to avoid fraud and detect fraud, you don’t understand the systems in place for verification purposes. You just want to be in a reality where Donald Trump is a honest hero. Sorry, but someday his voice will go silent and his lies will stop; the only thing that will be left are the receipts and documentation of fact – that’s not a good look for him.
Not much of a thinker, you are.
Fraudulent votes were never found. Sorry.
“Fraudulent votes were never found”??? You are badly misinformed. Do you remember Ruby Freeman? Biden just rewarded her for helping to rig the election in Atlanta. amgreatness.com/2023/01/06/joe-biden-awards-infamous-2020-election-workers-with-presidential-citizens-medals/
Yeah, I remember Freeman. She is the woman who was viciously defamed and lied about by Giuliani and Trump. Every lie about her and Fulton County was dismantled years ago. She and all poll workers were cleared by local, state, and federal investigations. Freeman already got a settlement and on-air admission from OANN and is currently suing Giuliani and others who have failed to get out of those suits.
She was awarded a medal for being a victim a Trump’s ugly disinformation campaign and having been threatened by his supporters. No “fraudulent” votes were found regarding her or anyone else in the election.
I am not the one misinformed.
You live under a rock ?
The supreme court denied it with no other comments
Where did you see or hear this I have been searching….
Go the the supreme court website for 1-9-2023 order list. There are many pages similar to this case. This was nothing big or special about the case. They deny so many of these all the time.
Thank you for being a voice of reason. SCOTUS gets hundreds of cases that they don’t ever consider for a million reasons.
SCOTUS could rule that NO one can be held liable for NOT upholding their oath, which would include them, because eventually someone would file that charge against them and we all know who that would be against. Hummmm maybe they will rule differently than I think, how many times have the Democrat and RINO Justices ruled against the Constitution?
The six Republican including three Trump appointees are “RINOS” huh? BTW, the court is not meant to be a partisan toy where you get what you want because your team is in charge.
The Brunson’s have it together, this should be interesting. When we can’t even protect supreme court justices let alone our southern border it’s time the Constitution be obeyed for once! It is after all the law of the land!
joe biden is not even real the real one is dead isnt that enough fraud right there
Where is the proof that he’s dead?
Compare the two side by side. Head shapes are different, voice, personalities, ears.
SCOTUS has agreed to docket this case 5-4 to be heard Sept. Please do your own research so as not to prove your ignorance.
Research = keep digging the furthest most obscure parts of the internet until you find what you want to see.
Dear God I hope this is parody. SCOTUS is not hearing the case. It never had a chance. Oh, and when dudes get old their ears get longer. It’s called gravity. Take a look in the mirror Barb. All of us are getting droopy
It’s not. A lot of the people invested in this are borderline crazy. They will tell you the most inane falsehoods to your face and do it with a certitude that is stunning.
There was a military funeral for him on Jan 21, 2021 at 11:59 am in Washington DC
Stop with your absolute silliness. Seriously
Hearing of this case by the SCOTUS is long overdue. The merits seem extremely valid and the multiple refusals by other courts to hear the related cases only point out the ineffectiveness of our legal system with respect to elections for federal offices.
There are no merits and it has been denied in conference. It will never be heard.
Trump knew he lost and that while they had fraud theories there was no evidence. Trump then staged a coup as proven by real evidence.
That’s absolutely ridiculous. AG’s for several states alone changed voter laws at the last minute side stepping State legislatures. That alone is worth a ruling from the supreme Court. None the less, 17 states filed appeals, that should at least call for investigation. But then again, who cares about the constitution??
State courts ruled changed to election laws legal, and both parties participated in those changes.
There were dozens of investigations.
Can you provide proof it was denied. Maybe a link to the original source information. I’ve been all over the Supreme Court’s website and can’t find anything to verify that it as denied. Thanks.
It’s on the Court’s website. Scroll down to Proceedings and Orders. it’s the last one with today’s date.
It’s on the Court’s website. Scroll down to Proceedings and Orders. it’s the last one with today’s date.
I sent a link but it’s stuck waiting for approval.
if you go to orders, then look at the list- there is an order list and it is included. from 1/9/2023. it is in a long list of denied cases.