Newsline

Newsline , Society

Supreme Court Dockets Brunson v. Adams Case That Challenges the Failure of Congress to Investigate Disputed Electoral College Votes

Posted on Wednesday, January 4, 2023
|
by Matt Kane
|
496 Comments
|
Print
Supreme Court
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 their 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  this Brunson “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” they 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 days 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 it’s 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 is 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.

Share this article:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
496 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gary
gary
1 year ago

joe biden is not even real the real one is dead isnt that enough fraud right there

Nilda Tull
Nilda Tull
1 year ago

I pray the plaintiff in cause 22-380 wins this case in the Holy name of Jesus Christ the Only begotten son of the God of love light and creation. I also would enjoy, if It be in the highest interest of life everywhere, seeing the 385 members of Congress plus Biden, Pence, and Harris being removed from office and publicly disgraced. Then next there can be and start clearing out the corruption at the bureaucratic level. It’s deep in sewage there as well.

cindy Ilges
cindy Ilges
1 year ago

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.

Nancy H
Nancy H
1 year ago

I have heard Loy Brunson speak about this case. This is awesome and it will be in my prayers the Supreme Court will make the right decsion!!!

Mick
Mick
1 year ago

Ted Cruz, Constitutional Lawyer, explained it well and offered up a Constitutionally based solution! Those who certified did not uphold their oath to the Constitution.

Alan
Alan
1 year ago

Our court systems are corrupt to their core

Benton
Benton
1 year ago

well this finding proves the supreme court is corrupt also and need to be tried for treason

Char
Char
1 year ago

In real time on the TV for all the naysayers out there watch it for yourself Trump was up in votes and then the glitch happen then all the sudden he lost votes in real time You don’t lose vote you only gain them or they say the same how can people be so dumb to believe that he lost votes stupid asses

Lisa
Lisa
1 year ago

Keep up the good work of God he is with us. This is crucial!

Patty B
Patty B
1 year ago

Oh my – so much ignorance in one page.

Just because this nonsense made it to SCOTUS doesn’t mean anything.

It’ll will be quietly ignored, like 99% of all writs of certiorari that are filed are.

Dave
Dave
1 year ago

Trump lost

His text to mark meadows it’s embarrassing we can’t let people know we lost.
Trump said in 2016 I won’t accept an election that I didn’t win

Shame on you AMAC for being the grifting right of AARP

Steve Reynolds
Steve Reynolds
1 year ago

The case has NOT been “docketed.” A case is placed on the SCOTUS docket only after they vote to hear it during conference. This case just went to conference on Jan 6.

Furthermore, this case is an unserious pro se mess that not only won’t be docketed, but will be relegated to the same pit of legal lore where us lawyers place the insane ramblings of Sovereign Citizens. It is something to mock and nothing more. The Government waived its right to even respond to the request for cert ???? and the only amicus briefs filed (both by that fruitcake group who thinks they’re going to secede from California) were both rejected because these people are simply incompetent.

You’ve got to stop embarrassing Conservative politics by aligning with all of these idiots.

Steve
Steve
1 year ago

The public announcement is due Monday from the Supreme court

Pam
Pam
1 year ago

Patience, patience, patience

Kevin Alpiger
Kevin Alpiger
1 year ago

I pray this happens and corrupt politicians start paying for their crimes

maggie murphy
maggie murphy
1 year ago

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.

American Patriot
American Patriot
1 year ago

Cert denied. Next case.

Joe Farruggio
Joe Farruggio
1 year ago

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.

Deb
Deb
1 year ago

Trump attorney admits SCOTUS was right

newsweek.com/trump-attorney-sides-supreme-court-1772423?amp=1

John
John
1 year ago

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.

Marktravis
Marktravis
1 year ago

I’m all for this case on the docket we the people need justice

Clay Hill
Clay Hill
1 year ago

Anything today?

Dolly Jewell
Dolly Jewell
1 year ago

What was today’s decision?

Ben Ray
Ben Ray
1 year ago

This is very promising. We have all seen the numerous reports of fraud and interference within our Elections. For the 2016 Democrats claimed Russian Interference and 2020 elections had even more claims; many very credible. With Twitter and Facebook influence from FBI and DNC on news like the Hunter Biden laptop we continue to see very real events that impacted our elections. People have loss faith.
We need to Supreme Court to either rule that none of these issues had any potential merit and our elections are 100% safe and accurate; OR they need to rule those who have taken oaths to make these guarantees to the American people have failed in their responsibilities.
There needs to be accountability.

Sharon McNatt
Sharon McNatt
1 year ago

Raland Brunson, I salute you. What a magnificent case, if any Supreme court member doesn’t support this then they shouldn’t be on the court. I know nothing of the law but I watched that night and I saw the votes pour in for biden in unpresidented numbers and I knew something wasn’t right. I pray to God that this will be proven as the socialist liberals have nothing but bad planned for this country and our citizens.

Brenda
Brenda
1 year ago

Paul E wants this case removed from docket immediately because it will call into question everything that has transpired over the last two years in our great country. Bad reason. Think about it. If it does go forward and does call into question these things, would it have been better to remain ignorant of the wrongs committed? Is it not better to know the truth, whatever consequences it may bring? Or better to keep your head in the sand because chaos may ensue? Charge forth, I say!

Tracy lewis
Tracy lewis
1 year ago

The Supreme Court did oaths also I believe they have no choice but to adjudicate. They will be culpable of the same suite.

Ggree
Ggree
1 year ago

If it is NOT about fraud, then how is it that the petitioner is seeking relief that could only be justified if fraud occurred? The petitioner is asking for the re-instatement of Trump, the candidate who did NOT win the election. Please tell me how this can be without telling me there was election fraud.

Rob
Rob
1 year ago

Curious, let’s say the SCOTUS decides for Brunson, the SCOTUS has zero authority or powers to remove any persons from Congress, the VP nor the POTUS. The SCOTUS can decide all day long and again they have no authority to remove. Look at New York. SCOTUS decided their gun laws is a violation of the 2A but you don’t see New York being stopped from enacting those laws do you? The SCOTUS has held only one case in contempt in its entire history but that was unusual circumstances also.

so it does not matter if they decide for Brunson the DOJ, the only ones beside the military is so corrupt they will not remove them. The military has the authority to do this if no other entity will. US Marshals cannot act on their own but Brunson can get an order of removal from the SCOTUS and he can take it to the US Marshals to have them removed. Just giving u all examples.

Dan G
Dan G
1 year ago

Make no mistake, this case is Dead On Arrival.
“Distributed for Conference” doesn’t mean what you think it does; it does NOT mean the Justices are considering taking it up. ALL petitions are distributed for conference; even if I sued my brother for a nickel that I lent him in Kindergarten, it would be “distributed for conference”, and would (rightly) be denied. One MILLION percent I guarantee tomorrow it gets denied; all you’re doing here is giving people a false hope. The election is over and done with. The SCOTUS has ZERO authority to remove anyone from office or to declare an election valid.

I’m surprised that a reputable organization like AMAC would publish this. For shame, really.

Before anyone asks, I’m a conservative who can’t stand Biden.

SOURCE: SCOTUS/Constitutional expert

Reality
Reality
1 year ago

There was blatant irrefutable cheating by the left. Biden no way won the election yet he sits there destroying America in every way possible-banana republic is an understatement!!!

Tim Toroian
Tim Toroian
1 year ago

Hell, anyone favoring gun control and/or confiscation is not living up to the oath. Representatives, Senators, and Judges take an oath to support the constitution but the president takes an oath to DEFEND it.

Marlie Nunes
Marlie Nunes
1 year ago

I hope we the people win 22 380

Ralph
Ralph
1 year ago

Thought you would want to see this!

Michael Lewis
Michael Lewis
1 year ago

What about the President not enforcing immigration law?

Joanna Mastopietro
Joanna Mastopietro
1 year ago

If this case succeeds, the outcome will be earth shaking and Lord knows this government needs an earthquake.

Jason McAvene
Jason McAvene
1 year ago

Oh snap! We are about to see the military take over ladies and gentlemen! Get your popcorn ready this is absolutely phenomenal. Two years too late but better late than never!

jeff willis
jeff willis
1 year ago

This case in one of the most vital in American history. Should the court hold for Brunson, it would restore faith in the overall system.

jeff willis
jeff willis
1 year ago

Brunson v. Adams | Not About Election Fraud Something Deeper (themaverickobserver.com)

Ormond Jack
Ormond Jack
1 year ago

It is a historical fact that 377 voted to certify, and 8 abstained despite over a hundred members asking for the 10 days which had been requested by several state legislatures. Overlooked is the fact that under Executive Order 13848 the Intelligence Agencies were to provide reports to DNI John Ratcliffe on possible tampering by foreign countries by December 18, 2020. They dragged their feet and did not submit the report until AFTER the certification. Report confirmed that China was involved, evidence of which we have seen provided by Mike Lindell of cyber invasions of machines to move votes for trump to Biden. Machines are considered “critical infrastructure” and tampering with them is an Act of War. Those who made access to the machines possible could be charged for collaborating with the enemy. The J6 committee desperately attempted to uncover the advance directives Trump issued before leaving D.C. in which under emergency he declared a state of war to exist between U.S. & China. I doubt that immunity shield would protect anyone who is charged as a war criminal. Trump has said numerous times “We caught them all, and there will be no deals”. SCOTUS can remove them from office as well as unelected collaborators like HRC & John Podesta. Although they are non-military it may be possible under these circumstances the Military may be the prosecutors

Deborah Wood
Deborah Wood
1 year ago

The Supreme Court doesn’t know anything about real or unreal
either. The latest justice can’t even tell the difference between
male and female!

Jacqueline Rocco
Jacqueline Rocco
1 year ago

Two words: “Divine Providence”

bridget wilder
bridget wilder
1 year ago

Elections are in the jurisdiction of the states, not federal. The US supreme court has no say in how a state runs it elections. Each state chooses its own electors, and investigates its own elections.

Frank Alvarez
Frank Alvarez
1 year ago

I am worried we have not made a case for Removing the Congress treasonous traitors immediately.
The fact that no attempt to investigate the 100 or so congressmen claims of fraud in the election are real and true,
But The Scotus is bound by law to avoid war, now if the war they know is guns, planes, bombing and death, they would want to avoid a civil war only, they could delay for months.
But if a case for a very different kind of war is made, of the unseen take over war from foreign adversaries, a much more serious war in which the Chinese said ” We will take over America, and not have to fire a single shot”. That understanding would make action against war much more Immediate, reciprocating with haste, determination and severe prejudice.
Well I have heard nothing about uncovering this war or bringing an understanding about it’s ammunition and death. C19, Misinformation by installed obama and other president szars, removal of propaganda bills, Misinformation by 3 letter agencies, educational departments and the MSM.
Revealing the years of lies and deceptions of foreign adversaries and countries may be at hand.

God Bless our endeavors, and all who love America.
Frank Alvarez

Penny
Penny
1 year ago

Wish I could know when a decision will be made

Lucy
Lucy
1 year ago

Yes, this is so interesting and the silence is deafening. How can we find out more?

Ken
Ken
1 year ago

Ted Cruz said it Best ! I don’t certify!

todd
todd
1 year ago

hoping like hell for a brunson victory but it is one in a million imo

i am licensed to practice law before the supreme court

if the ct clerk really did call the brunsons and ask them to file motion for emergency classification and if such motion was granted we have hope; unfortunately i remain unconvinced this is true

Rom
Rom
1 year ago

I am praying to God that he moves this case through the court and they find them guilty of treason against the American People. The WEF and the NWO MUST BE BROUGHT TO ITS KNEES.

Etaoin Shrudlu
Etaoin Shrudlu
1 year ago

As a retired attorney, who actually know the Law, I will be greatly surprised if this case gets no further than a curt “Cert. Denied”!

An older blonde women laughing in the kitchen with a grey haired man.
AMAC’s Medicare Advisory Service
The knowledge, guidance, and choices of coverage you’re looking for. The exceptional service you deserve.
The AMAC App on 3 different iPhone
Download the AMAC App
The AMAC App is the place to go for insightful news wherever you are and whenever you want.
Mexican migrants walking towards border. Group of migrants walking towards the Mexico and USA border after getting off Las Bestia train, Chihuahua, Mexico - 27-09-2023.
Nuclear Power Plant operations. Steam and smoke rise from the controversial Indian Head Nuclear Power Plant on the Hudson River in New York

Stay informed! Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter.

"*" indicates required fields

496
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x

Subscribe to AMAC Daily News and Games