⚖️ SCOTUS BRUNSON DECISION
TOMORROW!! 🙏🏻🕊
🇺🇸 Loy Brunson
DON’T GET DISCOURAGED
if there’s another denial.
The more letters we get the better!
EVERY SINGLE LETTER SCOTUS RECEIVES
IS FILED—THAT’S PART OF HISTORY
🇺🇸@qthestormrider777
PANIC IN DC AS BRUNSON CASE
MAKES MSM NEWS & TRUMP GIVES APPROVAL 👍
If the case doesn't make it into
the Supreme court
Don't be dismayed..... 3rd times a CHARM
→ EVERYTHING IS SETTING UP
FOR NATIONAL ATTENTION
If SCOTUS rules to hear the case
it leads to MILITARY INTERVENTION
& proves there was Foreign Interference
in the U.S. Elections
& Foreign Occupation in the United States
that has captures the government
at the highest levels.
If SCOTUS does NOT rule or take the case
It STILL leads to MILITARY INTERVENTION…
Either way → IT’S GOING MILITARY
🇺🇸⚖️ Juan O Savin
BRUNSON v ADAMS
is a case against 386 persons in Congress
+ Biden, Harris & Pence —
The remedy is
THEY CAN NO LONGER HOLD OFFICE 💥
KIRKS LAW CORNER LLC
Clearly there is a separation of powers. Is it a Political one OR a Judicial one? If it is a Political one, the Judicial Branch lacks ALL Subject Matter Jurisdiction and it rests with the Legislative Branch and then the Executive Branch, more specifically the Commander in-Chief Article II section 3 and Article IV section 4. That is the Letter of the Supreme Law of the Land. This is FORM of Government and who has what Powers and the PROCESS that is due.
Vindicating the public interest is the function of the Congress and the Chief Executive. To allow that interest to be converted into an individual right by a statute denominating it as such and permitting all citizens to sue, regardless of whether they suffered any concrete injury, would authorize Congress to transfer from the President to the courts the Chief Executive's most important constitutional duty, to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Art. II, § 3.
QSI Telegram, learning about Quantum Stellar Financial System, Medbeds, Liberty/Freedom, Checks and Balances, disclosure, Ascension,💜♾️
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/504/555/
Justia Law
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992)
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife: When Congress authorizes private parties to bring claims based on procedural wrongs, these plaintiffs still must show a concrete and imminent injury to establish standing.
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife :: 504 U.S. 555 (1992) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife: When Congress authorizes private parties to bring claims based on procedural wrongs, these plaintiffs still must show a concrete and imminent injury to establish standing.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/504/555/
