“We the People” need to understand corruption in the legal system in America, how the corruption was created, and how the corruption was used to attack democracy with fraudulent doctrines such as Citizens United and create core problems such as affordability and wealth inequality. Legal corruption included regressive tax laws enabling tax cuts that increased the wealth of billionaires and corporations while blocking federal funding of solutions to affordability and wealth inequality. Proper law enforcement was blocked in the corrupt legal system which allowed Trump to get elected in 2024 and implement Project 2025 to replace democracy with a lawless fascist autocracy.
The good news is that a new generation of progressive Democrats, who campaign in 2028 with Project 2029 to get elected to the presidency with control of the House and Senate, can then correct the corrupt legal system without any new Constitutional Amendments.
Implementing Project 2029 corrects the corrupt legal system and delivers proper law enforcement to restore and sustain democracy in America and sustain solutions to core problems such as affordability which are delivered with PROJECT 2029. Without Project 2029 delivering proper law enforcement, someone like Trump can be elected again by the oligarchy to destroy democracy and affordability.
“We the People” need to understand the corrections to the corrupt legal system that must be implemented by a new generation of progressive Democrats who get elected in 2028 to the presidency and with control both the House and the Senate.
The problem in America isn’t just Trump, the oligarchy, and the 60 million registered voters revealed in recent opinion polls who still approve of Trump. The problem is the lawless fascist autocracy which is being installed with an ongoing insurrection enabled by the corrupt legal system totally supported by Republicans in Congress, six justices on the Supreme Court and billionaire oligarchs. Trump’s insurrection began on January 6, 2021, but the insurrection continued into 2025 and 2026. Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, six justices on the Supreme Court and billionaire oligarchs are violating federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383). According to the federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383), a felony crime is committed by “Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office”.
in 2024 SCOTUS refused to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that permanently bars individuals from holding state or federal office if they previously swore and oath to the U.S. Constitution and later engaged in insurrection or rebellion. Therefore, Trump was allowed to be on the ballot and get elected.
A new Democratic controlled Congress and a Democratic president will be elected in 2028 because they campaign with PROJECT 2029 that implements solutions to affordability such as Medicare for All and solutions to the corrupt legal system to finally deliver proper law enforcement. Specifically, elected Democrats will have a sworn obligation to enforce the federal law against insurrection and the Constitution as described in PROJECT 2029 to prosecute, convict, imprison, Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, six justices on the Supreme Court and billionaire oligarchs. The corrupt six justices on SCOTUS who were all appointed by corrupt Republican presidents will be legally removed by enforcing the law.
Enforcing federal law against insurrection 18 U.S. Code § 2383 as described in PROJECT 2029 will create sufficient power with a Democratic super majority in Congress and enable changing the Supreme Court to a new Supreme Court with all nine justices appointed by a Democratic president. Enforcing the law will enable new taxes, laws and regulations required to finally solve affordability and wealth inequality, regulate AI, overturn Citizens United and other corrupt decisions by the Supreme Court, and properly mitigate the damage from destructive climate change caused by global warming.
THE CORRUPT LEGAL SYSTEM IS RUN BY A CORRUPT SUPREME COURT
Chief Justice John Roberts created and applied the Unitary Executive Theory that effectively rejects the Constitution and attempts to make Trump a King. Roberts needs to be removed and jailed.
The corrupt legal system headed by a corrupt SCOTUS refused to enforce the law on Friday, August 21, 2026, when John Roberts issued his administrative stay allowing construction on President Donald Trump’s $400 million White House ballroom to proceed. The order freezes a lower-court injunction while SCOTUS weighs an emergency appeal, rather than permanently resolving the legal dispute over congressional approval. Lower courts and a federal appeals court (the DC Circuit) ruled that the president lacks unilateral authority to demolish the East Wing and build the venue without congressional consent.
The same corrupt action was used previously by the Supreme Court to delay enforcement of Jack Smith’s case in 2024 against Trump which effectively allowed Trump to get elected in 2024.
The Supreme Court delayed the enforcement of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case against Donald Trump in 2024.
SCOTUS delayed the proceedings by first agreeing to hear Trump’s claims of presidential immunity on February 28, 2024, which kept the trial on hold. On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Trump v. United States, deciding that former presidents have absolute immunity for core constitutional acts and presumptive immunity for other official acts.
Impact on the Case Timeline
Trial Postponement: The original March 4, 2024, trial date was indefinitely canceled.
Lower Court Review: The Supreme Court ordered the lower district court to sort through the indictment to separate immune “official acts” from prosecutable “private acts”.
Revised Indictment: Smith filed a narrowed, superseding indictment in August 2024 focusing strictly on Trump’s private conduct.
The updated filing was specifically tailored to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark July 2024 ruling on presidential immunity, which shielded former presidents from prosecution for “official acts” committed while in office.
Key Adjustments in the Superseding Indictment
Maintained All Four Original Charges: The indictment retained the same four criminal counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.
Shifted Focus to Private Conduct: The revised framework reframed Donald Trump distinctly as a private candidate for office rather than a sitting president. It explicitly emphasized that he had no official role in state election certifications.
The Outcome of Jack Smith’s Case
Despite the modifications to isolate Trump’s private actions, the legal landscape shifted permanently following the November 2024 presidential election. Citing long-standing Department of Justice policy against prosecuting a sitting president, Jack Smith moved to dismiss the case. On November 25, 2024, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan officially granted the motion and dismissed the charges without prejudice.
In summary, SCOTUS enabled trump to get illegally elected in 2024.
THE CORRUPT LEGAL SYSTEM CREATES DAMAGE WITH DOCTRINES
Legal doctrines which are established by court decisions act as barriers to enforcing the laws in the Constitution and the laws which the Constitution says are exclusively established by Congress. Doctrines are not laws, but the corrupt legal system enables courts and judges to use doctrines as if they were laws.
Citizens United is based on a fraudulently established doctrine. The doctrine that corporations have personhood rights was used to justify the corrupt Supreme Court decision in 2010 on Citizens United.
The 1886 U.S. Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. is widely credited with establishing the constitutional doctrine of corporate personhood. However, the doctrine was fraudulently created because the Court didn’t resolve the constitutional issue of whether the 14th Amendment which granted equal protection rights only to people instead. The fraud was committed when the court reporter incorrectly wrote that the Court had decided the rule of corporate personhood applied not just to people but also to corporations.
Specific legal doctrines have blocked proper law enforcement.
Shielding Government and Corporate Misconduct
Qualified Immunity: This doctrine protects government officials from liability unless they violate “clearly established” statutory or constitutional rights. It frequently blocks civil rights laws by requiring an exact factual match from a previous case to allow a lawsuit to proceed.
Corporate Personhood & Limited Liability: Treating corporations as legal “people” while shielding investors and executives from personal liability often dilutes criminal law enforcement. Companies treat statutory fines merely as a cost of doing business.
Limiting Access to Courts
Standing Doctrine: To sue, a plaintiff must prove direct, concrete, and individualized injury. This blocks the enforcement of public interest laws, such as environmental regulations, because proving specific individual harm from systemic issues like climate change is incredibly difficult.
The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) Preemption: Supreme Court interpretations of this doctrine allow corporate arbitration clauses to override state consumer protection and labor laws. It effectively blocks citizens from enforcing their legal rights through class-action lawsuits.
State Secrets Privilege: This doctrine allows the government to block the release of information during litigation if disclosure harms national security. It often completely halts the enforcement of anti-torture, privacy, and whistleblowing laws.
Restricting Legislative and Regulatory Power
The Major Questions Doctrine: This principle states that if a federal agency seeks to resolve a matter of vast economic and political significance, it must have clear congressional authorization. Critics argue it blocks regulatory agencies from enforcing modern health, safety, and environmental laws using older, broadly worded statutes.
The Nondelegation Doctrine: This restricts Congress from transferring its legislative powers to administrative agencies. Stricter enforcement of this doctrine threatens to invalidate thousands of specific technical rules designed to enforce broad safety and financial laws.
Preemption Doctrine: Based on the Supremacy Clause, federal law can invalidate state laws. This often blocks progressive state or local governments from enforcing stricter health, labor, or environmental protections than the federal baseline.
THE ORIGIN OF THE CORRUPT LEGAL SYSTEM
Here are the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions that established major legal doctrines. The creation of doctrines began with the Supreme Court violating the Constitution that says laws are exclusively established by legislature including Congress and state legislatures. Without a Constitutional Amendment, the Supreme Court establishing the right of the Supreme Court to create doctrines that would be used as laws by courts.
⚖️ Constitutional Foundations
Marbury v. Madison (1803): Established the Doctrine of Judicial Review. It gave the Supreme Court the ultimate power to declare acts of Congress and the President unconstitutional.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Established the Doctrine of Implied Powers. It ruled that Congress has powers beyond what is strictly written in the Constitution to carry out its duties.
🛑 Shielding Government and Officials
Pierson v. Ray (1967): Established the Doctrine of Qualified Immunity for police officers. It originally shielded officers acting in “good faith,” which later evolved into the modern standard blocking lawsuits unless a “clearly established” law was broken.
Hans v. Louisiana (1890): Solidified the modern Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity. It ruled that states cannot be sued in federal court by their own citizens without consent, severely limiting federal law enforcement against state governments.
📋 Access to Courts and Civil Rights
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992): Defined the modern Doctrine of Standing. It set a strict three-part test requiring plaintiffs to prove concrete injury, making it much harder for public interest groups to enforce environmental laws.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961): Applied the Exclusionary Rule to state courts. It ruled that evidence obtained through illegal searches and seizures cannot be used in a criminal trial, blocking the enforcement of laws using tainted evidence.
🏢 Federal Power and Deregulation
West Virginia v. EPA (2022): Formally established the Major Questions Doctrine. It ruled that federal agencies cannot enforce sweeping rules on major economic or political issues without explicit, detailed permission from Congress.
Chevron U.S.A. v. NRDC (1984): Established Chevron Deference, which forced courts to accept an agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous laws. Note: This doctrine was later overturned by the Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024), shifting power away from federal enforcement agencies and back to judges.
In the 1970s, the 1886 U.S. Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. that fraudulently created corporate personhood by granting the 14th Amendment right of equal protection to corporations which the 14th Amendment granted only to people was used as a Doctrine to justify granting corporations the First Amendment right to spend unlimited corporate funds on ballot initiatives in a case called Bellotti.
· First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978): Extended corporate personhood into First Amendment rights by striking down limits on corporate spending for ballot measures.
· Citizens United v. FEC (2010): The justification for the decision was built heavily dependent on the fraudulent subsequent use of the doctrine of corporation personhood rights that granted free speech rights to corporations to rule that the First Amendment protects independent political spending by corporations.
Project 2029 should implement new federal laws to correct the corruption in the legal system created by doctrines and to correct other corrupt decisions by the Supreme Court as mentioned including Citizens United.
Also, at the core of the corrupt legal system are abuses of the law such abuse of the right of free speech granted by the First Amendment. An example is the extensive constant destructive lying by politicians enabled by weak enforcement of the law which has enabled attacks on democracy with false claim of rigged elections and voter fraud. Remember the Big Lie and notice the ongoing use of lying in attempts to prevent and stop fair elections.
Andrew Weissmann’ s new book, Liar’s Kingdom: How to Stop Trump’s Deceit and Save America, discusses the abuses of free speech by politicians and proposes two new federal civil laws and a modified existing federal criminal law to help correct the problem.
Project 2029 should adopt and implement the new federal laws proposed by Weissmann.
No posts
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.