Breaking Update:
The case, Brunson v. Adams, was filed pro se by four American citizens, and brothers, in Utah who are seeking the removal of President Biden, Vice President Harris, 291 U.S. Representatives, and 94 U.S. Senators who voted to certify the electors to the Electoral College on January 6, 2021, without seriously investigating allegations of election fraud in half a dozen states and foreign election interference and breach of national security in the 2020 Presidential election. Brunson’s lawsuit also claims that election fraud throughout the 2020 Presidental election made his vote for Trump in 2020 invalid when he cast his ballot in Utah.
Due to the critical national security interests, this case implicates the Brunson family was able to bypass an appeals process, bringing the case straight to the Supreme Court. The case was set to be heard on January 6, 2023, however, Supreme Court declined to consider the lawsuit on January 9. Plaintiff, Raland Brunson, filed an appeal on January 23, 2023. Now the Supreme Court has to reconsider whether or not to hear the case, according to an update on the SCOTUS’ website that read that the lawsuit was “distributed for conference” on Friday, and from there it will only need the votes of four Justices for the case to move forward.
Brunson wrote on Facebook after the court declined the case on January 9, Zach Schonfeld of The Hill reported last month, saying, “The petition was denied. We will now make our next move… A petition for reconsideration. Hang in their everyone.”
The outcome of such a case could be the restoration of Donald Trump to the presidency.
However, Jenna Ellis, a former senior legal adviser to former President Donald Trump, previously praised the Supreme Court for their decision to not hear the case, saying:
“This is the right call and predicted. The Supreme Court is not the arbiter of how a member does his or her job. This is a nonjusticiable issue,” Ellis wrote on Twitter.
She added, “Imagine if a future Dem sought removal of members for ‘failing to investigate’ Trump. This would open the door to further weaponizing.”
This is the right call and predicted. The Supreme Court is not the arbiter of how a member does his or her job. This is a nonjusticiable issue.
Imagine if a future Dem sought removal of members for “failing to investigate” Trump. This would open the door to further weaponizing. https://t.co/LOd5PUGpgJ
— Jenna Ellis 🇺🇸 (@JennaEllisEsq) January 9, 2023
Ellis would also later add that the case is:
“…circumventing the Constitution to achieve a desired outcome.”
By state legislatures enacting better election laws that include enforcement and remedies.
Not by circumventing the Constitution to achieve a desired outcome.
— Jenna Ellis 🇺🇸 (@JennaEllisEsq) January 9, 2023
This could imply that the Trump team believes that this Supreme Court case is a long shot, and Biden will not be removed from office to their decision – Trump’s best move is to win in the 2024 U.S. Presidental election, as opposed to trying to make a win out of 2020.
The suit named all 387 members of Congress who voted to certify Biden’s electoral votes and called for them all to be removed from their roles—along with Biden and Harris—and be prohibited from ever running for office again. Brunson also asked for over $2 billion tax-free in damages, according to The Hill.
In the appeal filed on January 23, Brunson argued that the court should grant a rehearing because the case “represents a very powerful domestic covert operation that is so benign that it cannot been seen on how it has breached our national security, and how it is affecting the national security of both Canada and Mexico, and how it has circulated fears that we might soon see the destruction of property along with a large volume of bloodshed in our own streets.”
Original story:
This Supreme Court Case Could Remove Biden
While there has been a considerable amount of chatter around the North Carolina election case of Moore v. Harper the case of Brunson v. Adams, which has not been as highly reported if it has seen any publicity, might just bring the 2020 election decisions back to the forefront if the case is heard and followed through by the Supreme Court.
The case was filed pro se by four American citizens, and brothers, in Utah who are seeking the removal of President Biden, Vice President Harris, 291 U.S. Representatives, and 94 U.S. Senators who voted to certify the electors to the Electoral College on January 6, 2021, without seriously investigating allegations of election fraud in half a dozen states and foreign election interference and breach of national security in the 2020 Presidential Election.
The outcome of such a case could be the restoration of Donald Trump to the presidency.
Due to the important national security interests, this case implicates the Brunson’s were able to bypass an appeals process, bringing the case straight to the Supreme Court. The case is set to be heard on January 6, 2023. From there, as the Brunsons put in a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, they would only need the votes of four Justices for the case to move forward.
While it may seem unfathomable for the court to think about discussing such a case that could result in a sitting President, who has held the position for the past two years, being removed the security threats this case highlights seem to have been important enough for the court to hear it. The case is penciled in and ready for a hearing. As well as Congress being put on notice of the hearing.
This is a developing story, stay tuned for updates. To read more check out The Gateway Pundit.
get rid of all of them its warranted.
The Supreme Court is not going to do anything to give us back our country or protect us from the destruction that Biden is causing.
About time there’s a snake in the wood pile? The constitution may not cover this? Hopefully the the truth will become known. The 2020 election system had to many unanswered questions and inconsistencies Congress and the Senate failure to investigate allegations of fraud and tampering and foreign interference and the Democratic Party hampering any attempts to allow Any and all types of Auditing using Democratic appointee judges to hinder audits of any type
One term for all elected offices. no office that is elected by the people shall have more than one term only. All elected offices should be paid salary by that district in which they are elected from, no retirement or medical after finishing office of any kind except SSN Medicare when they are old enough to receive it. All pay or salary should be the average mean income in the district from which they are elected. They may receive up to 10% more if they are doing an excellent job and listening to their constituents. The US Senate is for six years. We need to add one more senator per state and re-elect a new senator every two years. Each senator shall be paid from the district in which they are elected. Their salary should be the average salary in their district and Few percentage points more, no medical after they finish their term during their term. They get the equivalent of SSN Medicare only, IF THAN WANT TO BUY IT OK nonetheless, they buy it the House of representative they now serve a two-year term and some states have more than 30 representative this needs to be these needs to be changed a. state should have only 3 6 or 9 representatives only, here again a new ELECTED representative will be elected every two years so the officer the representative would now be six years and no more. Here again their salary will be like the senators above Local elective offices such as City Councilman, mayor, county representative, County Executive an other. These offices will follow the same lines in their terms and salaries as stated above
GOOD!
While the Court does possess the right to exercise original jurisdiction, I do not see anywhere in the Constitution where it has any right in law or equity to remove members of Congress or, regrettably, Biden and Harris short of impeachment which is an exclusive internal process of Congress. Better chance of impeaching Biden and Harris for treason and gross dereliction of duty than this case.
So they do have some Men of Courage left in America
Essentially, the case involves the swearing of an oath to uphold the Constitution and then violating that oath.
The Constitution restricts government powers to the enumeration listed, not only is the Bill of Rights excluded from government legislation but all other rights as well.
All this “Gun Control” legislation is a violation of the Constitution and their oath of office.
Imagine the court trying to tell a “Frontiersman’s” in 1800 he can not possess a gun. “Bruen” decision said the Constitution must be interpreted same as was originally interpreted.
This “White House Steering Committee on Equity” is another violation, the DNC is acting like the Constitution doesn’t exist.
I will sign
Sadly ( and I HOPE THAT I’M WRONG!!! ) – This will go NO WHERE, as the SCOTUS has neither the Backbone or Balls to DO THEIR DAMN JOB!
They are already afraid of this and thus their FEARS will win and not JUSTICE!