U.S. Supreme Court dockets case on fraud upon the court, unlawful/unconstitutional jurisdictional defects

by Laurie Azgard
Update on 6/16/2020 11:07PM: Solicitor General files waiver of response to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in U.S. Supreme Court on issues of fraud upon the court, failure to act on pending motions

The U.S. Supreme Court has now done it’s job by docketing the case of In re: Brian David Hill, a writ of mandamus/prohibition challenging a federal Court’s jurisdiction to have ever wrongfully convicted and revoked the probation of Brian D. Hill, formerly of USWGO alternative news from 2009 to 2012. One such basis is a repeated pattern of fraud upon the court by the assistant US attorney Anand Prakash Ramaswamy and others.

Photograph of Brian D. Hill, Alex Jones, and Stewart Rhodes – dated June, 2012
Screenshot of a news report of Brian D. Hill that had been sued by Righthaven, LLC in 2011 in federal court

The cowardly U.S. Magistrate judge Joe Webster from Durham, North Carolina admitted in his order and recommendation that even if Brian had merit of any of his claims, that the Court would simply deny it which means that the activist judges are ignoring the Supreme Court case law precedent stating that actual innocence is exempt from the one-year statute of limitations governing federal writ of habeas corpus petitions.

Quote 1 from the Magistrate judge’s pleading:


“Second, the potential merits of a claim do not impact the timeliness analysis, so any argument along these lines must also fail.”


g. The Merits: As explained above, all of Petitioner’s grounds are time-barred. However, if the Court were to reach the merits of Petitioner’s grounds for relief, it would deny them.

You heard it right from the Judge’s own words, even if the “court were to reach the merits of Petitioner’s grounds for relief, it would deny them.” So actual innocence does not matter to those judges, and that contradicts the various multiple case law rulings from the Supreme Court and other past court decisions that fraud upon the court is not subject to a state of limitations, and that actual innocence is not subject to a procedural time bar as such time bar would constitute a cruel and unusual punishment against a man/woman innocent of a crime but wrongfully convicted of.

The entire federal case file can be accessed on the courtlistener website as well as the Internet archive website.

The frauds upon the court is a very substantial case that is of national importance. When a court discovers that it was the victim of fraud or a repeated pattern of frauds, then the entire case has jurisdictional issues and can be attacked on its face and is not ever subject to a statute of limitations which is a procedural time-bar. For example ever since the passage of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act [AEDPA] that had been created after the Oklahoma city federal building being bombed allegedly by Timothy McVeigh who was considered a right-wing terrorist by the media, all federal writs of habeas corpus were set to have a one-year statute of limitations barring a petition if it is filed even one day after the 1-year period of time for a federal prisoner or probationer to file a 2255 or any other request for federal relief through the writ of habeas corpus. That would be one year after the final judgment which would be the final judgment of the tribunal/court or one year after the timely appeal of the final judgment of the tribunal/court.

Campaign to impeach Judge Schroeder

The DisHonorable Thomas David Schroeder considered the Magistrate’s opinions and dismissed Brian’s 2255 motion on actual innocence grounds on new year’s eve of 2019 as we were going into the year of 2020, the election year. This judge on record has ignored pending motions before him which violates his judicial and ministerial duties as a judicial officer of his respective court. This judge had even ignored any evidence and witness that would have been in Brian’s favor, the defense team’s favor. This judge ignored Pete Compton who admitted that Brian was a victim of carbon monoxide gas exposure that almost killed him and his mother Roberta Hill who had also filed affidavits in Brian’s federal case and his state case. Carbon monoxide gas and poison is a tactic of the deep state swamp CIA when they want to assassinate somebody and make it look like an accident.

The frauds upon the court would actually be enough that any reasonable judge or courthouse would throw the entire criminal or civil case out for being founded on fraud or frauds. That is common sense and logical as a case that was grounded on fraud by the prosecutor should never have held a favorable judgment against the party that was a victim of fraud. Any federal or state cases that had a lack of due process whatsoever has lack of jurisdiction.

QAnon has been listening, that Brian is under attack by the corrupt deep state swamp creatures.

Read this blog entry: From JP–More case law on Fraud on the Court and Void Judgments and how to attack them

See the document filed in the Supreme Court record:

Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperiscopy on this blog

Petitioncopy on this blog

Appendixcopy on this blog

Proof of Servicecopy on this blog

Original petition and appendix, Supreme Court chose their own investigated appendix but it includes different judgments which seem to accompany the entire case itself concerning both the probation revocation and the dismissal of the 2255

26 thoughts on “U.S. Supreme Court dockets case on fraud upon the court, unlawful/unconstitutional jurisdictional defects

Add yours

  1. http://www.judicialcriminal.com
    Michigan Family Court entered a non-consented to “settlement agreement” and two amendments (three judgment’s) in my case, that should be VACATED, and illegally subjected me to bench warrants, the loss of my home and all contents, professional licenses, retirement accounts, and life savings, for parental rights. Michigan Democratic State Representative read my book and responded to me November 19, 2019: ” With that all said, it is still well documented that either recourse is an uphill, and sometimes impossible, battle for a person when looking for judicial recourse and is in need of reform.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: