SharonsFacebookVideo

SharonYouTubeWidget

SharonSlideShareWidget

Sunday, April 16, 2017

ConstitutionalityMNCommittmentJudgeKarenAsphaug-JonHoffman

 
                          Easter Sun 16Apr2017
                  To the Above Named
                      Affiant VA Widow Mrs. Sharon Anderson aka Scarrella
is duly concerned.
                   WAS ALICE KRENGEL AND MARYJANE DUCHENE COVERTLY 
MURDERED?  

        HAVE THE COURTS CREATED DEATH,DISABILITYS,DISPARAGMENT OF TITLES BY BOGUS PSCY EVALUATIONS ON PETTY/MISDEMEANOR TICKETS,

 
                        Note to Kyle Christopherson to send the Current and newly appointed Members of Commitment Panel.
 
                           Has the State Judges ie Jon Hoffman and Karen Asphaug Exceeded their Jurisdiction/Authority
CommittmentPanel2016          
 
                        In the Matters of Ordering Pscy Eval , specifically on Bill Dahn on a 2 yr old Ticket, that should have been dismissed immnediately based on the Law.                  www.billdahn.blogspot.com
 
                        To Order a Pscy Eval on a Petty or  Misdemeanor Ticket 2 yrs old is Bizzare.

                         
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT AT THIS TIME
                           Re ParensPatrie  Duty of MN AG must intervent in all Commitment and or Psyc Evaluations.
                          www.sharon4mnag.blogspot.com  Forensic Files www.sharon4anderson.org










www.sharon4mayor2018.blogspot.com


LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: www.facebook.com/sharon4anderson www.twitter.com/sharon4anderson Homestead Act of 1862 neopopulism.org - Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson | Scribd Document's are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home | www.slideshare.com/sharonanderson www.taxthemax.blogspot.com www.sharon4anderson.org
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are makinknowledge gained as financial journalists , securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in g such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw Sharons

www.sharon4mnag.blogspot.com


www.taxthemax.blogspot.com
_
http://www.blogger.com/profile/17187848282847569592

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.
Ch.119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this "Message,"

including attachments, may contain the originator's
proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies
recipients Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based
actions. Authorized carriers of this message
shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients. See:
Quon
v. Arch.

Thursday, February 9, 2017

TrumpsOrderImmigration


About time Court Authority/Jurisdiction is challenged We Love Donald Trump Great Businessman who is not a Lying Lawyer.







17 Attorneys General File Amicus Brief In Support Of Virginia’s Lawsuit Against President Trump’s Immigration Ban

New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, And Massachusetts Lead Coalition Of AGs In Support Of A Preliminary Injunction Enjoining The Executive Order Nationwide
Amicus Brief Builds On Another Brief Filed Earlier This Week In 9th Circuit, As Well As Other Legal Action By State Attorneys General –Including The Lawsuit Filed By NY AG Schneiderman In The Eastern District Of NY Last Week
Today, 17 Attorneys General filed an amicus brief in support of the Commonwealth of Virginia’s lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s executive order on immigration. This follows an amicus brief filed earlier this week with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, supporting the Washington State lawsuit against the executive order.
The amicus brief is led by the Attorneys General from New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, and also signed by the Attorneys General from California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Iowa, Maryland, Maine, North Carolina, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. In the amici curiae brief filed today in the Virginia suit, the Attorneys General stated: “The excluded individuals include those with valid U.S. visas that enable them to work, study, and travel within the amici States. The Executive Order thus inhibits the free exchange of information, ideas, and talent between the seven designated countries and the amici States, negatively affecting the financial stability and intellectual vitality of educational and research institutions, and disrupting large and small businesses throughout the States.”
State Attorneys General have been at the forefront of the opposition to President Trump’s order. In addition to the amicus briefs filed this week, New York Attorney General Schneiderman filed to join the lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York last week.
“As Attorneys General, our primary job is to protect the people we represent,” said New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman. “President Trump’s immigration ban represents an all-out assault on the rights of New Yorkers, on our economy and businesses, and on our educational and healthcare institutions. My fellow Attorneys General and I will continue to do everything in our power to strike down this unconstitutional, discriminatory, and chaotic order, and prevent further harm to the people we serve.”
“Choosing who is allowed to come to our country based on their religious beliefs is unconstitutional and discriminatory,” Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said. “As the chief legal officer for one of the most diverse states in the nation, I am committed to protecting all of the residents of Illinois and our educational institutions and employers from the harm caused by this executive action.”
“I am supporting Virginia’s lawsuit because no president is more powerful than our Constitution. As state attorneys general, it is our job to hold this administration accountable and stand for the interests of our states and our residents. Working together, we are united in this nationwide effort," said Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey.
“This filing is about keeping our communities safe, protecting our economy, and upholding the rule of law,” Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said. “Pennsylvania was founded on the promise of liberty and we’re proud to help lead this effort in support of Virginia’s lawsuit.”
“We strongly believe this executive order violates both core constitutional principles and federal law, and we are proud to join with our fellow states in opposing its implementation in this case as well as the 9th Circuit case,” District of Columbia Attorney General Karl A. Racine said. “The District of Columbia, like all of our jurisdictions, is a city that has always thrived thanks to the hard work of immigrants and the educational and scientific resources that visitors and temporary residents from nations all over the world bring to our city every day. We will continue to fight for basic American principles of equal protection, religious freedom, and welcoming people from all nations and cultures.”
“The Trump Administration’s Executive Order is not only a policy that is unwise and dangerous, but it is a policy that is inhumane, inappropriate and un-American,” saidMaryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh. “As Attorneys General, collectively we will use our authority to protect the business community, educational institutions, and our citizens from this unconstitutional order.”
“President Trump’s executive order undermines the core American value of religious tolerance, and it makes us less safe. It signals to the world that America sees all Muslims as terrorists, strengthening ISIS’s propaganda and efforts to recruit terrorists. That is why I will join my colleagues in taking action,” said North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein.
“We will continue to review each lawsuit filed to determine how best we can, individually and collectively, stop the President’s ill-conceived, immoral, and unconstitutional executive order,” said Rhode Island Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin.  “As a state and a nation, we benefit academically, culturally and economically from the many immigrants that make up our communities. This executive order not only has a chilling effect on those communities but also on our academic institutions and our economy.” 
The amicus brief highlights the irreparable harm already caused to the amici states, including disruptions to staffing and intellectual exchange at colleges, universities, and medical institutions; enduring harm to the states’ economies and tax revenues; and the irreparable injury caused by the executive order’s egregious violations of the U.S. Constitution.
In particular, the brief cites the hundreds of employees and thousands of students affected by the order at state educational institutions, as well as disruptions to medical staffing and research. Additionally, the brief highlights the large number of entrepreneurs, developers, and other professionals who are foreign-born, and on which businesses and the states’ economies rely. The order has also caused the amici states to lose both direct and indirect tax revenue; for example, the approximately 1,000 nationals from the designated countries studying in New York on temporary visas have contributed nearly $30.4 million to the State’s economy.
The brief goes on to detail how the executive order violates the Establishment, Due Process, and Equal Protection clauses of the constitution, and how the order’s chaotic implementation has gravely harmed people in the states. As the brief states, “Without judicial action staying the implementation of the Executive Order across the country, our States will see a return of the chaos experienced in our airports beginning on the weekend of January 28 and 29, and continued serious harms to the individuals who live, work, and study in our States; the institutions that employ and educate such persons; and the communities in which they reside.”
The amicus brief calls for the Court to enter a preliminary injunction enjoining the operation of the executive order on a nationwide basis.