Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Slave Negro Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II (USN) Vs. United States of America (Houston Division) et al


                                                             129.

Pursuant to Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), “Negro Slaves” namely Pro Se “Slave Negro” “Louis Charles Hamilton II (USN) affirm, state and fully declare all allegation, contention, disputes, disputation, argument, conflict and disharmony, fully as follows

the Co-Defendant 1000% being The “State of Texas” herein (RICO) enterprising half bake “voting discrimination scheme of thing against the “Negro Race” among other people of "color" within the official “White Only” Constitution of The State of Texas et al

Since 2011 following Pro Se Slave Negro Louis Charles Hamilton II (USN), 1000 (RICO) abduction/mystery false mental prison @ “Texas State Hospital” being 1000% (America) “Negro Mad Maxx” escape Beyond “Thunder Dome” compound @
“Doctor Mind Bender” Asylum/Killer Hospital, suffrage of such 1000% “Murderous hostile attack against his peace, will, dignity, safety and crooked claim “civil rights” of Defendant “United States of America”,

                                                            130.

There after the State of “Mississippi” fully legally declared admittance into the “Union” of the “United States of America”, on or about the exact date of February 7th 2013 thereafter
Co-Defendant “State of Texas” et al “Criminal Directly engaging in an ongoing scheme of enforcement of

“Slavery Servitude” (RICO) enterprise scheme of continual things for “Unjust Enrichment”

 “White Only” engaging in (RICO) enterprising nature in continual criminal acts of Slavery Servitude money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957,

Slavery Servitudemoney laundering statutes, RICO statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961(1) for privileged, polished, well financial secure in Billions “White Only” constitution of America continual

 “Slave Régime” forevermore “Unjust Enrichments” now 2016 - legal and political means to Restore the Founders’ forever pursuant to “Dred Scott” Vs. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)

“Slavery Servitude” in 2013 leaving 44.5 plus still growing “Million Negro race” with no legal standing ever or any actual legal citizenship thereafter the passage of the 13th Amendment of the United States of America Constitution after

 1865 “Civil War” and the official never ending “Texas Black Codes Laws” of 2011 - 2016 past and present direct at among other things (RICO) “Texas Black Codes Voting Fraud Disfranchisement” to keeping

Slavery Servitude” forever 1000% in all Co-Defendant “State of Texas” “legal and political” means to Restore the Founders’ forever pursuant to “Dred Scott” Vs. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) against

 44.5 Million Negro Race 2011 – August 22nd 2013 thereafter February 7th 2013 the State of “Mississippi” fully legally declared admittance into the “Union” of the “Chief Defendant “United States of America” et al herein,

                                                            131.

As legally there upon which The U.S. government sued on Thursday to keep Texas from carrying out a voter identification requirement enacted in 2011, setting up a new battle between the Obama administration and a state that is a conservative stronghold,

The Justice Department said in a suit filed in U.S. District Court in Corpus Christi that Texas state lawmakers passed the requirement to deny racial minorities the right to vote and, unlike other states with similar laws, failed to take steps to prevent the law from being discriminatory,

A federal court in Washington blocked the Texas law in August 2012, but its ruling was undone in June when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

            "We will not allow the Supreme Court's recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights," U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement

Separately, the Justice Department filed a motion to intervene as a plaintiff in a Texas redistricting lawsuit brought on behalf of minority voters
Voter ID laws - which require government-issued identification before voting - have become a political and racial flashpoint across the country. Democrats generally oppose the measures and many Republicans back them.
                                                                        132.
Supporters say they are needed to deter people from illegally casting ballots, while opponents say voter fraud is exaggerated in order to mask purposeful suppression of Democratic constituencies.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, called the Justice Department suit "gutter politics" and "offensive to the overwhelming majority of Texans of all races who support this ballot integrity measure." He has said he will defend the state's voter ID law and redistricting plans in court.

In its ruling a year ago, the federal court in Washington said Texas failed to ensure that voters could obtain ID cards free of charge, noting that people would have to pay to obtain a certified copy of their birth certificate or other proof of their ID and travel to a state office to present it,
Critics argue that such conditions effectively deny voting rights to people without means,
The courts and the Justice Department have allowed voter ID laws in states that guaranteed that voters would face no additional costs as a result of the laws,

Voting rights lawyers have said they expect the Justice Department to sue other jurisdictions, possibly North Carolina over its new voter ID law, as it looks for ways to protect minority voters,

Without naming any states, Holder, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said that the Texas lawsuit "represents the department's latest action to protect voting rights, but it will not be our last

 

No comments:

Post a Comment