No.

___________________

IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUSAN HERBERT

A Natural Born Citizen Who Is A Mother And So Shed Her Blood And Risked Her Life
In Defense Of The Constitution Or We, The People
Thus The Protected Right Is Hers

Petitioner/Applicant/Defendant,
v.

BARACK OBAMA
JOHN ROBERTS
FRANK HULL
And
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondents.

______________________

PETITION TO BE REHEARD
OR
FINAL DEMAND TO BE HEARD IN PERSON
AS THE AUTHORITY ISN’T ASKING YOU FOR ANYTHING
_______________________

Susan Herbert, pro se

1100 Seagate Avenue 101
Neptune Beach, FL 32266
904-705-6171

1
The time to trade paper back and forth has come and gone. SCOTUS has finally become
repugnant thus all of its actions are automatically void as it has violated the last line in
Marbury that I needed it to violate to then submit what constitutes a judgment of default to the
proper ‘court’.

The latest decision out of SCOTUS reads “DENIAL” but that is not possible in this type of
case based upon all fact such as previous court action and US history. It must then be a
judgment of default, that is, SCOTUS has now defaulted thus tried and found the People and
the military in abstentia when we could appear and wanted to appear in person. We all know
SCOTUS has no rule covering this situation and we all know SCOTUS wildly and recklessly
invokes its own rule as law as if it can and may supercede the authority of the written
Constitution and The People. Thus it has no provision for DEFAULTING as by its very
nature to default is to perpetrate a coup or to actively overthrow the Constitution both written
and living. It’s to do it or to participate with full knowing, willingness and deliberation. It is
to target mothers and enlisted service members directly and unjustly as that’s all it can be in a
case revolving around natural birth in both letter and spirit. And we all know SCOTUS has no
office to then submit a judgment of default thus we can reasonably assume SCOTUS meant to
injure mothers and enlisted service members in a permanent, impossible manner – death,
without any reason or cause other than the Justices and clerks own selfish interests like their
titles and paychecks.

US law and code is if you act in such a manner and cause the death of a citizen you then may
be subject to a charge of treason and the death penalty in return.

I know exactly what ‘court’ to enter this judgment to and last year I set up the exact situation
whereby SCOTUS must hear this case or die as an institution: you will be rounded up,
charged and placed in jail until the common law courts try you as your guilt is proven by your
final or absolute EXACT violation of Marbury thus you are no longer acting under original
intent. The SCOTUS docket is my incontrovertible proof, the piece of proof no other
American ever had. So here we go, keeping in mind no sane, rational person can read my
brief or petition 09-6777 or the rulings this very Court has generated (and/or the Court rule)
and claim you are in the right as I was ‘nice’ to you this last time out and even accorded you
every opportunity I could going so far as to claim you are geniuses and yet I am still the
victim of what meets the definition of criminal activity or else Marbury could never have
come to be wholly violated and I would not be the very first American who is denied any and
all protection of US law only as lower judges and employees of SCOTUS injured me and

2
violated my rights. YES, you’re geniuses - as either you’re legal geniuses or criminal
masterminds and so I guess we will once and for all find out which one it is:

"The Government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of
laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation if the laws
furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal right." I have exhuasted the process
thus a denial is SCOTUS claiming zero remedy or relief exists which is a lie, an exact lie, as
hearing in person exists and is entirely awardable and in this case is what Marshal instructed
you to do. Thus SCOTUS is deciding we are not a nation of law and are animals not men plus
we can’t govern our own selves. Lies, lies, lies. This denial then is repugnant thus void, the
Justices who wrote it are repugnant and SCOTUS itslef is repugnant thus void. You wil be
removed and the doors of this courthouse will be closed.

“If courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any
ordinary act of the legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern
the case to which they both apply.” SCOTUS may not invoke ANY court rule as law; its
rules concerning ‘you must ask for a writ’ are void exactly as USC 1331 is void as they are
repugnant in my case as they then make it impossible to secure justice due to chain of
command theory and the Office of the Executive also being the Office of Commander.
SCOTUS must invoke The Constitution and in this case may not cite Art. III to avoid doing
its duty as that then is a crime. SCOTUS may not deny The People, the military or myself any
and all protection of the law but then find us under the law. Citing Art. III grants SCOTUS a
right not named anywhere in our law, makes the Justices and other SCOTUS employees a
privileged class and is an act in this unique case which Marshall said you may not do: Violate
moral authority or violate the spirit of our law. All SCOTUS has is moral authority as we all
have the same legal power, one vote, thus violating moral authority makes ME, The People
and the military the authority not SCOTUS. This denial then is an act that is repugnant that
then voids the institution itself as being unconstitutional as SCOTUS can no longer be organic
to the People if it denies those people an appearance in person to address the violation of a
fully vested fundamental right. Therefore upon the fall of SCOTUS I may then as the acting,
legal Commander invoke martial law. Do not be surprised if there is a knock on your chamber
door and it is not the mailman but the authority, handing you your walking papers while
placing handcuffs on your wrists.

“The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to
claim the protection of the laws, whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties

3
of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain the king himself is sued in the
respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” In
the third volume of his Commentaries, page 23, Blackstone states two cases in which a
remedy is afforded by mere operation of law. 'In all other cases,' he says, 'it is a general
and indisputable rule, that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by
suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded.' And afterwards, page 109 of the same
volume, he says, 'I am next to consider such injuries as are cognizable by the courts of
common law. And herein I shall for the present only remark, that all possible injuries
whatsoever, that did not fall within the exclusive cognizance of either the ecclesiastical,
military, or maritime tribunals, are, for that very reason, within the cognizance of the
common law courts of justice; for it is a settled and invariable principle in the laws of
England, that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its
proper redress.'” Obviously; it’s self-evident as you would not have rights i.e. protection of
the law if there were actually and legally no redress and no remedy and relief for injury. Also
obvious is: “By the act concerning invalids, passed in June 1794, the secretary at war is
ordered to place on the pension list all persons whose names are contained in a report
previously made by him to congress. If he should refuse to do so, would the wounded
veteran be without remedy? Is it to be contended that where the law in precise terms
directs the performance of an act in which an individual is interested, the law is
incapable of securing obedience to its mandate? Is it on account of the character of the
person against whom the complaint is made? Is it to be contended that the heads of
departments are not amenable to the laws of their country? Whatever the practice on
particular occasions may be, the theory of this principle will certainly never be maintained. [5
U.S. 137, 165] . No act of the legislature confers so extraordinary a privilege, nor can it
derive countenance from the doctrines of the common law. After stating that personal
injury from the king to a subject is presumed to be impossible, Blackstone, Vol. III. p.
255, says, 'but injuries to the rights of property can scarcely be committed by the crown
without the intervention of its officers: for whom, the law, in matters of right, entertains
no respect or delicacy; but furnishes various methods of detecting the errors and
misconduct of those agents by whom the king has been deceived and induced to do a
temporary injustice.'” MY PROPERTY INTEREST IS THE PEOPLE, THE MILITARY
AND MY TWO BIOLOGICAL CHILDREN AS WELL AS MY OWN PERSON. I
SUFFERED PHYSICAL INJURY, RECALL? THIS ESCALATED UNTIL YOU
ASSAULTED AND BATTERED THE WRITTEN DOCUMENTS. THE PROPERTY
INTEREST IS THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS AMENDED W/O DUE PROCESS AT
LEAST THREE TIMES. SO FORGET THE PEOPLE; ARE YOU ABOUT TO TELL US

4
THAT THE PHYSICAL PAPER DOCUMENTS THE TAXPAYERS OWN ARE NOT
PROPERTY??? I’d think land, vegetation, minerals, water, air and animals is a given. [An
side: The dependence of American lawyers and judges most especially Justices to rely upon
Blackstone’s, or, to ignore every petitioner who does not rely on this work and its form, is
also unconstitutional. I was exactly told by a lawyer that the reason I was getting nowhere
with SCOTUS is that I did not use Blackstone’s as my crutch. I objected; I said, “No, the
reason SCOTUS, both the clerks and the Justices, is hell bent upon facing a firing squad is:
This case is a logic problem that then is a pattern of complex concepts. As I use much more
than 10% of my brain the logic and the patterns are very easy for me to process and discern; I
can extrapolate smaller and smaller ideas...but I understand it wholly, or, as time is not in a
linear fashion. I do not need any of these patterns or concepts to appear in linear order to
understand them and recognize them; I can handle much more information than any Justice
can thus as I must dumb this down in what seems to be an ad infinitum manner too much
information is then lost. Then the Justices are not even making those tiniest of all connections,
as I had to remove them so they could process one minuscule idea after another, such as no
such Writ exists to cover this situation as you do not ask for anything let alone mandamus to
then stop criminal activity as that is a arrest or death warrant or prohibition as that too is an
arrest or death warrant if it is agiasnt a SCOTUS employee, instead of the larger single
concept let alone a pattern of concepts. I will quote: “Concepts fit together in patterns in
order for there to be communication between us. I must disentangle a concept from its
pattern, which is somewhat difficult. It is somewhat like having to disentangle a particular
word from a strong emotional association. I experience patterns made up of concepts,
and you use words in associations. When I speak to you I must disentangle the concept
from the patterns, which sometimes leaves me with short ends because it is natural for
me to experience the concepts in their entirety; and yet I must drop very important data
by the wayside because you are not capable of handling it, except in consecutive form.” “

I’m experiencing patterns made up of concepts, some of them complex, while SCOTUS is
experiencing absolute ideas such as: “we’ll never be held accountable” or “she can’t tell us
what to do”. That’s an idea; the concept would be the discrimination of women realized as
overthrow of The Constitution and skewing power in favor of a title when our law reads one
person, one vote and equal protection; the pattern is acting as if the law does not apply to you,
the titled person, when clearly I’m your boss under US law as you’re the one who takes pay
for what he does while I do not thus all moral authority belongs to me, obliterating your one
vote as my vote negates it. Think of this demand as me, the authority, voting against you, not

5
the authority. To win against me you would then have to possess at least some moral authority
and this latest denial is proof – you do not.

And the final nail in your coffin: “The question whether a right has vested or not, is, in its
nature, judicial, and must be tried by the judicial authority, If, for example, Mr.
Marbury had taken the oaths of a magistrate, and proceeded to act as one; in
consequence of which a suit had been instituted against him, in which his defence had
depended on his being a magistrate; the validity of his appointment must have been
determined by judicial authority. So, if he conceives that by virtue of his appointment he
has a legal right either to the commission which has been made out for him or to a copy
of that commission, it is equally a question examinable in a court, and the decision of the
court upon it must depend on the opinion entertained of his appointment. That question
has been discussed, and the opinion is, that the latest point of time which can be taken as
that at which the appointment was complete, and evidenced, was when, after the
signature of the president, the seal of the United States was affixed to the commission.” I
have claimed from day one my commission is a part of my defense. No matter what
commission you examine, are you about to tell us that the President did not sign the
Declaration, Constitution and 19th amendment? That by voting The People did not sign these
same documents? Or by appearing before SCOTUS, or rather by hiring legal representatives
to appear IN PERSON, that they did not sign Marbury? Once you violate this sentence by not
allowing for that in person appearance:

SCOTUS AS AN INSTITUTION IS REPUGNANT THUS AUTOMATICALLY VOID AS

THE CONSTITUTIONALLY SET GOVERNMENT ISN’T THE PAPER BUT THE
PEOPLE, LIVE ONES NOT DEAD BODIES AND NOT NAMES UPON DEAD PAPER.
THE DENIAL IS REPUGNANT AS ARE THE OFFICERS THAT CREATED IT – NO
MATTER WHAT ACTION THEY TOOK AND/OR FAILED TO TAKE – AS IT GRANTS
AUTHORITY AND POWER OR PRECEDENT TO DEAD PAPER - THUS IT’S VOID
AND SCOTUS IS TOO, AS BY ITS VERY NATURE A REPUBLIC THEN MEANS THIS
CANNOT HAPPEN INSIDE SCOTUS OR ELSE THE OVERTHROW AND ENSUING
FOREIGNIZATION IS THE FAULT OF THE SCOTUS EMPLOYEES; IT MAKES
WHAT WAS A COURT OF LAW A COURT OF MEN AND THEIR PERSONAL WHIM
& WILL.

My defense is my commission was not only delivered but a seal affixed. Am I to believe the
19th amendment is not signed, sealed and entered thus delivered? Or that the two governing

6
original contracts aren’t? Forget the originals: The 1871 Constitution is signed, sealed,
entered and delivered and you defaulted upon that too AFTER overthrowing it (BVG) and the
original. And you know, SCOTUS singed, sealed entered and delivered its ruling as well that
then constitutes another commission. SCOTUS forgot one thing:

I took an oath in person and then exactly and specifically entered my commission to act
as President and Commander having been signed, sealed, entered and delivered as my
defense. I appeared in person in NY after SCOTUS once again had this case; knowing
overthrow is I then took the oath of office in open court and proceeded to enter as my defense
the fact that my SCOTUS case, establishing that I was the authority and my commission had
been delivered and so I was now acting upon my knowledge of it. The judge asked me to my
face EXACTLY to state whether my commission was state or federal, as in the NY State
Supreme Court or THE Supreme Court of the US? I answered, “The Supreme Court of the
US.” I entered this defense in both writing and orally. After the hearing I then contacted the
judge: “If you believe that you can weasel out of this think again: NOBODY is going to
believe you when you cry you did not know it was a federal case and that you did not know
you were obstructing justice by filing and docketing a case over which you never had legal
jurisdiction and still do not. You asked me the question as to what Supreme Court as your
planned defense is ignorance, as in you did not know it was SCOTUS. You can’t read the
docket or what I entered? The court record will fall apart under examination; the transcript of
the proceeding will prove you are a criminal instead of making it seem as if what you did is
legal. Thanks for asking me that question! Now: Try again as you are caught.” I then went on
to inform this judge that the exactly named Creator delivered the only commission that counts
as he endowed us with will and liberty and what god has joined no man can disjoin. See A
Summary View Of The Rights Of British America, Jefferson. I stated that I entered my case
having won so all I had to do is wear SCOTUS out as eventually they would back themselves
into a corner as this is a logic problem the greatest minds on the planet grappled with
throughout human history and I resolved it. I stated all of SCOTUS put together, every
employee and indeed ever crook in this nation combined, did not have the intellectual prowess
to defeat me and certainly no other person possessed my will. It is logic problem you CAN’T
wrap your minds around as you do not have the human ability to access that region of your
brain while I do; call me a freak of nature thus this nation needs me. You can’t access that
area until a physical event occurs as you will it into being; if you’re not wiling to go there? In
person? You remain unknowledgeable; that area of your brain remains dormant. I then said,
‘Your actions against me caused me to die and caused my children to be injured beyond repair
thus you gave me nothing to lose. You took it all, even my life, thus I have no reason to NOT

7
attack as I know as fact how this ending will play itself out.’ I then added: You do not have
the power to stop me from claiming my destiny and fate as that is an act of God.

I exactly named every element of the commission and Linda Griffin in an attempt to be her
same old nasty self then WROTE THIS DOWN EXACTLY EVEN REFERRING TO IT AS
BOTH A LETTER AND A COURT DOCUMENT, PART OF THE RECORD. She denied
and ignored my entire written answer, every fact and law save a single scientific law, but still
entered my defense, the commission is good and is mine; it is binding, valid and legal. She
too named every element such as SCOTUS and “God” as I used words to trip her up, to make
her do what I needed her to do, what is legal as it gives me my defense; I flipped a nasty
lawyer trick right back on her.

I told SCOTUS time and time again: NONE of this is random; people too are not random.
You’re a science so I can and do know exactly how you will respond. I can plan for it. I can
design a plan and execute it accounting for you. I can and do make the impossible then
possible. If SCOTUS sets up what is impossible? There’s always a way around it as
Blackstone’s tells you if you pay attention to what you, your own self, cite and invoke as law
when it is not and it’s British not American to boot: If it is a right, an actual right, then it is
inalienable so that SCOTUS may not deny it or take it from you thus if they try just find the
thing in this universe that you can use as a force against the now criminal SCOTUS action;
you’ll win as you’re using what is actual reality while they are using what they personally like
– what is fantasy - so they have no law and no natural force on their side but you do. From
BLACKSTONES.

I reduced the entire work into a single concept, JUSTICES UNLIKE KINGS NOT ONLY
ARE DUPED INTO DOING INJUSTICE BUT ISSUE CRIMINAL ORDERS THEIR
AGENTS THEN ACT UPON MAKING THEM ALL CRIMINALS aka after stating
that personal injury from the king to a subject is presumed to be impossible the law, in
matters of right...furnishes various methods of the errors and misconduct of those agents
by whom the king has been deceived and induced to do a temporary injustice, the ideas or
parts of which appear in a linear, consecutive sequence in this new petition and in all of my
documents so that you might understand. This court itself unjustly and insanely added "not
possible if you sport the label Supreme Court" as if a king and all other people could do it but
SCOTUS could not, as if only SCOTUS could not cause injury, which you will find no where
in Blackstone's or US - not the exact words, the idea or the concept. It does not exist in this
universe as NOTHING makes only SCOTUS, the clerks and Justices, ABSOLUTELY

8
PERFECT and so beyond any and all human error – as if they are Gods and Kings, or, British
exactly as Obama once claimed to be.

SCOTUS has made any actual or legal appeal out of NY impossible as it has treated me like
no other American ever. All NY is going to do is what it has always doen and that is issue an
unconstitutional denial as SCOTUS has told it ‘we will never allow her to appear in person as
she is a woman, a genius, a nonlawyer and a natural born American. NY has told me it intends
to do this – once in a letter. As SCOTUS did this? This ruling then makes justice impossible
for the US military as well as all other people as any ruling made after this is then void as it is
nothing but personal and arbitrary once the law is completely overthrown and the process
killed.. I will word it for SCOTUS once more as I worded it for another:

“The question whether a right has vested or not, is, in its nature, judicial, and must be
tried by the judicial authority. If, for example, Mr. Marbury had taken the oaths of a
magistrate, and proceeded to act as one; in consequence of which a suit had been
instituted against him, in which his defence had depended on his being a magistrate; the
validity of his appointment must have been determined by judicial authority. [I took the
oath and proceeded to act. My defense and so defense of the nation depends upon being the
President and Commander. I exactly named this as my defense in NY, a court action
undertaken while I was still within SCOTUS but after I had already won the first time.
Judicial authority must review it. SCOTUS had the proof: My petition, brief and motions and
the NY court order denying the SCOTUS docket and denying The Constitution thus violating
it. I appeared pro se in SCOTUS and in NY thus proving I did fulfill the oath of office. I
informed the judge of my authority – to her face - and so it is on the court record. In NY, in
October of 2008, before the election and before giving this testimony, I swore an oath, an
actual oath thus I took and fulfilled the oath of office as it reads I WILL not MY LAWYER
WILL. And all courts are courts of constitutional authority as The Constitution is the
standard and as you can and may enter with a federal case concerning the violation of a fully
vested fundamental right and/or a constitutional authority case. It’s entirely possible and it
happened to me as I exhausted the Judiciary. Upon leaving NY and re-entering SCOTUS as
the Commander as well as the President this time around I then hired people who found me
upon reading my case and citizens acknowledge me as the President and Commander. Thus
the SCOTUS denial issued on 11/09/09 and it itself as it now exists is repugnant and so void
and the power of judicial review is automatically granted to the military via my standing as
Commander].” – John Marshall & Susan Herbert

9
SCOTUS has only two choices: Hear this case in person or cease to exist as a court of law as
the proper authority will be called upon to use force to remove you, try you and hang you as
at least one mother and one enlisted service member died as a direct result of your refusal to
hear this case when your own original charter, your own original intent, says you must.
Treason and death is exactly named within the Constitution thus there is no other recourse;
it’s your death. You’ll die one way or the other. I am not going to violate the Constitution for
you, as this is the problem: You invoking Art. III to deny people justice by avoiding duty such
as reporting the exact details of criminal acts that you have, that you know.

THIS COURT KNOWS AND ALWAYS HAS KNOWN BUSH AND OBAMA ARE NOT
LEGAL AND THAT CRIMES WERE COMMITTED AGAINST ME, MOTHERS AND
ENLISTED SERVICE MEMBERS BUT REFUSED TO DO ITS MOST BASIS DUTY. IT
ATTEMPTED TO CITE ART. III TO EXCUSE THIS CRIMINAL, TRAITOROUS
ACTIVITY AND ATTEMPTED TO DO SO ONCE MORE AFTER IT DENIED THOSE
SAME PEOPLE ANY AND ALL PROTECTION OF THE LAW THUS AS THE PLAYING
FIELD IS NOW LEVELED BY ME SCOTUS CANNOT AND MAY NOT CITE ART. III,
AS THAT IS YOU FINDING US IN ABSTENTIA WHEN YOU DO NOT ACCORD US
THE SAME PROTECTION YOU NOW EXPLOIT AND WHEN YOU REFUSE TO
ALLOW US ENTRY IN FAVOR OF LAWYERS, PEOPLE FORMALLY TRAINED IN
THE LAW, WHO ARE GUILTY, IN FAVOR OF THE WEALTHY, IN FAVOR OF
ACTUAL TERRORISTS AND IN FAVOR OF PAPER AND TITLES OR DEAD
INSTITUTIONS. [An aside: You do realize that the actual 9/11 bombers were allowed entry
to the very same NY courts that denied me an appearance in person? And then threw out my
petitions naming me as the plaintiff thus refusing to allow me to file as the plaintiff but only
the defendant as if I am guilty, to make it seem as if, and later ignored and denied my paper
appearance to get around all fact and law? NY made me the defendant; NY gave me this
defense. NY made my commission a part of my defense as did SCOTUS itself.

“So, if he conceives that, by virtue of his appointment, he has a legal right, either to the
commission which has been made out for him, or to a copy of that commission, it is
equally a question examinable in a court, and the decision of the court upon it must
depend on the opinion entertained of his appointment.

That question has been discussed, and the opinion is, that the latest point of time which
can be taken as that at which the appointment was complete, and evidenced, was when,
after the signature of the president, the seal of the United States was affixed to the

10
commission. [The Declaration, Constitution and 19th Amendments were signed and a seal
affixed. I also affixed a seal to my documents.]

It is then the opinion of the court: 1st. That by signing the commission of Mr. Marbury, the
president of the United States appointed him a justice of peace, for the county of
Washington in the district of Columbia; and that the seal of the United States, affixed
thereto by the secretary of state, is conclusive testimony of the verity of the signature, and
of the completion of the appointment; and that the appointment conferred on him a legal
right to the office for the space of five years. 2dly. That, having this legal title to the office,
he has a consequent right to the commission; a refusal to deliver which, is a plain
violation of that right, for which the laws of his country afford him a remedy.”

If SCOTUS seeks a stand off? You and I will be meeting IN PERSON in a court of law
only you will not have the home field advantage.

How dare you question my authority? How dare you question the authority of The People or
the military? How dare you violate the very principles The Founders gave up their lives to
accord us? How dare you sink to become every single rotten thing you have ever been
accused of being? How dare you sit under a portrait of Marshall and shake hands, entering an
honor bound agreement to defame him and our Constitution? How dare you make an attempt
to revoke the Declaration as if you are a god? How dare you sell us, literally sell us, back to
the Crown when you know Obama openly advertised on his own website that he was subject
to that Crown upon birth? How dare you condone premeditation as the Secret Service began
protecting him 18 months BEFORE the election and as his associates began arguing for the
repeal of the natural birth clause and so our sovereignty as far back as 2006? You know as I
informed you.

How dare you surrender to Britain and colonial rule, SOCIALISM and DESPOTISM, without
a fight? You are nothing more than cowards as genius does a coward no good and at this point
your genius is now in question isn’t it? as is your sanity. There’s something else The Founders
including your personal patron saint John Marshall said you may not do: Fail to put up a
fight.

I fought: I changed it all up by suing the Justices and the clerks themselves for what is an
original case decided WRONGLY not in error as we do not give our opinion where sworn
truth –fact - is concerned and/or math is concerned as it is inviolate; it is exactly worded law
and US case law. Math will never, ever change in this universe. Thus as all men have unclean

11
hands, no male clerk could legally touch my petition and as the clerks did not know the real,
actual reasons BVG is wrong and became a coup, no clerk then could reason the massive
point of law and so correctly summarize my case for a Justice; the clerks could never, ever
overcome the conflict.

The Constitution is already overthrown or Obama would not be sitting and BVG never would
have been heard. I warned this court that you would be signing your own death warrants and I
meant it as all I ever needed to call out the US military and The People against SCOTUS was
this very ruling, a DENIAL of our right to redress of the violation of a fully vested interest
and right as that then is SCOTUS committing what is treason and so constitutional authority
belongs to The People via common law courts and the military; this DENIAL w/o any named
reasoning and with out any respondent answering? It is the US military’s marching orders; it
allows them to act against the sitting officers thus put bullets in all of your heads or better yet
blow up the damn building with all of you inside: IF SCOTUS IS THE INSTITUTION
THAT HEARD AN ORIGINAL CASE AND DECIDED IT WRONGLY THUS
INSTALLED A PRESIDENT IN WHAT NOW IS A CRIMINAL MANNER AS IT
REFUSED TO ADDRESS THAT VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS THEN SCOTUS IS
INVOKING MARTIAL LAW AGAINST ITS OWN SELF. SCOTUS IS THE
INSTITUTION AT FAULT, IT IS GUILTY OF IT ALL AS LONG AS REDRESS IS
DENIED, AND SCOTUS WILL BE MADE TO PAY THE CONSTITUTIONALLY SET
PRICE.

As for extraordinary circumstances and intervening circumstances: In this type of case? ALL
defendants must enter an actual, written response or else neither the US nor my one person
can defend ourselves. The only case law that is applicable set this precedent. And now we
aren’t being allowed to face our accusers: The clerks and Justices that tried and found us in
abstentia. This happens to be US law and US case law as Marbury received a response and a
hearing in person; the Court named an actual reason they were denying him his paper
commission- it’s the wrong court - but it’s the correct court this time as SCOTUS did this to
us via Bush V Gore and by previously denying me entry and by refusing to file paperwork it
acted upon thus is accountable and responsible and if no hearing in person is granted then
guilty too due all of the action that took place in my case within SCOTUS.

As I now possess the incontrovertible proof Justice Department asked for, the SCOTUS
docket that is an extraordinary and intervening circumstance as the DOJ never believed
SCOTUS would go and create it but SCOTUS did, I have notified them that I did secure the

12
proof and requested an investigation based upon it and so I am in the process of filing federal
criminal charges (the FBI is a branch of that Department but is not the Department itself); I
have taken action to convene a common law court as The People themselves have secured 15
convictions and have merely been waiting on the military to enforce them which it now can
and may and I have contacted the military as I now have the proof they requested – again the
SCOTUS docket showing that I did stand aside and now down the sitting Chief Justice thus
the military may take action against the officers of this Court as well as enforce the common
law courts rulings; and I have made arrangements with the Secret Service to be arrested upon
a charge of making a threat against the sitting Chief Justice plus the sitting Executive to then
force the US to prosecute me criminally whereby I will turn the tables on this institution and
secure jury nullification of SCOTUS as well as both Roberts appointment, Obama’s
installation and the acting clerk’s positions. I’m going to ask that SCOTUS itself as an
institution be found null and void. I know the US has no defense as it does not exist thanks to
SCOTUS and I know The People will side with me as they have told me so. As Roberts and
the clerks will then be a party to a criminal action I may call them to testify in open court and
so we will discover what actually occurred inside this court and to my person. SCOTUS has
ruled that nobody may claim privileged immunity: “neither the doctrine of separation of
powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high level communications, without more, can
sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process
under all circumstances” US V Nixon decided 8-0 as it established the conditional nature of
presidential immunity not to follow the plurality view in Barr v. Matteo of absolute
administrative immunity. It reined in extravagant assertions of President Richard Nixon's
lawyers, who claimed presidential power to be unlimited, especially as to foreign and defense
matters, and defined solely by a president's own judgment; in refuting such claims and
proclaiming that no one is above the law, Chief Justice Warren Burger's opinion nevertheless
twice quoted Chief Justice John Marshall's words, in United States v. Burr to the effect that
presidential accountability to the legal order does not mean courts may proceed with the
president as with any other citizen, which is WHY Susan came to SCOTUS –as she can
reason this applies to a sitting Chief Justice as well. I can imagine US V John Roberts and/or
US V SCOTUS, et al. as Bush V Gore caused so much damage and death.

Also extraordinary and interveningly: Since I entered the Petition? NY defaulted when it
called the US Marshals and perjured themselves as they reported me for doing nothing more
than filing within SCOTUS and then serving them legal notice AS THE LAW AND COURT
RULES INSTRUCTS ME TO DO. A lie was told; these NY judges said I threatened them in
a dangerous, life threatening manner. Nowhere in any document will you find any such threat.

13
As a appellate judge did it then it constitutes default thus my defense left NY and landed
here.

SCOTUS will never, ever triumph over The Constitution – over the People and the military.
NEVER. That would constitute SCOTUS triumphing over the universe, over God. It’s not
going to happen. SCOTUS then can obey its original intent and its own rulings but first The
Constitution or it can go down in literal flames, as the choice is yours as that is liberty.

Volunteer to live or die but this entire universe is all voluntary. We The People volunteered
and swore an oath. If what you want and need as proof of your unconstitutional and now
criminal actions is The Creator smiting you out of existence? The People and the military will
be more than happy to defend themselves against the likes of you. I do not have to remind
you that every pay check you cash constitutes an emolument and was given to you as a bribe
by a foreign authority, do I? Like this denial is not an actual or legal denial your paycheck is
no longer an actual or legal paycheck but something else.

If SCOTUS does not surrender to me, The People and the military then We will use lethal
force to remove you and SCOTUS will cease to exist thus I secure exactly what I set out to
secure: The end of SCOTUS as we know it and, without SCOTUS, constitutional authority
falls to the lone citizen via the common law and/or military courts. Constitutional authority
and so judicial review as the right of the citizen vests as does natural birth and I would know
as I acted to fully vest it and as justice is not possible any other way if SCOTUS is not willing
to obey the law. If SCOTUS will not do the least of its duties, hear living people who are not
lawyers or name an actual reason other that the no longer good Art. III, then SCOTUS is no
longer organic to The People thus is repugnant and so void. We can and will wipe it off the
face of this Earth for if we can’t appear in person within it and if the Justices and/or clerks are
bragging they do not have to obey The Constitution they now exploit than why let it exist at
all?

John Marshall said, “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department
to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity,
expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each. So if a law be in opposition to the Constitution; if both
the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either
decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution; or conformably
to the Constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of these
conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.”

14
Marshall did not say “except for natural birth” or “except for when the citizens make law via a
direct vote by installing a person who is not qualified to hold the Office of the Executive”.
SCOTUS can’t have it two ways – denying The People authority one minute but then forcing
it upon them then next via unconstitutional and criminal denials and other unjust rulings that
we are not ‘allowed’ to fight which leave us no recourse but violence and by refusing to create
the venue as SCOTUS seems to believe it is above the law. If SCOTUS refuses to create the
venue then we inform SCOTUS: The real, actual reason Marshall and no other person or court
ever ruled the only clause that can’t be adjudicated is “natural birth” is because we were born
in a war and so we can and may be born again in a war especially if SCOTUS is ‘ordering’
the only redress possible is violent redress. We can and may create the venue via another war
as we did that first time, in 1776.

The Constitution conflicts with the law some of not all of the citizens made via a direct
vote that violates every one of my fundamental rights such as due process, liberty, equal
protection, freedom of speech, religion and press, natural birth and custody of my
children. It made me the defendant in NY and I have already exhausted the NY
Appellate twice over thus I remain the defendant and the commission is apart of my
defense plus the law the citizens made is now on the table as SCOTUS must adjudicate
the issue or cease to exist as an institution. The Constitution provides no means to make
law via the direct vote of The People be they innocent or guilty.

SCOTUS may not personally like it but I did what Marshall instructed while William
Marbury did not thus my defense will always be mounted in SCOTUS or in front of
The People, either a common law court or via military action and any common law
action must then be enforced by the military thus I, Susan, go straight to the military
upon a the infliction of a wrong, a ‘denial’ of all of my rights perpetrated by SCOTUS,
as I re-entered this court as the acting, legal, PROVEN Commander. I’m DEFENDING
myself against every unjust institution and person including SCOTUS clerks and
Justices of this court, whoever is responsible and perhaps guilty, and now WE have been
told you must use violence or WE will never, ever secure the protection of the
Declaration and Constitution – liberty and justice - as SCOTUS will not accord it to you
any other way except for violence aka a military action as it is not going to allow us
entry in person.

If the judiciary falls in any nation but most especially in a Constitutional Republic? The
citizens have earned the right to shoot and it is in their best interests to do so. Shooting has
vested. They should aim for those in the Whitehouse, SCOTUS and Congress with SCOTUS
Justices and clerks being the most dangerous sitting officers of all as Barack Obama could not
reason his way out of a paper bag, not even with a teleprompter to do it for him, and nobody

15
truly believes him these days – his approval rating fell through the floor – it’s a US record –
thus SCOTUS became enemy #1 as it is yet lying to the masses. Then you take out the rest. I
advocate aiming for SCOTUS first then at Obama as it is not a violation of chain of command
theory as Marshall said the President and Chief Justice are equal and as somebody in this
court believes they are unequal or above the law thus above us so I say it’s constitutional to
take out SCOTUS first and then go after Obama. Don’t worry: The People and I will reason
and act upon the most effective, Constitutional plan as the Founders wrote it down for us.

I know SCOTUS exactly like NY & FL truly believes it will exist if it denies me w/o
responding and w/o naming nay reason and that it will never pay the price, as it hasn’t yet or
when the military marches on it there will be some sort of defense it can mount. Nope, as that
defense is nonexistent at that point. You may not tell me your reasoning only when you are
actually under duress, when The People or the military are actually holding an actual gun to
your heads as I cannot and may not accept your testimony as truth then. Things that have
never happened yet? They happen someday:

Jefferson wins and John Marshall loses. For good. And all you ever had to do was hear the
damn case in person. I can’t thank you enough for granting me the means to mount a military
strike against you and the other crooks destroying this nation and killing its citizens.

As SCOTUS has now demanded that I ask for and do what does not exist in US law, case law
or court rule then SCOTUS must go as it is acing as if it is mentally ill and maybe mental
illness is not criminal but it is impeachable and we do not need Congress anymore to dissolve
or even abolish you as of 11/09/09 as there is more than one way to ‘impeach’ sitting Justices
when al offices fall especially if the Justices ask for it in writing.

“Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear
political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty.” Justice Louis Brandeis

“Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They also did not
give a rat’s ass about their personal reputations or personal fortunes. I know I didn’t.”
Chief Justice Susan Herbert as I am both the Executive and Chief Justice under martial law.

Susan Herbert, The acting, constitutional President and Commander in Chief of original
jurisdiction as I am, as my will, my reasoning, my one vote, my ability to add and subtract,
the equal protection and due process clauses, history such as the Revolution and SCOTUS’
prior action and Marbury make it so.

16