Federal judges bring a class action law suit to uphold their rights and the Supreme Court gives them 30% salary increase, at the same time the same judges deprive us of our rights
Posted on | April 25, 2013 | 7 Comments
Supreme Court won’t stop promised raises from going to some …
3 days ago – … won’t stop some federal judges from getting cost-of-living increases … a move that could end up increasing the salaries of all federal judges.
Comments
7 Responses to “Federal judges bring a class action law suit to uphold their rights and the Supreme Court gives them 30% salary increase, at the same time the same judges deprive us of our rights”
Leave a Reply












29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy, 
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld 

April 25th, 2013 @ 4:16 pm
Juries don’t decide issues of law.
April 25th, 2013 @ 9:16 pm
A higher salary is NOT A RIGHT. Fair and honest services is. During the sequester, nobody gets a raise, especially if your part of the cause for higher living costs. Those toilet heads are lucky they have a job, we could outsource better judges.
April 25th, 2013 @ 9:27 pm
is that how the govt pays off judges by bribing them with our money? damn but a 30% raise is a great incentive to keep obama free and stealing our freedoms
will
April 25th, 2013 @ 10:48 pm
UnConstitutional statutes, policies, programs and procedures are legally unenforceable. Much of the public have awakened to such and are more frequently pointing the finger at names and events and aggressively sharing their enlightenment with other folks, daily.
April 26th, 2013 @ 3:35 am
7th amendment allows jury to decide all issues based on fact and law
April 26th, 2013 @ 8:12 am
Dr. Orly, you are correct about the 7th amendment….but criminals don’t follow the law.
Your efforts have not been in vain, we now know without a doubt just how deep the corruption goes.
Thank you for exposing this sad truth.
April 26th, 2013 @ 4:38 pm
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
See? What Dr Taitz said!