{"id":3999,"date":"2017-07-17T12:34:42","date_gmt":"2017-07-17T19:34:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/private-person.com\/blog\/?p=3999"},"modified":"2017-08-30T14:50:24","modified_gmt":"2017-08-30T21:50:24","slug":"us-supreme-court-rules-government-officers-liable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/private-person.com\/blog\/2017\/07\/us-supreme-court-rules-government-officers-liable\/","title":{"rendered":"US Supreme Court Rules Government Officers Liable"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"gavel+money\"<\/a><\/strong>In what I would call a confirmation of the law, not a NEW ruling, the US Supreme Court One lays down the law for all to see, and USE if you choose.<\/p>\n

One of the BIG legal fantasies promoted by governments and officials is the idea of officials’ having ‘immunity’ from prosecution and no liability<\/strong>… so they are not held liable for their corrupt and illegal actions.<\/span><\/p>\n

Don’t buy the LIE.<\/h1>\n

Judges are liable, cops are liable, corporate officers are liable, ANY official is liable… when:<\/span><\/h3>\n

1. if they perform any actions while in office, not defined by their office<\/span>, or<\/h3>\n

2. actions that are defined by their office but are done in <\/span>BAD faith<\/span> <\/strong>or <\/strong><\/h3>\n

3. the actions taken are <\/strong>illegal by nature<\/span>.<\/h3>\n

Any actions that they take NOT defined by their office or illegal by their nature<\/strong> are considered to have been done outside of their office therefore done in their private capacity and therefore they are fully liable, in their private capacity, without any protections of their office.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately this lie of\u00a0‘immunity’ is also repeated unknowingly by people, again and again, who have a real case against government officials and therefore do not pursue very valid claims.<\/p>\n

A recent US Supreme Court decision clarified and confirmed that the government and their agents can be held liable and accountable for wrongdoing carried out by officials in its employment while on the job.<\/span><\/h3>\n

Officials ARE Liable for Bad Faith and Illegal Acts, NO Immunity<\/h3>\n

This should be a a no brainer but in the land of legal fictions and unaccountable government officials being protected by legal process…someone FINALLY took the issue to the US Supreme Court for a common sense confirmation which lower level courts are now bound by.<\/p>\n

This is a fundamental principle of law<\/strong> that nobody is above the law including all government actors. The government immunity clause only applies to government actors when they are performing their actions of their office defined by their office in good faith<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Any actions that they take not defined by their office or illegal by their nature are considered have been done outside of their office therefore done in their private capacity and therefore they are fully liable in their private capacity without any protections of their office.<\/h3>\n

So in effect the government is also liable for having employed them, their supervisors are liable for improper training and oversight<\/strong> and the actions carried out while they were employee and the individual is liable personally also.<\/p>\n

In this particular case the complaint and Millbrook<\/em> had been denied hearings for his claims that the lower courts and submitted a hand written, in pencil, complaint to the Supreme Court of the United States. Less than 1% of Supreme Court applications are heard by the court. I’m certain that this particular case was heard because it addresses a fundamental aspect of law and the only point of protection for a private person from the abuses of any government actor.<\/p>\n

If you take the time to read the articles about the case you’ll find the disgusting actions\u00a0of government lawyers and lower courts protecting the corrupt and abusive actions of government actors creating a series of faulty case law decisions that perpetuate the idea that violence and criminal actions\u00a0by government actors is protected.<\/p>\n

Millbrook filed a handwritten petition, in pencil no less, to the U.S. Supreme Court, and in a rare show of magnanimity, the Court agreed to hear his case and assigned a lawyer to represent him. Curiously enough, after the Court announced it could hear the case, the U.S. Justice Department\u2014which had defended the government\u2019s actions at every level of the judicial proceedings, including asking the Supreme Court\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0to take the case\u2014did an about-face<\/strong> and switched its position to argue that the FTCA\u00a0does<\/em>\u00a0apply to prison guards as law-enforcement officials.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Sadly much “case law” is biased garbage designed to allow corruption to continue as most people do not have the time, stamina or money to\u00a0challenge\u00a0bad\u00a0decisions\u00a0to higher and higher courts where the real law might be heard and decided.<\/p>\n

This case ultimately should be a watershed decision to open the doors for all manner of complaints against abusive and corrupt actions by government actors, the legal profession and officials as it now clearly confirmed by the Supreme Court that they do not have protection for their illegal and unlawful actions.<\/p>\n

MILLBROOK v. UNITED STATES ( )
\n477 Fed. Appx. 4, reversed and remanded.<\/h2>\n