Judge dismisses 9/11 lawsuit based on "doctrine of sovereign immunity"

[Minstrel Boy]

While I've been, and remain, skeptical of Stanley Hilton's motives, it's interesting to note the cause for the dismissal of his suit.

The $7 billion federal class action lawsuit against top Bush Administration officials for, among other things, their roles in engineering and orchestrating the 911 attacks has been dismissed by Judge Illston. Attorney for the plaintiffs, Stanley Hilton is preparing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and hopes to reverse the judge's ruling.

Mr. Hilton will be making the fifteen page ruling dismissing the suit available to the public. As soon as SueTheTerrorists.Net webmaster, Abel Ashes (Hull Simmons) receives the document it will be online for all to read and understand the judge's given reasons for dismissing the suit.

Mr. Ashes spoke with Stanley Hilton earlier today and Mr. Hilton informed him that the judge's ruling was based on the "Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity". In other words, the suit was not dismissed because of lack of evidence, but rather because the judge reasoned that U.S. Citizens do not have the right to hold a sitting President accountable for anything, even if the charges include premeditated mass murder and premeditated acts of high treason. Mr. Hilton and his plaintiffs disagree and so are filing an appeal.

If the Ninth Circuit reverses the U.S. District Court of Northern California's decision, the suit will be amended and new plaintiffs and allegations will be added.

http://www.suetheterrorists.net/

[OutsourceBush]

1. I hope they can prove what we all know

Bush's 911 death deal with the BL family.

[meppie-meppie not]

21. boy am I thick, death deal with the BL"s? n/t

[OutsourceBush]

23. Here is a brief rundown...in case you haven't been paying attention

Did Christian Fundamentalist George Bush conspire with the Saudi Arabian Royal family (the Bin Ladens) to attack the US on 911?




Bush reads 'My Pet Goat' while the Twin Towers burn

Consider this:

1. Everyone knows that when bombings happen in other countries of the world politicians gain power. They gain that power by declaring war on the supposed terrorists or rebels.

2. Bush sat in a class room safely in Florida (convenient time to be out of Washington) for approx 7 minutes after being informed that the US was under attack. Was he allowing the attackers time to finish their agreed upon attack? The expression on George Bush’s face was not one of concern it was more one of 'Here we go as planned, I will be glad when this is over.'

3. The mysterious 911 anthrax mailer was never identified and arrested. The FBI intentionally misdirected public attention to a man by the name of Steven Hatfill calling him a "person of interest". Hatfill apparently had nothing to do with the anthrax letters but that didn’t keep the FBI from slandering him on a nearly daily basis to make it look like they had their man. He is now suing the US government and will probably win.

4. The price of oil has raised significantly since the US entered Iraq. Would it not be in the best Interests of the Saudis (Bin Laden family) to get rid of Saddam Hussein if he was keeping the price of oil too low for their liking by continuing to sell oil through the back-door while he was under UN sanctions. There is a finite amount of oil in Saudi Arabian oil fields, it will eventually run out. So they would sure want to make as much as they can from it before that happens.

5. Christian Fundamentalist Bush and his Christian Fundamentalist administration would like to have the US be officially declared a Christian country run on purely biblical principals, outlawing anything that does not agree with the Bible. This is required by their faith as to prepare the world for God. By orchestrating the 911 attacks with the Saudis he could justify clamping down on the civil rights of US citizens, which would be required by the new Christian Fundamentalist state. The old Constitution would be obsolete in the new Christian country of the US.

6. Immediately after the attacks Bush grounded all domestic air traffic but helped co-ordinate the speedy exit of the Bin Laden family via jet aircraft while the rest of our country’s aircraft were still grounded and our citizens in shock. Why would he do this if he was not already aware of who was responsible and that there was value to them remaining in the US? If they were not guilty or of some value why the urgent need to get them out of the country while our entire nation’s aircraft were still grounded?

7. The vast majority of 911 hijackers (15 of the 19) were Saudis. (Numbers vary by source)

8. What are the odds that the world’s most successful terrorist would happen to be named Bin Laden?

9. What are the odds a terrorist such as Bin Laden could escape the most powerful nation in the world, a task even Saddam Hussein was not able to do?

10. The 911 attacks have conveniently diverted American's attention away from the Bush administration’s implementation of electronic voting machines in the United States. The three main companies chosen to implement these computerized voting are ES&S, Diebold and Sequia. All three companies appear to have seriously troubling links to far right Christian Fundamentalists groups and the Bushes. Bush’s brand of Christianity believes that only white (or well connected) Christians should have the right to vote in the United States. This is a dangerous mix.

WIN FOR SAUDIS
WIN FOR BUSH

We now find ourselves in a situation where the United States government is nearly completely controlled by extreme right wing Christian Fundamentalists. The House, the Senate and the Presidency. Next stop, the Supreme Court.

If the Bushes have gained control of the computerized voting machines there is absolutely no way that Democrats can ever hope to get back into power in any branch of the US government in the new Christian Fundamentalist state of Bush. The secret “proprietary” voting programs will always favor the ‘correct’ Christian Republicans. Fox news, the Washington Times, Rush Limbaugh, UPI and a host of other far right media outlets will willing show corrupt polls that favor the Republican candidate and confirm their corrupt win.

Note: There are many websites and sources who have specific facts on the above. This is just a few items I threw together for reference.

[meppie-meppie not]

29. I have been paying attention but thanks for the rundown. There is so

much information I'm presently wading through surrounding 9/11 but I haven't seen anything about evidence (direct) wherein the Bin Laden's and Shubco Inc were in cahoots (not to say they weren't just that I haven't seen it reported yet). So the term you use confused me a bit, sorry.

[Mikimouse]

2. Doesn't the Clinton 'case' set some type of precedent for this?

I would think that since the SC ruled that he could be investigated and sued while in office, the door was open for exactly this sort of thing. Let's be real, if Clinton could be sued for something that had no effect on national security, then surely this case should go forward, in the interests of national security.

[Kagemusha]

6. But that wasn't about acts Clinton did while in office.

It was about acts he did before the presidential office.

[ixion]

3. just more evidence of BushCo duplicity

IMO.

And just another corrupt Judge defrauding we, the people

[meow2u3]

4. Gotta be one of Bush's appointees

What other judge would say, "Bush is above the law" (besides Scalia or one of his ideological clones)?

[seemslikeadream]

5. US Citizens don't have the right to hold a SITTING President accountable

U.S. Citizens do not have the right to hold a SITTING President accountable for anything

[toymachines]

7. that would seem to be the problem

we need checks and balances people, and the final, most important check should be the people's right to hold all poitical leaders accountable for their actions, especially the dam president. i mean arent we founded on some sort of ideals of justice, shouldnt that be the most important thing...

[Kagemusha]

8. As I just said...

You can't hold him to account for a sitting President FOR DOING ACTS AS THE SITTING PRESIDENT while he is still sitting. (And after, so long as his actions are lawful uses of his power.)

Which is why impeachment exists to unseat him.

And yet, the US government ITSELF can and frequently is held accountable for acts it is found liable for. Sovereign immunity keeps non-Americans from holding the government accountable in this manner.

Anything else would be a copy of a doctrine long banished from the US: Crown immunity.

[meppie-meppie not]

20. but wouldn't that be for "lawful" acts only? n/t

[ladjf]

11. I repeat for the 100th time. Democracy is stone dead in the U.S.

The only question worth discussing now is how in the hell can be get it back?

[ladjf]

9. Hmm. But the Paula Jones suit was accepted. How's that?

[Kagemusha]

10. BECAUSE IT INVOLVED ACTS BEFORE THE PRESIDENCY

Sorry to shout but.. geez.. how hard is it to understand?

And to be blunt the justices made assumptions that were later proven wrong. A civil suit vs. the President merely provides immense temptation to utilize the power of the Presidency itself to fight the suit.

[ladjf]

12. I haven't read the exact statute where is says that the act

has to have occurred during the tenure. Have you read that in the law? If so, direct me to it and I'll try to see if I can fathom that complicated statement.

[leesa]

13. THIS is where the Clinton witch hunt may come back to bite them in the

butt. Precedent has been established, as far as I can tell.

[meppie-meppie not]

19. that's what I thought too and I posted to that effect below before

I caught site of this post, sorry for my redundancy

[peacetalksforall]

14. So are you collectively saying that sovereign immunity would

apply if non U.S. citizens filed a lawsuit, but doesn't apply if U.S. citizens file a lawsuit?

If U.S. citizens can't do it now, can they do it after the accused are out of office?

The words above apply to 'sitting President' - what about the others named in the suit?

[Al-CIAda]

15. 'Its good to be the king!" -eom

[WritersBlock]

16. I always thought "sovereign immunity" applied to the government, not

individual office-holders?

I know nothing about the law, as this post probably makes abundantly clear. But I found this at http://www.rbeerslaw.com/sovimune.html and thought it had possibilities:

The Defense of Sovereign Immunity

Any environmental suit against a state or relating to property owned by it may be subject to a defense of sovereign immunity. The Supreme Court’s decision in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 116 S.Ct. 1114 (1996) effectively precludes any private cost recovery action under CERCLA against a state. The court held that Congress could not use its Commerce Clause powers to abrogate a state’s immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. However, private citizen suits under CERCLA and RCRA for injunctive relief against state officials to compel compliance with these statutes (but not monetary relief) are still available under the doctrine of Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441 (1908).

(Bolding added)

[Stop_the_War]

17. I agree..9/11 was all planned

I've suspected it ever since it happened. I knew Bush and his advisors planned all of it. The WTC was built to withstand a Boeing 747 impact. After all, the administration claimed that fires had made the towers fall. Then how could people have been standing out of the holes that the planes had punched into the Towers? The fires had already died down. The firefighters in the towers were saying things on their walkie-talkies that they had the fires contained. This picture says it all:



It is my belief that the Towers collapsed because of bombs planted in the WTC days before the impact.

[meppie-meppie not]

22. don't know if it was planned but I sure feel they knew in advance and

allowed it to happen. I've heard this theory of demolition charges throughout the towers going off one by one but not too sure if I buy into that. Mind you I'm doing a ton of reading from all manner of books on 9/11 and right about now feel like I'm wading through a mine Field trying to understand it all.

[seemslikeadream]

25. Have you been to the 9/11 room, meppie-meppie not ?

9/11, Military Affairs, and Terrorism
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=125

It's a little hard to find - Archived & Leftover Forums

:hi:

[meppie-meppie not]

28. no I haven't, didn't even know it existed but TY I'll check it out! :-) nt

[itzamirakul]

24. You are 100% correct...where the hell is the fire?

She is standing in an open gaping hole AND THERE IS NO FIRE!

This is one incrdiblysad, scary picture.

[seemslikeadream]

26. Stop_the_War, have you been to the 9/11 room?

9/11, Military Affairs, and Terrorism
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=125

On the Discussion Forums page in the Archived & Leftover Forums

:hi:

[meppie-meppie not]

18. they seemed to forget about "sovereign immunity" when it came to

Bill Clinton and Paula Pokes law suit. Hell they made a sitting President go through a deposition for the little trollop!

[noiretextatique]

27. wait just a minute...don't we pay his salary?

doesn't that mean he works for us? who IS he accountable to if not the american people? :eyes: yes, i know the answer already.