Habeas Relief Due Process
Habeas Relief and Due Process
United States District Court
Title 28 U.S. Code Chapter 153 Habeas Corpus § 2255 Motions to Vacate Convictions
U.S. District Courts in dismissing § 2255 motions to vacate, the government lawyers and judges failed to respond to the allegation of Ground One which are the same in all the applications. Section 12
RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2255 PROCEEDINGS FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Rule 5 (b) Contents. The answer must address the allegations in the motion. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-governing-section-2254-and-section-2255-proceedings.pdf pages 14, 19
The U, S. District Courts have denied Certificate of Appealability (COA) There is no substantial denial of any constitutional right being in federal custody. 28 USC § 2253
This denies being incarcerated is seizure of person and deprivation of prisoners' constitutional right of liberty. They are political prisoners.
Amendment V. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law.
"Writs of habeas corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof,the district courts and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions. " 28 U.S.C. 2241 (a)
“If addressed to the Supreme Court, a justice thereof or a circuit judge it shall state the reasons for not making application to the district court of the district in which the applicant is held.” 28 U.S.C. 2242 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2242
“A court, justice or judge entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. 2243
SCOTUS RULES 20.4. (a) (b).
Such rules are inconsistent with federal law violating 28 U.S.C. § 2071. Such rules “shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2072
When SCOTUS denied petitions for habeas corpus they are denying to order a response to the petition and the petitioner is being directed to file in a different court for habeas relief. 20.4. (b).
Criminal laws are an Article III case and controversy. Justice Barrett 3rd day confirmation hearing. https://www.ursm.us/article-iii/article-iii-courts/
The operation and effect of police power is the seizure of persons and effects, deprivation, taking of liberty and property. Threatened with prosecution is standing to challenge the constitutionality of criminal laws that threatened the seizure of person and effects and deprivation (taking) of constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.
SCOTUS demeans liberty in the 14th amendment’s due process clause to the substance of liberty, liberty interests, victimless crimes. Washington v. Glucksberg 521 U.S. 702, 719 -721 (1997) Assisted Suicide
Government must present compelling reasons for criminal laws when their operation and effect is the seizure of person and deprivation of liberty.
Due process of law requires the threatened and actual use of police power in the deprivation of fundamental rights of life, liberty and property shall be reasonable and necessary.
Criminal laws are justified by compelling government interest, reasons.
Judicial review of criminal laws is strict scrutiny, not rational basis.
Criminal laws are an Article III case and controversy.
Due Process of Law
1. Procedural Due Process
SCOTUS Rules of process, criminal and civil of procedures.
2. Substantive due process
Substance of criminal laws. Threats to public health and safety, the rights of others.
Substance of liberty. Unenumerated rights, a liberty interest historical and traditional to be fundamental, majority rules.
Substance of liberty is political due process of law.
What is historical in the meaning of liberty is freedom from physical restraint, government custody. SCOTUS has declared liberty means more than physical restraint a liberty interest to do this or that, to travel, that is crime