The judiciary declaring criminal laws are a political question because what is declared a crime is not  a fundamental right is deprivation of rights to libertry, freedom from physical restraint, without a compelling state interest, without due process of law  under the color of law.

 

Deprivation of Rights under the Color of Law, Title 18 USC 242
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/242fin.php

 

 

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242

Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes

 

This statute makes it a crime for any person, including judges, acting under color of law, ….. to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

“And that’s why—as the lead agency for enforcing federal civil rights laws—the FBI remains dedicated to protecting the cherished freedoms of all Americans.

That includes aggressively investigating and working to prevent …, “color of law” abuses by public officials“, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights

 

 

 

===================================================

 

FBI Criminal Complaint 1
Mailed April 5, 2012

Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Title 18 USC 242

http://www.s234950599.onlinehome.us/7.html

 

 

FBI Criminal Complaint 2

 

Mailed April 9, 2012

 

Wyoming Supreme Court
Title 18USc 242

 

http://www.s234950599.onlinehome.us/6.html

 

2008 Wyoming Suptreme Court 2/13/2008 case Number S-07-0185
http://law.justia.com/cases/wyoming/supreme-court/2008/451267.html

 

 

 

====================================================

 

 

Past Complaints to Department of Justice

 

Civil Division Criminal Section

 

Marijuana remains illegal because law enforcement officials deprive us of our rights under the color of law, a federal crime.Title 18 USC242. I filed complaints against federal and state judges and attorneys for deprivation of my right to due process law with the Civil Division of the DOJ.

 

I than complained about the deprivation of my right to equal protection of the law by the Civil Division Criminal Section. The Inspectors General sent me back to the Civil Division.

 

Government letters on top. Mine follow below total of four. Separated by red dates.

 

 

Official Misconduct

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/overview.php
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/242fin.php
http://www.justice.gov/crt/

 

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of the Inspector General Investigations Division
1425 New York Avenue NW, Suite 7100
Washington, D.C. 20530


May 4, 2011

Michael J. Dee
P.O. Box 2021
Windham, ME 04062

Dear Mr. Dee:

The purpose of this letter is to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence. The matters that you raised are more appropriate for review by another office or Agency.

Therefore, your complaint has been forwarded to:

Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20005

Any further correspondence regarding this matter should be directed to this office.
I hope this answers any questions you have relative to this matter.

Sincerely,
Office of the Inspector General
Investigations Division

 

 

===============================

 

Civil Rights Division
Criminal Section - PHB
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

N. W. Washington, DC 20530

DJ 144-87-0                                                                 


SEP 28, 2010

Mr. Michael J. Dee
P.O. Box 2021
786 Roosevelt Trail
Windham, ME 04062

 

Dear Mr. Dee:

 

This is a response to your correspondence received by our office on October 16, 2009, in which you allege officials have denied you your fundamental right to due process of the law to question the validity and construction of criminal laws you were charged with because they claim marijuana is not a constitutional right. We apologize for our delay in responding.

The Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division is responsible for enforcing federal criminal civil rights statutes. Much of our enforcement activity relates to the investigation and prosecution of deprivations of civil rights under color of law.
These matters generally involve allegations of excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers.

We have carefully reviewed the information which you furnished. However, we have determined that your complaint does not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes. Accordingly, we are unable to assist you.

You may wish to contact the nearest legal aid program or the local bar association to determine whether they may be able to assist you.

By: Sincerely,
Robert Moossy, Jr.
Acting Section Chief Criminal Section

By Aneesa Khan
Paralegal Specialist Criminal Section

 

===================================================

 

2011-04-08  


Office of the Inspector General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Room 4706
Washington, D.C. 20530

 

RE: DJ 144-87-0

 

Violations of Civil Rights By Officials of the Department of Justice

 

I am reporting violations of Title 18 USC 242 by officials of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and Criminal Section for willful deprivation of my rights under the color of law.

 

Section 242 of Title 18 makes “it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” “Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, …who are acting as public officials.” http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/242fin.php


Eric H. Holder,                   Jr Tom Perez.                                   Mark Kappelholff
Attorney General                   Assistant Attorney General            Civil Rights Division
(202) 514-2001                     Civil Rights Division                       Criminal Section
                                                  (202) 514-4609                              (202) 514-3204



These DOJ law enforcement officials have willfully deprived me of my civil rights, secured by the Constitution, to due process of law and to equal protection of law, Title 18 USC 242. I am a victim of this crime, again.

 

DOJ officials will not enforce Title 18 USC 242 on federal and state judges and government attorneys in three judicial jurisdictions, in four complaints filed with Criminal section of the Civil Rights Division. These DOJ law enforcement officials have failed to protect my individual rights to due process of law and equal protection of law secured by the Constitution of the United States.

 

The judges and lawyers in these criminal complaints had willfully deprived me of my

 

1

 

civil rights, protected by the Constitution, to due process of law by denying me equal protection of my fundamental civil rights to liberty, to property and to privacy secured by the 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments from unreasonable government intrusion. These federal and state judges willfully misrepresented my Declaratory Judgment lawsuits. For declaratory relief these judges and attorneys are saying I am asking the court to declare marijuana a fundamental right. Court documents submitted with the those complaints showed this was not the truth.

 

There is no denial by DOJ that judicial review of criminal laws by rational review was deprivation of rights under the color of law. There is no denial by DOJ Criminal section of the Civil Rights Division that these federal and state judges, under the color of law, have willfully deprived me of my rights to due process of law by denying equal protection by the 4th 5th and 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.The DOJ’s Criminal Section response, DJ 144-87-0 Dated 28 September 2010, said my four Title 18 USC 242 complaints did not “involve allegations of excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers.” I appealed this decision to Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez in a certified letters sent October 28, 2010 and again February 28, 2011. I have not received a response from Mr. Perez office indicating I am a second class person.

 

Title 18 USC 242 includes both non violent and violent official misconduct involving deprivation of civil rights. There are three levels of deprivation of rights with three levels of punishment. “The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.” http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/statutes.php

I want the Office of the Inspector General to recognized and do something about the arbitrary enforcement of Title 18 USC 242 by members of the Criminal section of the Civil Rights Division. This official conduct violates due process of law and equal protection of law and is deprivation of my rights under the color of law by not enforcing Title 18 USC 242 upon judges and government attorneys who have willfully deprived me of my rights under the color of law.

 

The enforcement of the marijuana laws by the DEA is also deprivation of rights under the color of law. The Attorney General of the United States, past and present, have willfully deprived individuals of their rights under the color of law by the enforcement of the marijuana laws for political reasons.

 

United States Attorneys of the DOJ can not demonstrate the proscription of marijuana is reasonable and necessary regulation of my individual rights to liberty, to property and to privacy in a court of law so the judges play politics with my constitutional rights and the rights of all persons in this country to support the war on drugs. The DOJ can not demonstrate that marijuana meets all three criteria to be a controlled substance. Marijuana is safe to use without medical supervision. Title 21§ 812. (b). There is also a problem of Congress ignoring the Bill of Rights to uphold the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961

 

Law enforcement officials have ignored their oath to the Constitution in pursuing the “war on drugs”. They are aiding and abetting organized crime of the drug cartels

 

I wanted equal justice under law, but unknown to millions of others, all I have gotten is deprivation of rights under the color of law. Marijuana is not consider property and marijuana users are non person. Only persons and property are protected from unreasonable and unnecessary regulation. Law enforcement officials are telling me it is rational to invade my privacy with a search warrant. It is rational to seize my person and property for violating the marijuana laws.

 

I want my day in Wyoming and Maine courts and in US District Court, District of Maine. I want Equal Justice Under Law. But it seems the constitution is null and void in pursing the war on drugs.


Michael J. Dee
Non person
Second class citizen.

 

February 28, 2011  

========================================================

 

     (sent certified mail 7010 1060 0001 4211 4110)

 

PO Box 2021
786 Roosevelt Trail
Windham ME.

207-893-0287

 

Thomas E. Perez
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

(202) 514-2151

 

Re: DJ 144-87-0

 

Dear Mr. Perez,

 

I guess over four months is enough time to be waiting for a reply from your office to my appeal of the decision of Criminal section of your Civil Rights Division DJ 144-87-0. What ever it takes keep marijuana illegal even denying equal justice under law.

 

I claim that members of the Department of Justice, including you, of conspiracy for willful deprivation of my rights under the color of law by arbitrarily enforcing Title 18 USC 242. You et al are denying me my civil right to due process of law and equal protections of this law.

 

As long as I am not beaten up, it is OK for judges to willfully misrepresent my Declaratory Judgment lawsuits and deprive me of my civil rights to due process of law by denying me equal protection of the 4th and 5th Amendments. Judicial review of criminal laws by rational review is willful deprivation of my rights under the color of law.

 

I claim Attorney General of the United States, past and present, for willful deprivation of rights under the color of law for enforcing the marijuana laws for political reasons. Marijuana is arbitrarily classified as a controlled substance and violates due process of law. Marijuana is safe to use without medical supervision.

I claim the Department of Justice of conspiracy Title 18 USC 241 to deprive all persons of their rights under the color of law. Marijuana is not property and marijuana users are not persons because only persons and property are protected from unreasonable deprivation, unreasonable laws. I claim the Department of Justice of conspiracy to demean the 4th and 5th Amendment to mean the only the operation of the law not the reasonableness of the law.

 

Your web page no longer mentions “Equal Justice under the Law.” The Criminal section web page says DOJ’s only enforces Title 18 USC 242 for violent deprivation of rights by law enforcement officials. That means the law is arbitrarily enforced, a violation of due process of law.

Official Misconduct
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/overview.php

Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.

 

The laws that authorize the police to seize my marijuana is unreasonable and unnecessary and is theft of my property. The laws that authorize the police to seize my person and deprive me of my liberty is an illegal arrest because the laws are unreasonable and unnecessary. There was no victims of my crimes.

I am a victim of a crime committed by judges and government attorneys for willful deprivation of my rights under the color of law.

 

Department of Justice or Department of Tyranny?

 

Equal Justice Under Law? I am April fool.

Sincerely, Michael J Dee


www.ursm.us

===============================================================

 

Thomas E. Perez                                                               October 28, 2010  (sent certfied mail 7010 1060 0001 4211 4110)
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 514-2151

DJ 144-87-0

Dear Mr. Perez,

Marijuana laws are criminal laws. Criminal laws present an Article III justiciable controversy. I am quite POed at the way the government has demeaned the Bill of Rights to keep marijuana illegal. And the way the media aids and abets this crime. Judges reviewing criminal laws by rational review is deprivation of rights under the color of law and the DEA and the drug cartels rule witout law.

On your web page your message is about equal justice under the law. I am appealing to you a decision from the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division, DJ 144-87-0 et al that has denied me equal justice under law.

I filed three separate criminal complaint in 2009 (and again 2010) against federal and state judges and state attorneys in three jurisdictions for willful deprivation of my civil rights under the color of law. The basis of these complaints is that judicial review of criminal laws by rational review was deprivation of my civil right under the color of law.

I have received only one response, DJ 144-87-0. It refers to a document the Criminal Section received October 16, 2009. According to this response, my complaint “ does not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statute” because there is “no allegations of excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers.”

The DOJ does not deny these Federal and State Judges and Attorneys have willfully deprived me of my rights under the color of law. The facts are clearly proven I did not ask the courts to declare marijuana to be a fundamental right. But DOJ will not prosecute these law enforcement for violating Title 18 USC 242. Where does that leave me?

The DOJ has allowed these judges to abuse their authority by making unlawful judicial decisions by reviewing the constitutionality of criminal laws by rational review. These judges have willfully failed in their constitutional duty to protect my individual civil rights from unreasonable government intrusion.


Excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers affects only one individual. Judicial review of criminal laws by rational review affects not only my federal rights to liberty, to property and to privacy but the civil rights of all persons protected by the Constitution of the United States.

There has been a willful conspiracy by officers of courts to deny the civil right to question why it is reasonable and necessary to criminalize marijuana. To deny due process of law to keep this question out of the judicial process. Marijuana is property. The right to acquire and possess property is a fundamental civil right. Seizing marijuana is deprivation of property. Liberty and privacy are fundamental civil rights. Being arrested is deprivation of liberty. A search warrant is an invasion of privacy.

You know judicial review required by due process of law when my fundamental civil rights have suffered actual injury is strict scrutiny. You know that requires the government to show a compelling state interest related to public safety, to show the laws are reasonable and necessary. You know marijuana does not meet all three criteria to be a controlled substance. Marijuana is safe to use without medical supervision.


I WANT EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW. I WANT A HONEST DAY IN COURT. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU, MR. PEREZ, ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT.



Submitted, by

Michael J. Dee
PO BOX 2021
786 Roosevelt Trail #5
Windham, ME 04062
(207) 893-0287

==========================================

 

First Letter

 

To Thomas E. Perez    August 31, 2010 
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 514-2151

 

Mr.. Perez,

 

Where is my “civil right” to “Equal justice Under law” when the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, allows judges to abuse their authority by making unlawful judicial decisions by reviewing the constitutionality of criminal laws by rational review?

 

Where is “Equal justice Under law” when the DOJ allows judges and government attorneys to demean the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution to mean only the reasonable operation of the law not the reasonableness of the law?

 

Under the color of law, judges have used “rational review” to determine the constitutionality of criminal laws thereby depriving me of my fundamental “civil rights” to liberty, to property, to privacy, to due process of law, to equal protection of law.

“It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.”
http://www.justice.gov/crt/crim/242fin.php

 

 

DOJ’s DUE PROCESS

 

The Criminal Section of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division did not respond in writing, to three Title 18 USC 242 complaints that were separately sent by certified mail by the end of 2009. On March 1, 2010, a follow up letter was sent by certified mail, addressed to Mark Kappelhoff, Chief of the Criminal section. No response. All three complaints and a cover letter were sent again by certified mail on June 14, 2009 to Chief Kappelhoff. No response.

 

It was late morning on August 10, 2010, I called the following number (202) 514-3204 to insist upon a written response for each complaint. The operator directed my call to a man who did not identify himself at first or later when asked.

This unidentified person said the DOJ wo

uld not provide a written response to each of these complaints. He said I should look into “judicial misconduct” but that avenue does not include judicial decisions as cited on U.S. District Court of Maine’s web site page. http://www.med.uscourts.gov/geninfo/misconduct.htm Judges and government attorneys are law enforcement officials and they are not above the law and not excluded from Title 18 USC 242

1


according to this DOJ’s web site page. http://www.justice.gov/crt/crim/242fin.php

 

 

THE CRIME

 

I alleged in these complaints that state and federal judges and state attorneys in three judicial jurisdiction in two state have abused their authority by willfully depriving me of my federal “civil rights“ under the color of law.

 

In their official duty they have willfully denied me my right to due process of law by willfully denying me equal protection of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

 

For declaratory relief I asked the courts in three judicial jurisdictions to declare the marijuana laws unconstitutional because they are unreasonable and unnecessary regulation of my fundamental “civil rights” to liberty, to privacy and to property secured by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments from unreasonable deprivation, unreasonable searches and seizures.

 

These judicial decision are based on the willful misrepresentation of my lawsuits. This is easily proven by looking at my request for declaratory relief in each Declaratory Judgment lawsuit.

 

I did not ask these courts to declare marijuana to be a fundamental right. But these state and federal judges and state attorneys claimed marijuana is not a fundamental civil right therefore judicial review of the marijuana laws, criminal laws, is rational review. My lawsuits were frivolous.

 

Judicial review of the marijuana laws, criminal laws, by “rational review” was willful deprivation of my “civil right” to privacy, to liberty, to property, to due process and to equal protection of law.

 

 

FACTS

 

A search warrant is invasion of privacy, a civil right. Being arrested is deprivation of liberty, a civil right. Seizing marijuana is deprivation of property, a civil right. Deprivation of civil rights to liberty, to property and to privacy presents an Article III justiciable controversy. Criminal laws present a justiciable controversy. The marijuana laws have been and still are a justiciable controversy. Judicial review is strict scrutiny requiring a compelling state interest that shows the laws are reasonable and necessary, to justify the deprivation of my “civil rights”.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The marijuana laws have been determined to be constitutional by rational review, to be a political question, a political crime. Tens of million of individuals have been deprived of their

 

2

 

“civil rights” to privacy, to liberty and to property for political reasons, under the color of law, because the judiciary says marijuana is not a civil, fundamental right.

These state and federal judges and state attorneys have denied me equal justice under the law. They were discriminatory and did not recognize me as person and marijuana as property because only persons and property are protected from unreasonable and unnecessary laws. These judges decisions were willful deprivation of my “civil rights” under the color of law and they are not immune from criminal prosecution.

Under the color of law, I claim the law enforcement officials of the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division have denied me to equal justice under the law. They have deprived me of my individual “civil rights” to due process of law and equal protection of title 18 USC 242.

That Title 18 USC 242 is arbitrarily enforced and violates due process of law. Judges are not above the law.

Growing marijuana is a crime. The only victim of a crime here is the willful deprivations of my “civil rights” under the color of law by law enforcement officials.

 

RELIEF



1. I want equal justice under the law. I want my law suits re-filed in each court at their expense. Due process of law secures my right to know why it is reasonable and necessary, the compelling state interest to proscribe marijuana, that allowed law enforcement officials to invade my privacy with a search warrant and/or seize my person and my property. AND/OR

 

2. Prosecuting these judges and state attorneys for willful deprivation of my rights under the color of law. OR

3. As a law enforcement official, please inform me in writing, the enforcement of the marijuana laws did not cause injury to my fundamental “civil rights” to privacy, to liberty and to property and judicial review to determine the constitutionality of these criminal laws is rational review. Please put it in writing that being arrested is not deprivation of liberty, seizing marijuana was not deprivation of property, a search warrant is not an invasion of privacy. Please tell me in writing the these law enforcement officials, did not deprive me of my civil right to due process of law and deny me equal protection of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

 

Submitted, by
Michael J. Dee
PO BOX 2021
786 Roosevelt Trail #5
Windham, ME 04062 (207) 893-0287

 

 

U.S. Department of Justice
                                          Civil Rights Division

 

Sent Certfied Mail 7010 1060 0001 4211 4110

 

Sent Certfied Mail 7010 1060 0001 4211 4110

 

 


Dear Mr. Dee:

 

This is a response to your correspondence received by our office on October 16, 2009, in which you allege officials have denied you your fundamental right to due process of the law to question the validity and construction of criminal laws you were charged with because they claim marijuana is not a constitutional right. We apologize for our delay in responding.

 

The Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division is responsible for enforcing federal criminal civil rights statutes. Much of our enforcement activity relates to the investigation and prosecution of deprivations of civil rights under color of law. These matters generally involve allegations of excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers.

 

We have carefully reviewed the information which you furnished. However, we have determined that your complaint does not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes. Accordingly, we are unable to assist you.

 

You may wish to contact the nearest legal aid program or the local bar association to determine whether they may be able to assist you.

 

By: Sincerely,
Robert Moossy, Jr.

Acting Section Chief Criminal Section

 

By Aneesa Khan
Paralegal Specialist Criminal Section

 

4 letters sent

 


This is a response to your correspondence received by our office on October 16, 2009, in which you allege officials have denied you your fundamental right to due process of the law to question the validity and construction of criminal laws you were charged with because they claim marijuana is not a constitutional right. We apologize for our delay in responding.

 

The Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division is responsible for enforcing federal criminal civil rights statutes. Much of our enforcement activity relates to the investigation and prosecution of deprivations of civil rights under color of law. These matters generally involve allegations of excessive physical force or sexual abuse by law enforcement officers.

 

We have carefully reviewed the information which you furnished. However, we have determined that your complaint does not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes. Accordingly, we are unable to assist you.

 

You may wish to contact the nearest legal aid program or the local bar association to determine whether they may be able to assist you.

 

By: Sincerely,
Robert Moossy, Jr.

Acting Section Chief Criminal Section

By Aneesa Khan
Paralegal Specialist Criminal Section

 

4 letters sent

 

 

 

   Sent Certified mail 4/13/2011 7007 07100 0002 8437 4771

Michael J. Dee
PO Box 2021
Windham, ME 04062
(207) 893-0287

Un Reasonable Seize Marijuana-------------- Our Rights Their Betrayal
Print Print | Sitemap
Our Rights Their Betrayal