PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.

com/Human_Rights_Alert

Human Rights Alert

11-10-11 Corruption of the US Courts and US Banking Regulation: Origins and Proposed Corrective Measures
Large-scale fraud in the electronic record systems of the US courts has enabled the corruption of the US courts to a degree that has not been seen for at least a century. The US Congress, the public at large, and computing experts should initiate corrective actions.

The United States is in the midst of a constitutional and financial crisis, the like of which has not been seen for at least a century. The US courts are central to undermining Banking and Corporate Regulation and Civil Rights during the ongoing financial crisis. [[i],[ii]] Likewise, restoring the integrity of the US courts is quintessential for restoring Banking Regulation and Human Rights. Like the Great Depression before it, the ongoing financial crisis is a system-wide integrity crisis in its essence. Unless integrity of the justice systems is restored, socio-economic and civil society conditions in the United States are unlikely to improve in the foreseeable future. At present, the public should skeptically view any new legislation aimed at addressing this crisis, since it may only serve as lip service. Recent examples include:

Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), which was enacted following the Enron crisis. Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (2009), which was enacted in response to the current crisis.

Neither is enforced. A major shift needs to be seen in the conduct of the US Congress, relative to accountability of US judges and senior US officers, through impeachments, [[iii]] before any further legislation is enacted. One can only hope that such shift would result from the current Occupy Wall Street movement, or from the dire circumstances that the People are yet to endure in the next few years. Proposed corrective actions:

Restoring key provisions of the Salary Act of 1919, which placed the clerks of the US courts under the authority of the US Attorney General:

The primary charge of the office of the clerk, from its inception, was in the safeguard of the integrity of court records. [[iv]] Conditions in the offices of the clerks of the state and US courts, and the implementation of electronic record systems in the US and state courts is the enabling tool for judicial corruption in the past couple of decades. [[v]] (To a large degree the same is true of banking and corporate electronic financial records.)

Page 2/4

October 11, 2011

During the Robber Baron Era (late 19th century - early 20th century), conditions in the US courts were described in the US Congress as "a burlesque", and the Salary Act was credited as a key measure in restoring the US courts integrity. [[vi]] It restored the capacity of the clerks of the US courts as checks and balances vis a vis judicial corruption. [[vii]] By the mid 20th century the clerks were again placed under the authority of the judiciary. The implementation of electronic record systems in the courts has further circumvented the accountability of the clerks for the integrity of court records. Large-scale fraud in court records is key to the current corruption in the state and US courts. [[viii],[ix]]

Enactment of federal rules of electronic court:

As part of the transition to electronic administration of government, the US Congress passed the EGovernment Act (2002) [[x]] and the E-Sign Act (2000). [[xi]] The US Department of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12 (2004) further established policies for validation and authentication of electronic systems and electronic records of the executive branch agencies. [[xii]] Standards were accordingly promulgated and applications were implemented. [[xiii]] In contrast, the US Courts established PACER and CM/ECF (the online public access and case management systems of the US courts), which are deliberately invalid and unauthenticated. As part of the implementation of the systems, the public is routinely denied access to the electronic authentication records (NEFs), which are integral part of court records. [[xiv]] Therefore, the People and pro se litigants (who are routinely denied access to CM/ECF) are denied the ability to distinguish between judicial records, which are authenticated, valid, and effectual, and judicial records, which are published by the courts, but are not authenticated, and are not deemed by the courts themselves as valid and effectual. In the process of implementing PACER and CM/ECF, a sea change was introduced in court procedures, which had been established for centuries as the core of Due Process. However, all US courts that were examined, without exception, failed to publish Rules of Courts pertaining to their new electronic procedures, in alleged violation of Due Process rights. Moreover, all courts that were examined deny public access to various records in their electronic case management systems in alleged violation of First Amendment rights. Therefore, the US Congress should perform its duties and establish the electronic court systems by law. Implicit in such law should be the requirement for publicly and legally accountable validation (certified, functional logic verification) of such systems prior to their implementation.

The People, and computing professionals in particular, should exercise their civic duties in ongoing monitoring of the integrity of the courts:

The common law right to inspect and to copy judicial records was reaffirmed by the US Supreme Court in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978) as inherent to the First Amendment. In doing so, the US Supreme Court stated that the right was necessary for the People "to keep a watchful eye on government". Today, the People must keep a watchful eye on electronic court records in particular. No other measure could substitute for scrutiny of court records by the People in safeguarding the integrity of the courts and Human Rights in the Digital Era.
LINKS: _______

Page 3/4

October 11, 2011

[i] 11-06-14 Corruption of the Courts and Failing Banking Regulation in the United States: Dred Scott redux? http://www.scribd.com/doc/57707808/ 11-06-24 Time Magazine - 4th of July Issue: Does the Constitution Still Matter? http://www.scribd.com/doc/58665806/ 11-10-03 Execution of US Citizens by Presidential Directives With No Due Process of Law http://www.scribd.com/doc/67408506/ [ii] 11-02-03 Stealing from the People: Corruption in the United States; the Big Feast: Banker, Judge, Civil Servant http://www.scribd.com/doc/48090911/ [iii] 11-10-10 Inspector General for the US Judiciary? Congress needs to start impeachments instead! http://www.scribd.com/doc/68252366/ [iv] 00-00-01 1789-09-24 Judiciary Act of 1789 - An Act to Establish the Judicial Courts of the United States http://www.scribd.com/doc/42306274/ Three publication of the Federal Judicial Center http://www.scribd.com/doc/42954952/ http://www.scribd.com/doc/42952670/ [v] 10-11-17 Duties and Responsibilities of the Clerks Key to Integrity Failure of the US Courts s http://www.scribd.com/doc/43223951/ Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/38328585/ Zernik, J; The Clerks and the Calendars of the US Courts http://www.scribd.com/doc/42686043/ 10-10-30 Zernik, J Case Management and Online Public Access Systems of the Courts in the United States http://www.scribd.com/doc/40511204/ 10-11-11 Table 2: US District Courts PACER and CM/ECF: Public Access to Calendars - Survey of Individual Cases in 5 District Courts http://www.scribd.com/doc/42100653/ 11-01-08 Press Release: Dont Ask Dont Tell' - Motion to Intervene, requesting the US Court of Appeals to dismiss the appeals from an uncertified judgment, was posted in the docket, is now pending before the Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/46528428/ 11-01-07 Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al (10-56634) at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Motion to Intervene and Concomitantly Filed Papers as published in the online PACER dockets http://www.scribd.com/doc/46516034/ [vi] 02-00-00 Messinger, I Scott: Order in The Court - History of Clerks of United States Courts, Federal Judicial Center (2002) http://www.scribd.com/doc/34819774/ [vii] 02-00-00 Messinger, I Scott: Order in The Court - History of Clerks of United States Courts, Federal Judicial Center (2002) http://www.scribd.com/doc/34819774/ [viii] 11-08-01 Zernik, J: Fraud and corruption in the US courts is tightly linked to failing banking regulation and the financial crisis, 16th World Criminology Congress presentation http://www.scribd.com/doc/61351562/ [ix] 11-07-06 Request filed by Windsor and Zernik with US Attorney General Eric Holder for Review of Integrity of Public Access and Case Management Systems of the US Courts http://www.scribd.com/doc/59480718/ [x] 03-01-07 E-Government Act (2002) HR2458 Final - USA http://www.scribd.com/doc/46429557/ [xi] 00-06-30 E-Sign Act (2000) http://www.scribd.com/doc/46516104/ [xii] 04-08-28 DHS _ Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12_ Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors - USA http://www.scribd.com/doc/46428296/ [xiii] 11-01-08 NIST-CSRC-Guidance on E-Sign Implementation in Federal Agencies http://www.scribd.com/doc/46516618/ 05-08-05 m05-24- Office of Management and Budget: Memorandum for the Heads of All Departments and Agencies in re: Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 - USA http://www.scribd.com/doc/46428607/ 06-09-07 Tumbleweed Validation Authority Secures FIPS 201 Certification - USA http://www.scribd.com/doc/46427903/

Page 4/4

October 11, 2011

10-09-28 Innovative Uses of SCAP-Developing a Government-Funded SCAP-Validated Application/ Internal Revenue Service /National Security Agency - USA http://www.scribd.com/doc/46426854/ [xiv] 10-10-11 Linzer, D. In GITMO Opinion, Two Versions of Reality, The National Law Journal, October 11, 2010 http://www.scribd.com/doc/53954229/ 10-07-02 Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) in the US Courts Electronic Filing System (CM/ECF) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24732941/ 10-04-01 Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing - US District Court, Western District of Texas, Revised April 1, 2010 http://www.scribd.com/doc/48329825/ 08-02-00 US District Court Central District of California: General Order 08-02, Authorizing CM/ECF, Digital Authentication and Attestation in NEFs http://www.scribd.com/doc/27632471/ 11-01-07 Log Cabin Republicans v USA et al (10-56634) at the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - Motion to Intervene and Concomitantly Filed Papers as published in the online PACER dockets http://www.scribd.com/doc/46516034/ 11-06-20 Additional evidence of fraud in PACER and CM/ECF: Document Verification Utility, as described in the US District Court, Northern District of Illinois s http://www.scribd.com/doc/58416505/ 11-06-21 PRESS RELEASE: Additional evidence of fraud in PACER and CM/ECF - the Document Verification Utility, as described in the US District Court, Northern District of Illinois http://www.scribd.com/doc/58426399/