Summary

Re: AskGPO: Inquiry Status Closed 00195418: U.S. Courts opinions on govinfo.gov [SUMMARY] 1. First, thank you—I am grateful for the federal government’s official position in simultaneously asserting that Mr. Brendan Hurson of the District of Maryland and Chief Judge Albert Diaz of the Fourth Circuit are the persons responsible. In doing so, you have acknowledged direct liability on behalf of the federal government under the doctrines of ratification and negligent supervision. If you were not previously aware, both Mr. Hurson and the federal government have already been named as defendants. 2. Second, your legal error rests on three material assertions: 3. Claims against Hurson are supported by conclusive evidence, and Chief Judge Diaz order crediting unlawful conduct to Hurson. 4. The referenced Fourth Circuit order was issued in response to the several days during which the court records were restricted. During that time, the courts used their position to censor public records, including blocking search engine indexing and visibility on legal research websites. 5. Censored evidence includes: documentation of over $2 million in investments made by Mr. Hurson in the two months following his swearing-in, despite having no reported source of income on his financial disclosure. The evidence also links Mr. Hurson to other named defendants as being a material factor in becoming a magistrate and Article III judge. Those same defendants were also invited to the Fourth Circuit Judicial Conference and sponsored an event at the conference. 6. The public has both a common-law and First Amendment right of access to judicial records. At a minimum, court opinions qualify as judicial records for those purposes. [Limitation on Rules (28 U.S.C. § 2072(b)): 'Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. All laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect.'] 7. Additionally, the statutes governing GPO publication requirements [Federal Electronic Information (44 U.S.C. § 4104): As used in [44 U.S.C. §§ 4104–4104], the term '[Federal electronic information]' means Federal public information stored electronically]. The GPO is required to maintain public online access to such information under 44 U.S.C. §§ 4101–4104. 8. Judicial discretion is limited to adding, and there is no legal authority to remove, censor, or restrict public records (not including the specific statutory ones that are not applicable). I am formally requesting disclosure of all materials connected to the censorship of GovInfo, web search engines, legal databases, and all other repositories of public information relating to me, my case, or any named defendant. I further request that the federal government immediately reverse all censorship measures imposed in connection with me, my case, and the named defendants. 9. In addition to the numerous civil rights violations inherent in the government’s conduct, these acts constitute a prohibitive sanction imposed without any of the constitutionally required procedural safeguards. The sanction’s clear intent is to unlawfully prevent me from distributing and circulating information lawfully submitted to the courts and preserved in the public record. In addition to conspiracies actionable under state law, common law, and federal civil rights statutes, my claims are inextricably intertwined with serious criminal conduct involving a complex system of criminal enterprise conspiracies.

Tags