State of Washington, et al v. Donald J. Trump, et al

Filing 176

Filed Amicus Curiae - Pending Anthony P. Keyter motion to become amicus curiae (motion contained within amicus brief). Deficiencies: None. Served on 02/16/2017. [10329705] (LA) [Entered: 02/22/2017 03:38 PM]

RECEIVED
MOLLY C. DWYER CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FEB22 2017
No 17-35105
7iLED

,)oC ETED

C)a s

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF WASHINGTON and STATE OF MINNESOTA,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
V.

DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON,
THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROB ART PRESIDING,
CASE NO. 2:17-cv-00141-JLR

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE ANTHONY KEYTER
IN SUPPORT OF THE RULE OF LAW CONCERNING REHEARING EN BANC

ANTHONY KEYTER
6200 SOUNDVIEW DRIVE, R201
GIG HARBOR, WA 98335
TEL: [phone]

FEBRUARY 16, 2017

iN1TIAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Table of Authorities / Cases Referenced ..........................................
2
Statutes.................................................................................
2
Disclosure Statement .................................................................
2
Motion for Leave to File .............................................................3
Amicus Curiae Brief ............. . .. . ...................... . .... . ...................
4
Conclusion............................................................................
8

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES/ CASES REFERENCED
Page
Anthony P. Keyter vs The Boeing Company:
US District Court, Western Washington 09cv962, 2009 ........................
US District Court, Western Washington 12cv474, 2012 .......................
US District Court, Western Washington 13cv982, 2013 .......................
9th Circuit Appeal Court 06-15253 ................................................
9'h Circuit Appeal Court 12-72265 ...............................................
9th Circuit Appeal Court 13-36056 .................................................
Anthony P. Keyter vs 230 Government Officers:
9th
Circuit Appeal Court 05-35717 ..............................................

5
5
5
5
5, 7
5-8
5

STATUTES
18USC2381...........................................................................
18USC2383...................................................................................................
18USC2384 ...................................................................................................
Constitution, Article III, Section 1 ...............................................................
Constitution, 14th Amendment, Section 3 ...................................................

Page
4, 7
4, 7
4, 7
4, 7
4, 8

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - RULE 29(a)(4XE)
This brief was authored by Anthony Keyter, a private citizen, without the involvement of
counsel for any party in this matter. No party or counsel for such party contributed
money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting this brief. No person other
than the Amicus Curiae Anthony Keyter contributed money that was intended to fund
preparing or submitting this brief.

2

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF - RULE 29(a)(3)
Motion
Amicus curiae Anthony Keyter respectfully moves the 9th Circuit Appeals Court
for leave to file a Brief as amicus curiae in support of the `rule of law', and all that that
terms means, as practically applied to the `rehearing en banc'. This motion is
accompanied by the proposed Brief, given below.
Statement of Interest of Amicus Curiae - Rule 29(a)(3)(A)
Anthony Keyter is a private citizen with personal knowledge of a virulent
`seditious conspiracy' active within the US District Court, Seattle, and 9th Circuit
Appeals Court, and files this Amicus Curiae Brief in the paramount interest of 'the rule of
law' for the United States, and in the best interests of the American public. As will be
clear from the 'Brief, the interest that the 'rule of law' prevails in this case is not an
elementary whim or sentiment or legal theory, but a profound practical necessity in this
matter before the 9u' Circuit Appeals Court affecting the 'rule of law', the dignity, and the
good name of the United States and the American veoole.
Reasons Why Amicus Brief is Desirable - Rule 29(a)(3)(B)
For justice to be served in this case, the 9a' Circuit bench and Judge Robart of the
US District Court for Western Washington have to obey the statutes of the United States
of America, which they are in direct violation of- and must disqualify themselves. Only
then can justice and the 'rule of law' be served in this important matter, so vital to the
public wellbeing. Only then can the best interests of the American public be served and
the American nation claim to be a law-abiding country.

3

Judge Robart (and several other US District Court judges for Western Washington
besides), together with most all 9th Circuit Court Judges, are implicated in a welldocumented seditious conspiracy and an `insurrection against the laws'. A number of
criminal complaints have been filed against the judges in several court cases, only to be
suppressed on each occasion, in order to protect the lawbreaking judicial officials from
prosecution and the justice system from disgrace. (Those criminal complaints were also
filed with the FBI and DOJ under Presidents GW Bush and Obama, and were similarly
squashed and covered up).
Pending criminal charges filed against the judges for their active role in the
criminal enterprise include, inter alia, the crimes of seditious conspiracy, insurrection
against the laws, and treason. The statutes which forbid those subversive activities
(18USC2384, 18USC2383, and 18USC2381 respectively) and the Constitution, Article
III, Section 1 and the 14th Amendment, Section 3, simultaneously and expressly forbid
Judge Robart and most 9th Circuit Judges from holding public office under the United
States. Since the judges have no legal standing under those statutes, all decisions taken
by the judges are null and void. It is in the United States best interest and in the public
interest that only judges who are in good behavior and have legal standing decide this
case, important for the public wellbeing.
ANUCUS CURIAE BRIEF
Background
There is a major criminal endeavor afoot by United States Court officials and
others, to obstruct the administration of the laws, to provide impunity to known criminals,
to deny fundamental rights of due process and protection of the laws to victims and to the

ri

United States, and to defeat the ends of justice. A number of persons have perpetrated
violent criminal offenses in pursuit of the objectives of the unlawful endeavor, including:
intimidation, coercion, extortion, tampering with evidence, theft of court record,
obstruction of justice, and mass murder of 161 innocent people and grave injury to 189
others (in two completely avoidable air accidents); and several foiled attempts to kidnap
and kill a key witness.
The criminal endeavour has been meticulously documented over a period of 14
years in a 2600-page digest titled the `Dossier of Crimes', and in thousands of pages of
evidential documents surrounding the broader case. The `Dossier of Crimes' describes
the impunity with which numerous government and industry officials have committed
innumerable offenses and have on several occasions attempted to kidnap and murder
witnesses to their crimes. The Dossier is filed in US District Court Western Washington,
case numbers 09cv962, 12cv474, and 13cv982; and in 9a' Circuit case numbers 05-35717,
06-15253, 12-72265, and 13-36056, amongst other filings.
Several attempts to bring the perpetrators to justice in the United States Courts
have met with strong efforts on the part of the judiciary to suppress all information and
knowledge of the shameful affair. Those court cases have been combined into a single
US Supreme Court Case titled: the "Consolidated Boeing Company Murder Case ",
which remains pending, although obstructed, with Chief Justice Roberts.
Judges' Role in the Seditious Conspiracy
From the earliest stages of the matter, the role of the federal judiciary has been
one of considerable corruption. Amongst numerous other statutory obligations to act
against malfeasant officials, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rules 4 and 41)

E

dictate that the courts 'shall' arrest those defendants in a court action who are suspected
of crime. Not a single arrest has been made. Not a single hearing has been convened.
Not a single crime, amongst a multitude committed by officials, has been investigated or
prosecuted despite overwhelming and unambiguous evidence presented.
In every civil and criminal case filed against the seditious government
conspirators, the federal courts simply swept all criminal charges against officials under
the carpet, thereby impeding a critical function of government and nullifying their very
own raison d'être. In that way many fully informed federal judges aided and abetted
known criminals to escape justice, with one paramount purpose in mind: to protect
seditious officials from prosecution and public disgrace, knowing that those officials
would do the same for them in return.
Amongst those federal judges who obstructed justice in the extensive criminal
matter and who assisted known felons to escape justice, are Judge James Robart (and
several other US Western Washington District Court judges) and the following 9th Circuit
Judges:
9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges
Judge Mary M. Schroeder; Judge S. Reinhardt; Judge M.D. Hawkins;
Judge Trott; Judge Canby; Judge Kleinfeld; Judge Edward Leavy; Judge
Ronald M. Gould; Judge Richard R. Clifton; James R. Browning; Alfred
T. Goodwin; J. Clifford Wallace; Joseph T. Sneed; Procter Hug, Jr.; Otto
R. Skopil; Jerome Farris; Harry Pregerson; Arthur L. Alarcon; Warren J.
Ferguson; Dorothy W. Nelson; Robert Boochever; Robert R. Beezer;
Cynthia Holcomb Hall; Melvin Brunetti; Alex Kozinski; John T. Noonan,
Jr.; David R. Thompson; Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain; Ferdinand F.
Fernandez; Pamela Ann Rymer; Thomas G. Nelson; A. Wallace Tashima;
Sidney R. Thomas; Barry G. Silverman; Susan P. Graber; M. Margaret
McKeown; Kim McLane Wardlaw; William A. Fletcher; Raymond C.
Fisher; Richard A. Paez; Marsha S. Berzon; Richard C. Tallman; Johnnie
B. Rawlinson; Jay S. Bybee; Consuelo M. Callahan; Carlos T. Bea; Milan
D. Smith, Jr.; Sandra S. Ikuta; R Smith; M. Murguia; M. Christen; J
Nguyen; P. Watford; A. Hurwitz.

Cel

For details of criminal charges filed against Judge Robart and not addressed by any
court, see the Dossier of Crimes: Vol. II, Chapters 18.39.1, 18.44.1, 18.49, 18.50.1; and
Vol. III, Chapters 49.1, 49.3, 50.2, and 50.3).
For details of criminal charges filed against 9t Circuit Judges and not attended
to, see the Dossier of Crimes: Vol. IT, Chapters 18.30, 18.34, 18.37, 18.38, 18.39.1,
18.44.1, 18.49; and Vol. III, Chapters 49.1, 49.3, 50.2, and 50.3).
The Dossier of Crimes is filed in 9a' Circuit case no. 13cv-36056, as Appendix 1
to the motion for joinder of defendants. An updated copy is available to investigators.

Criminal Charges Filed against Judges
Amongst several other charges, sedition charges were filed against the judges in a
number of the court cases (including 9`h Circuit cases 12-72265 & 13cv-36056) for their
role in preventing, hindering, and delaying the execution of the laws of the United States
by violence (accessories after the fact to attempted murder of a prime witness). The vast
extent of the criminal endeavour within the US Courts and government over many years,
involving the US District Court and 9th Circuit judges, and many other judges and senior
government officials besides, constitutes a rebellion against the laws of the United States.
Further charges of violating 18USC2383 (for insurrection against the laws) were filed
against the judges in the courts, as were charges of treason (18USC2381) filed against
them for providing aid and comfort to the insurgents (enemies of the United States), and
for assisting them to escape justice.
Those charges against the judges remain filed and pending (awaiting the judges
imperative actions) in the 90 Circuit Court, in the "Combined Boeing Company Murder

7

Case ", case no. 13-36056, in the Dossier of Crimes filed as Addendum 7 in the Amended
Appeal Brief.
The Laws Demand Compliance
Statutes 18USC2381 (on treason) and 18USC2383 (on insurrection against the
laws), demand that judges so engaged in these subversive offenses, shall be incapable of
th
holding any office under the United States. That means that 9 Circuit Judges listed
above are holding their positions illegally.
In addition, the Constitution, in Article III, Section 1, demands that "The judges,
both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour".
Judge Robart and the 9`h Circuit Judges are not in good behaviour while engaged in
subversive activities against the United States. They may not legally hold office. The
laws are clear and have not been obeyed.
Furthermore, the 14th Amendment, Section 3, dictates that no person shall hold
any office under the United States, who, having previously taken an oath to support the
Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against
the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. That includes the judges.
US District Court Judge Robart and the 9th Circuit Judges are not above the law,
and are compelled, like any other citizen, to obey the laws and the Constitution. The
laws and the Constitution declare that they shall not hold office under the United States.
CONCLUSION
US District Court Judge Robart and the 9d' Circuit Judges continue to hold office
under the United States in violation of the Constitution and the statutes mentioned above,
as detailed in the Dossier of Crimes filed in 9's Circuit case no. 13-36056. They have no

legal standing to adjudicate this case, or any other case for that matter. Any rulings made
by any of these judges are illegal and void.
For justice to be served in this case, US District Court Judge Robart and the

9th

Circuit Bench of Judges need to obey the statutes of the United States of America, and to
step aside and disqualify themselves, so that judges who are loyal to the Constitution and
the laws can decide this important case in the interests of the 'rule of law' and the welfare
of the American people.
Respectfully Submitted,

Anthony P. Keyter

W

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 16th day of February 2017, a true and correct copy of this
Amicus Curiae Brief was served electronically, on the following counsel for the parties:
Counsel for Defendants-Appellants:
Edwin S. Kneedler
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Room 5139
Washington, DC 20530

Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees:
Noah G. Purcell
Office of the Washington Attorney General
P.O. Box 40100
1125 Washington St., SE Olympia,
WA 98504

Respectfully Submitted,

Anthony P. Keyter

10