Supreme court building   200 E. Capital Springfield IL 62701

dated 2/ 7 /11

James Frank Osterbur               )    Appellate court 4th district
2191 county road 2500 E.         )       Gen no 4-10-0679
St. Joseph   IL 61873                 )Judges: Sue E Myerscough               )             M. Carol Pope
petitioner/ plaintiff.                   )        Thomas R  Appleton

)       Champaign  Circuit court
Provena Covenant Medical       )        6th judicial circuit
1400 W.  Park                           )          Case no 09-LM-1414
Urbana IL 61801                       )     Thomas J. Difanis                                                                      presiding judge
respondent/ defendant


Petition for leave to appeal
there is no room for denial.




December 17, 2010 “appellees’s motion to dismiss appeal in the above-captioned cause ALLOWED.  Appeal dismissed!”
“January 26/ 2011,   I have today issued the mandate of this court in the above entitled cause, pursuant to the provisions of supreme court rule 368"
[neither,  statement of the clerk/  included any judicial signature!   Consequently it was rejected.  The last included  judicial names, as are required in the filing of an appeal: thereby no option existed prior to this moment to re-file.   AS NO CLERK, is allowed to enter a judgment/ only a judge/ and NO JUDGE,  SIGNATURE OR NAME APPEARED.  Neither did any legal cause as is LAW, or “personalized” seal,  appear on 12/ 17/ 10]. Merely a print ad, that can be received from anyone.    Which means it is errant and        ill-advised in a courtroom of law.  The assumptions of a courtroom or judge does NOT give dismissal, the authority of law.  Only the law decides/ not a judge.


The appellate court having dismissed this case without cause!  “The whim of a judge is NOT enough”/ the reality of law MUST be imposed as the will of this people upon the decisions called justice by the court. The law is not a game/ the judiciary is NOT our “ruler”.  They are employees hired to obey and enforce,     the law/ NOT their opinion. Their opinion is allowed only under the authority of that law.

 Prove the law!  WHICH MEANS: THE LAW MUST BE APPLIED, to every cause or dismissal.

The gravity of this case includes

THE ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION, “our government for this state” READS
THE ILLINOIS PREAMBLE INCLUDES, AS THE DIRECTIONS OF VALUE PROVIDED TO EACH EMPLOYEE, that they may know their job:”.... eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social and economic justice;.....” 
Established here to prove the intent of the people in hiring employees to work within the laws of our courtroom.  Or more clearly the mandate, which provides the authority under which a judge, or any official;   is allowed to work!

                          ARTICLE I                      BILL OF RIGHTS   SECTION 1. INHERENT AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS    All men are by nature free and independent and have certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights and the protection of property, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

Established here to prove the legitimacy of a demand for redress of grievances within the healthcare industry by the people of this state or nationWE ARE THE OWNERS/ WE DECIDE BY THE LAW CALLED REDRESS!  Not a judge, we are the rulers of this nation/ as we the people.


   SECTION 2. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION    No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)  Established here to prove that my right to the law is being obstructed by employees of our court.  That is criminal contempt for the process and rights guaranteed by OUR law; within the judiciary.  THAT IS felony theft of what is precious and valuable to me, and to this people; an act of treason or open rebellion against the law, and the people.     


SECTION 5. RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION    The people have the right to assemble in a peaceable manner, to consult for the common good, to make known their opinions to their representatives and to apply for redress of grievances. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Established here to prove, that my right to redress is absolute/ it is the law.  The foundation of financial rape among each and every citizen having been established by the courtroom/ rather than the hospital.  This case challenges a contractual dispute between the hospital and me/ that has not be resolved even though my right to a jury trial as is guaranteed by the seventh amendment of the US constitution has been presented to this case.  It is the court that attempts to rape and defile me (thereby us, am I not like any other)/ that currently has established the cause for redress.  The people explaining again to their employees/ what they can or cannot do: AND REMOVING those employees,  or imprisoning those who have sought to do us all harm.  Redress is a legal guaranteed law of this state and nation/ it is NOT subject to the discretion of the courtroom judge.  It is the law! The court denies the law/ discards the guaranteed amendments applied by constitutional mandate and order upon the judiciary/ and transforms this democracy into a dictatorship by refusal to be subject to the law themselves.  They now believe themselves rulers/ rather than employees.  A fact that must be addressed.


SECTION 6. SEARCHES, SEIZURES, PRIVACY AND INTERCEPTIONS    The people shall have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and other possessions against unreasonable searches, seizures

Established here to prove: that although I am guaranteed the right to be secured within the law, as would aspire and describe justice.  I have been throw out of court, both circuit and appellate: without due process of law.  Without my guaranteed rights as described by the US CONSTITUTION under the fourteenth amendment.  My privilege as a citizen is to call for the US SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO BE ENACTED FOR ME, A JURY TRIAL!  I am denied without cause or law or signature or name or seal! Merely the claim of a clerk.
That fact, now opens the door to the removal of property from me, by the defense:   WITHOUT MY DAY IN COURT.  A rule does not present justice as is the demand upon this judiciary/ RATHER it is an obstruction to the law, and is used to control the population, thereby aiding and abetting the lawyer:  in their ability to extort money.  That is against democracy, and is in fact a war upon our lives.  We the people: IS, the true assertion/ I will, be able to do it myself. NOT be forced to pay.


   SECTION 16. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND IMPAIRING CONTRACTS    No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts or making an irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)  

ESTABLISHED HERE, because there are NO RULES, that can impair or infringe upon my right to justice within a courtroom of this USA or state of IL.   No rules exist:  That can alter my demand to acquire and obtain a jury, wherein significant costs and protections are described by constitutional guarantees.  NO FOUNDATION EXISTS, whereby I am forced to pay a lawyer to defend what is rightfully mine.  Rather the constitution demands that the court shall indeed not only help me find justice/ but provide the means and establish the merits without fail.  These judges fail.


   SECTION 23. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES    A frequent recurrence to the fundamental principles of civil government is necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty. These blessings cannot endure unless the people recognize their corresponding individual obligations and responsibilities. (Source: Illinois Constitution.) 

Established here to prove: that the essence of redress is to return to the agreements which built our nation as a democracy of this people.  Whereby the blood/ mutilations/ disabilities/ sacrifice/ and heartbreak paid to create this nation CANNOT be lost.  Cannot be disgraced or disavowed by our employees.  Instead as is written here, IT IS OUR DUTY to confront those employees who have damaged or created trouble for this nation with a true investigation of our agreements as written within the foundation documents of revolution and society; namely the declaration of independence/ bill of rights/ and US constitution; as well as state constitutions.  Having examined them, and finding true and substantial fault/ thereby the need for resolution of costs in healthcare by this people themselves.  I did and do call upon the court to provide that redress of grievances/ so that the rest, can also choose for themselves.  If democracy has been served, by our employees/ and by the allowed business or industry in this nation and state.  It is our legal right as a people to make this decision, in a courtroom of law.  IT IS NOT the right of a judge to intervene in that law.  Because in terms of the democracy as a whole, be it state or nation:   WE ARE THE OWNERS/ THEREFORE WE SHALL JUDGE FOR OURSELVES.   It is the courtroom that applies the investigation, by examining the facts and penalizing the liars.

   SECTION 4 SUPREME COURT JURISDICTION (c)  Appeals from the Appellate Court to the Supreme Court are a matter of right if a question under the Constitution of the United States or of this State arises for the first time in and as a result of the action of the Appellate Court,
ESTABLISHED TO PROVE; you cannot deny this claim because there are numerous questions of right established by the constitutions of both state and nation/ granting to me, and to us;   our redress of grievances as law.


   SECTION 3.  OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF OFFICE    Each prospective holder of a State office or other State position created by this Constitution, before taking office, shall take and subscribe to the following oath or affirmation:    "I do solemnly swear (affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of .... to the best of my ability." (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Established to remind the judiciary of their pledge.  THEIR SWORN OATH TO ACCEPT the responsibilities and demands of this office.  THEIR SWORN OATH, to be responsible for their own actions under the constitution and its laws.  The criminal context of failure to obey these very laws/ wherein NO opportunity to excuse or represent an misinterpretation exists: causes the charge of treason to be leveled.  The intentional act, by carefully thought out decision:   to change, disrupt, abandon, disrespect, and violate our sacred right to democracy as we the people enacted and resolved;  This, shall be our way!   The court in its failure to obey that law called redress or the amendments both state and nation listed.  Have thereby chosen to not only rebel/ but attack.

  SECTION 4. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ABOLISHED    Except as the General Assembly may provide by law, sovereign immunity in this State is abolished. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Established to prove: no claim of immunity, when blatantly and purposefully intending to destroy a foundation right guaranteed to the people and to me under constitutional law;    Shall be allowed.  Guilty is guilty, let the people decide.



The question presented
The elemental truth of a court case as is presented above IN THIS APPEAL.   Searches within the meanings of REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, both state and nation to discover the foundation of democracy exists within, AND as our right to defend ourselves!  That right is exercised through our relationship with redress of grievances as is the law of this state and nation.  OUR Ownership of that right, is NOT for the judiciary employees within our courts to deny.  THEY HAVE NO JURISDICTION to rule a constitutional law is anything but the law.   Not any court, in this land.

The court is bound by the constitution and is not allowed to interpret that text in any other way, than its true intent. ALL INTENT of the constitution both state and nation is delivered in their respective preambles, as the message to our employees: they shall obey this directive/ or be in rebellion to state or nation.
religion is banned from government/ thereby “the word prayer is refused, from pleadings”!   This assertion that you are “a god” is removed.  The reality you are an employee with a job to do, by  serving the people through their own law is enforced.

I am entitled to the law.  I am entitled to the signature of any judge who asserts authority over me.  I am entitled to the cause and subsequent reality of argument provided by the judiciary in denying any case.  I am entitled to the seal of a courtroom decision;   being identified by more than merely a printed image. I am entitled to assume and assert, NO CLERK can merely hand me a piece of paper and say, “I am dismissed”: they have no right/ only a judge can dismiss.  I am entitled to the names of the judiciary in this case prior to presenting my appeal to this state supreme court; and did not receive them until 35 days after dismissal is assumed.  I am entitled to fair and accurate warning, regarding any intent to dismiss my subsequent appeal.  This court intentionally withheld that information so they could then play games with my life, by discarding my assertion to further this case.  I am entitled to justice rather than the obstruction of law/ by rules of the court.  I am entitled to fair play rather than the disgrace of playing games with my life.  I am entitled to equality, in a courtroom of law: for the judge is NOT my superior, he or she is merely another citizen with a job to do.  That means our discussion in trial or its preliminary is strictly held to the foundation of what our constitution provides as the basis and critical promise or guarantee, that is my absolute right in this or any courtroom of law in this state or nation.  I am entitled to redress or grievances/ because it is a guarantee of these constitutions both state and nation.  I am entitled to address the court in terms of a contractual agreement with this people/ YOU GAVE AN OATH, and that means you understand it is a contract.  We let you judge by the law/ NOT by a whim or opinion that subjugates our democracy to you.  It is not a game, and you are not a ruler.   Only the law is entitled to rule/ in our absence as we the people.

the demand; for leave to appeal

Comes now, petitioner, James Frank Osterbur,   pursuant to the IL constitution/ and the US constitution.  I hereby respectfully petition this court for leave to appeal from the decision of the appellate court, 4th district. Their dismissal is without merit or warrant of the facts, and void of law.  Their refusal of constitutional law is treasonous, and intentional; thereby the desertion of duty, and a rebellion against this people.

Comes now, the force and authority of the people of this state of IL, and the nation called this United States of America/ in demanding their constitutional laws shall be upheld.  No exceptions!  The reality of ownership by WE THE PEOPLE is exercised in the form of trial to establish and contain the various evils that are represented by the need and business called healthcare for this our state and nation.  Redress of grievances establishes the people by their own right of ownership shall decide for themselves.  If they so elect through their legal right to vote on this issue for themselves.  I do so present that issue.
To create the foundation of a decision that is ours: namely WE HAVE RIGHTS TOO! The establishment of redress trial for the people of IL, or this nation is necessary; and becomes a LEGAL demand herein this case.  The critical contention is financial, and what is then to be, the  BALANCED discovery of FAIR PLAY AND REALISTIC EQUAL CARE FOR ALL.  As best we can Throughout our interaction in terms of healthcare between  citizens; and those with medicine, skills,  and the work of medicine in this state or nation.


                   Judgment below

The appellate court in their order dated 1/ 26/ 11:   states  that on the 17th of December 2010, the CLERK entered:    Case dismissed.   Their assertion, a clerk is entitled to make that statement of dismissal:     Carla Bender.  Without the signature of a judge.  The clerk is NOT so entitled.  I complain that signature of a judge,  is required by  law/ they do still,  continue to refuse. As no signature is present on the mandate sent 1/ 26/ 11.    IS THAT, OR IS THAT NOT A RULE OF THE COURT, only a judge can dismiss?  Answer the question. An assumption is not the law.


I have called for redress of grievances according to the first amendment/ section 5 of this state called Illinois constitution.  The law that governs our state  and the first amendment as it governs our nation.  Regardless of position an employee of the court CANNOT refuse these laws,  or deny their existence.  Anyone who conspires or aids an abets the actions of someone who clearly conspires to steal from me the law, guaranteed to be my rights in a courtroom of law: act in defiance of WE THE PEOPLE.  That is a criminal contempt, and collusion  within a courtroom of this state.  It is fraud/ the distinction of a criminal felony established against me: by the refusal of my right to DUE PROCESS/ denial of my guaranteed legal citizens right,  both in this state and in this nation! It is a criminal felony due to the legitimate truth: this guaranteed citizen right:  is “a value to me, that is priceless”.  Thereby the intent to steal and deny what is clearly my PROPERTY/ our guaranteed right AS CITIZENS:   is criminal treason against the people of this state and nation due to the truth.  THIS IS ABOUT ,   WE THE PEOPLE, AND OUR LAW, OUR GOVERNMENT, AND OUR COURTROOM:  that you have not only refused, and illegally withheld.
This conceives of conspiracy and collusion with the other two judges within the lower court: and previous cases involving this appellant/plaintiff James F. Osterbur.  THIS DEMANDS REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, TO ESTABLISH AND PROVE:    WHAT IS THE AUTHORITY AND DUTIES OF A COURTROOM CALLED DEMOCRACY, TO THESE THE PEOPLE;   OF THIS STATE AND NATION.

THE FOUNDATION OF THIS TRIAL THEN MOVES TO THE COURTROOM, and confronts the judiciary with a deliberate demand to OBEY THE LAW.
Proving the combined effort to remove from me the protections of OUR LAW, and consequently the guarantees, to each and every citizen/ BY OBSTRUCTIONISM through irrelevant rules/ irresponsible dismissal/ claims of ignorance  unsubstantiated by truth, FRAUD by the denial of truth that is the law called redress, and the intent to rule rather than perform the duties to which your oath applies.  The judges herein/ the judiciary recognized by other cases formally filed by the plaintiff James F. Osterbur, are accused thereby: of  committing treason/ rebellion/ or other as defined by the following.  The intentional take over of our government, by the judiciary; the sacrifice of our right to live and breathe as a democracy!  Is a “murder” of our most sacred promise as a nation:   that we shall find our resolution to strife and conflict within the law/ that WE ARE OWNERS HERE.  And in charge of this nation,  By obtaining true democracy through WE THE PEOPLE according to the legal right of redress: the accounting demanded, the ability and truth of ownership established, by our decision to control of our government operations/ when clearly necessary. As it is today   These judges FAILED, our democracy!  An illegal act/ if not an outright rebellion against the oath of office they gave of themselves: to obtain their job.  “The judge” is a job, we give:   for the sake of,  we the people, you obtained/ NOT a right to rule!  The reality of redress is then substantiated to prove not only does healthcare need to be revisited by we the people/ but the entire court system as well requires:   a return to the fundamentals and purposes of we the people as the constitution, both state and nation demands.

Added within the ranks of this dismissal, in this case of contractual healthcare:    is the refusal to provide to me a jury according to the 7th amendment to the US constitution.
These judges refused to provide me with DUE PROCESS, the 14th amendment. Due process includes the contractual law, constitutional law, and more.   Which has been denied to me.  That is established with dismissal, WITHOUT LAW;   which constitutes simply  a whim, opinion of a judge or  clerks letter of “dismissed”.   Due process is the foundation upon which justice is derived.  That requires the essence of evidence to hear the case/ that requires a jury, when demanded, as I did do.  This was no trial, this was a preliminary to refuse me trial without legal cause, and thereby the opportunity to defend myself; was removed.
This dismissal is illegal, without the law which supports it as their right to establish an authority over my life/ our lives.  The law rules/ NOT the judge. Apart from the law, we are equals/ it is the law that represents authority, NOT the judge/ he or she is merely an employee charged to do their duty.  Our relationship to the courtroom as citizens is in need of relief from those who seek to oppress and contain us as slaves for their own purposes;   rather than provide the freedom and liberty our truths as a nation or state guarantee.  That Is illegal.  I am refused a jury, in a case involving thousands of dollars of my property. That is illegal.   Added is the refusal of protection offered to me by the 4th amendment:   the assertion being,  that in a contractual agreement: “I DO have the right to expect the billing that I had agreed to”!  Instead I am abandoned to whatever the defendant, and their lawyer asks.

   I DO HAVE A RIGHT TO THE LAW/ not the whim of a judge.  THAT IS the promise of our constitution.  Without that law, the courtroom is merely the exercise of extortion/ the protection of whatever a judge wants: the disintegration of democracy .   I DO have the right to expect that my money, and/ or possessions shall NOT simply be handed over to anyone: WITHOUT MY DAY IN COURT.  As has been done, by these judges!
Unless the law proves me wrong.  I have a right to a jury, that cannot be denied, so that they decide/ not a judge!   These judiciary are NOT rulers over me, having the authority to do whatever they please.  They are employees required to do their job as we have hired, and paid them to do.  AS THEY GAVE OATH, to obey the constitutional decrees of this state and nation: which they have refused!  There is NO AUTHORITY in this land, that precludes or denies the law shall be applied equally.  That means these actions are proven to be traitorous; because the judiciary which demands and applied them: KNOW, IT IS THE LAW THAT DECIDES, not the judge.  Prove me wrong:  BY LAW! 

          We the people have rights.  We the people are the owners here!  We the people, ARE DUE, the foundation agreement of our democracy which is redress:    The call upon our employees, to give account of themselves, and prove they have done their job as required by the contract we have formed and provided to them. Within an understanding called:   YOUR SWORN OATH.   It was not a game:   without that oath and its consequences/ YOU HAVE NO JOB. The judiciary have thereby been acting illegally; pretending to be the law/ rather than a judge, for which you are not entitled to do.  Because you refuse to honor and accept your duty owed to that oath/ the very oath that lets you assume the position, of authority called a judge.  You the judiciary involved, thereby failing this state, this nation, this people, and me!  Represent the disgrace of a nation.  The question is:   WHAT IS OWED, by guaranteed constitutional right?  The reality as judge through redress:     IS   WE THE PEOPLE!      There are penalties involved.

The absolute failure of the judiciary, in all respects of this appellate case/ and numerous cases established by James Frank Osterbur, with  undeniable evidence formed within a courtroom of law:  regarding this constitutional guaranteed law;   as is redress of grievances.  Establishes contempt for the law, by the judiciary.  Establishes denial of the right called due process guaranteed to me, and a jury lost/ a people disrespected and ruled, rather than WE THE PEOPLE, protected by our law. The thievery and fraud, created by the denial of an oath/ IS the theft of our democracy.   THIS IS OUR LAW, our ability to provide ourselves with proof of ownership as we the people of this  state and nation.  Thereby it is treason; the rule of a dictator,  deliberately attempting to overthrow this people by consuming or destroying their inalienable right of democracy:   PROOF of ownership.  As is the demand of accountability or change in society or the means or methods of governing ourselves by law.  IS OUR INHERENT  RIGHT.  This cannot legally be taken away or withheld, it is the foundation of our democracy, the proof we own this nation/ the reality, WE SHALL DECIDE, for ourselves.

Therefrom, the initial demand of this appeal is the same as occurred in both circuit and appellate court:    Institute redress within the courtroom of this state of IL is my demand;   LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
And provide me with all that is necessary to let these people within the state of IL or nation such as the case now becomes due to the addition of federal courts.   So the people can achieve their constitutional right and decision.  By presented the opportunity called redress of grievances both state and nation,   to their representatives as a jury, in trial.   Given the true and literal option to demand,  yes or no.    We do as a people establish redress/ or we do not.   The parameters are dealt with in the trial papers;   the purpose,  speaking for the rest, as we the people.   To demand redress in these matters, by law.  Establishing true democracy:    Our vote/ my vote decides.  In the matters we deliberately choose for ourselves to vote upon:   One vote per citizen, means we rule as we decide.
It is my right to ask them/ it is their right to decide/ it is the courts responsibility: TO OBEY THE LAW, AND HONOR THIS PEOPLE WITH TRUTH.    We the people;    are the rulers, under constitutional law.   To this date, the judiciary both “great and small” have failed in absolute terms.  Which means the investigation of collusion/ conspiracy/ contempt/ and foundations called open rebellion against the people of ILLINOIS, or this nation:    begins here!

YOU, the judiciary:    ARE NOT immune from the law.  YOU ARE NOT immune from your oath.  YOU ARE NOT entitled to “lifetime jobs, in this state or nation”/ there are no constitutional foundations for this.  YOU ARE NOT immune from the penalties for rebellion against our democracy.  You are employees, and must now give account to we the people who gave or allowed to you:   this job, to protect and defend our lives/ our future/ and our state and nation.  YOU ARE GUILTY OF BREAKING THE LAW!   Redress is not a game, it is the law that governs our state and nation.  That means criminal aspects of decision and intent,  in reality exist.
YOU ARE:   just like us, equal, as citizens/ not rulers, not gods, not better or worse: only the law divides us.  The law does not know, who you are or me: it is blind to all but truth and right and democracy.  A citizen is created by and entitled with;  grants and RESPONSIBILITIES established by the constitution which is OUR GOVERNMENT, by state and nation.  Same as me!  Diploma be damned/ JUSTICE doesn’t care who you are:   because RIGHTS, LAW, and fair play decide.  Not you or me.

The question presented:
DO, WE THE PEOPLE, have a voice: an authority to determine and design our society, and our governance under the legal parameters of the constitution; through redress,     both state and nation!       
  The correct answer is: YES, WE DO.

Argument being:   that no democracy is sustained or built by rulers.  IT IS THE CREATION OF LAWS, through and by the agreement of the people themselves that determines and sustains all democracy/ and all rights or authority.   The correct methods and means for attaining JUSTICE, requires access to the courts:   THROUGH PROPER AND REAL DUE PROCESS/ or more simply I have a true right to test and sustain the contractual agreements of this people, in a court of law, with or against the interpretation of those employees chosen to sustain my democracy, the values and respect guaranteed to me, for my life in and of society.  No judge or official is granted to be “ruler”! Rather we are equals, my duty being to demand contractual democracy as the law we assigned for our employees to keep/ as the reality of your oath NOT to deviate from our definitions sustained to be our life in society:   OUR WAY, as WE THE PEOPLE.   Not your way/ OUR WAY, as the law we chose to create;   which then rules everything our employees are allowed to do, with or for our society or ourselves.
The elemental path which is redress of grievances in this society as provided by constitutional legal right/ addresses the reality of what is NOT being done by our employees/ what is hidden behind closed doors by our employees/ what is NOT respectful or dignified by our employees/ what is failure because of our employees/ what is disgrace and disease established by arrogance/ pride/ and the attempt to create power over us, by our employees/ what is fundamental to the purposes our constitution dictates as our defined right and authority called change/ and all that we believe should be, if not already sustained;   AS THE LIFE IN SOCIETY, THROUGH LIBERTY, JUSTICE, FREEDOM, AND LAW THAT WE DESERVE, OR DESIRE FOR OURSELVES.   This is our nation, and it is our constitutional right to establish it as we see fit, under the guidelines of the agreements upon which this nation exists.  THAT IS NECESSARY, because it serves the lives lost/ the bodies mutilated/ the families sacrificed to make this nation real.
There is NO ROOM here, for those who believe themselves to be “rulers”!  There is no room here, for those who believe they are “the law” themselves/ for fraud, thievery, LIARS, or fools in our employ!  The consequence of redress, fundamentally explains that.  The courtroom is ours!

 as a statement of proposed change, created here for the purpose of:         as “a friend of the court”!
So that a beginning can be established/ and no illusion can be found:   in HOW COULD WE CHANGE THIS HEALTHCARE;    AS WE THE PEOPLE , is hereby established.  The contractual reality of all financial relationships provides:   “Let us be equal, and fair”.


Our authority as a people in democracy is: that we do have the right to change/ right to alter the status quo/ right to decide what is fair play or equal treatment as is prescribed by the intent of justice for all.
The elemental demand to eliminate poverty and inequality, cannot be conceived without the right to establish what is fair.  Thereby balanced between needs, work, and human right or value.  The composition of money is time, work, sacrifice (given for you/ not me, beyond my reward owed), and ability.  It is the same life for all/ regardless of the numbers we are paid: which means poor or rich, we are the same.  Therefore because OUR LIVES ARE EQUAL/ the debts we receive in terms of healthcare must be equal as well.  That leaves us with a percentage of income and holdings/ in accordance with the facts: is same for all.   Ten percent of income for a person in poverty/ is the same as ten percent of income, etc for a so called billionaire.  Don’t want to pay/ go ahead and die.  But if you leave this nation for healthcare/ we will take double or more.

Social, legal, and economic justice
are elements of the relationship we share with our government.  Or more simply:   as owners, those whom we fire from their jobs/ are fired.  There are no employees who can say otherwise.  We work for ourselves/ but you work for us as employees of this state or nation.  That means the social, legal, or judicial changes we demand shall exist.  That means the legal requirements, by our constitution;   placed upon you and us, shall be carried out.  That means the challenges to those who have proven “TOO GREEDY”, and do extort from us more than they have a right: SHALL be called to account/ so that what is true, fair, and respectful to our reality can, and shall: govern our lives.  NOT YOU, the employee/ but we, the people.  With our law!
All the principles are in place, for a preliminary redress trial: the hospital: and the  doctor with his  debt collector, have been fully informed in preparation for this trial.  While actual redress trial will demand more/ this is enough for a beginning redress question to be presented.

A judge/ every judge is, a servant of this people!  A judge/ every judge is, constrained to obey and serve the law: without contempt for the people, or the disgrace of believing they are “rulers, over the people”!      HOW DO YOU PLEAD?  This is a “yes or no” question.  This is a demand to prove what you believe is true.
Are you servants of the people, as their judiciary, under law/ OR THEIR RULERS, the law unto yourselves:   Answer the question.