Martin Reiner v. John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice, Supreme Court of the United States, et al.

(Of Acute National Importance) 1. Respectfully, what is the obligation of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”), under HAZEL-ATLAS GLASS CO. vs. HARTFORD-EMPIRE CO. 322 U. S. 238 (1944) (“HAZEL”), when the Chief Justice, John Roberts (“Roberts”), and Associate Justice, Elena Kagan (“Kagan”), along with SCOTUS Deputy Clerks Laurie Wood (“Wood”), and Mara Silver (“Silver”), are participating in surreptitious criminal malfeasance of violating Title 18 United States Code Sections 241,242,1341, and 1512(c)(2), by their imposing extrinsic fraud upon the institution of the Court by deprivation of a litigant’s federal constitutional right of Procedural Due Process, and its component part of having a meaningful opportunity to be heard, in SCOTUS case Number 18D3030, through secrecy in violation of JOINT ANTI-FASCIST REFUGEE COMMITTEE VS. MCGRATH 341 U. S. 123 (1951)(“JOINT”), as well as in the subsequent matter of United States District Court for the District of Columbia (“USDC-DC”) case number 1:21-cv-00031-APM/United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (“USCOA”) case number 20-5190, by prohibited ratification of a legally null and void conviction (which is null and void on its face) that was contrived in defiance ofthe admittedfailure to meet the required burden ofproof at trial (as admitted by the involved judicial officers in the judgment roll of the case) to cover-up the malfeasance of persons they wish to wrongfully protect by the obstruction ofjustice, to enable those persons to evade justice? What is the obligation owed by the Justices of SCOTUS to the defrauded litigant so victimized? What is the obligation owed by the Justices of SCOTUS to our American society, to protect our society’s interest in the integrity of American jurisprudence?