Raland J. Brunson v. Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the United States, et al.

A serious conflict exists between decisions rendered from this Court and lower appeal courts, along with conflict that exists between constitutional provisions and statutes that do or do not protect treason and misprision of treason.

1. Also, under the U.S. Constitution and supportive citations as demonstrated in this case, doesn’t the lower court have jurisdiction to try the merits of this case?

2. Also, under acts of treasons doesn’t the lower court have the authority to remove sitting Justices of this the Supreme Court of the United States, while deeming them unfit from ever holding a office under Federal, State, County or local Governments found within the United States of America?

3. Also, the doctrine of equitable maxim, created by this Court, doesn’t it set in direct violation of jurisprudence affecting every court in America?

4. Also, doesn’t the requirement that permission must first be granted before suing a Federal Officer place a unconstitutional restriction against the free exercise of the First Amendment to petition the government for a redress of grievances?

5. Also, isn’t it unconstitutional for any statue, or citations or any legalese that provides a shield of immunity towards the protection of the guilty rather than the accountability of the guilty?