Dessie Andrews v. Alma Adams, et al.

Do the People, as sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, have an unalienable right to sue Congress for systemic constitutional violations—such as replacing constitutional money with valueless fiat currency, lacking intrinsic value, via the Banking Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall), which redirected Federal Reserve profits to Federal Reserve Banks and amended the Federal Reserve Act before its 20-year expiration in 1933, seizing gold in 1933, enacting legal tender laws, and endorsing the Uniform Commercial Code—without a particularized injury, when such actions exceed Congress’s power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 5, were upheld by a coerced Supreme Court in the Gold Clause Cases (1935), and undermine the republican form of government guaranteed by Article IV, Section 4?

Does the Article III standing requirement, as applied by the Fifth Circuit, unconstitutionally bar the People from enforcing their unenumerated rights under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments against Congress’s imposition of fiat currency and maintenance of a peacetime standing army, contrary to the Declaration’s mandate that government secure Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness?

Are respondents’ actions and inactions, in their official and individual capacities, reviewable under Article III when they perpetuate an unconstitutional fiat monetary system, lacking intrinsic value, and an unauthorized standing army, causing chaos and eroding the People’s sovereignty, especially in light of United States v. Lopez (1995), which exposed decades of federal overreach enabled by coerced rulings like the Gold Clause Cases?