In Re Richard Mack v. Susan Bolton
Long standing legal precedent allows for States to be sued in other than the Supreme Court, despite the clear language and intent of the Constitution. The Founders intended States to be sovereign on the order of foreign countries and that States would be protected by establishing in Article III, Section II, Clause II: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”
In 1884, legal precedent was established based on the naive reasoning of the court which essentially said, “That will never happen.” In Re Richard Mack v. Susan Bolton is a Writ of Mandamus to the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that the Supreme Court reevaluate the precedent set in Ames v. State of Kansas ex rel. Johnston, 1884 and restore State Sovereignty by re-establishing the Constitutional requirement that the Supreme Court have exclusive jurisdiction when the federal government sues a State.
About Plaintiff Richard Mack
Richard Mack is a United States citizen, resident of the State of Arizona, a former Sheriff for Graham County, Arizona, and was one of the parties that successfully challenged aspects of the Brady Bill in the Supreme Court. The Brady Bill attempted to compel state law enforcement officers to act at the direction of the federal government. See Printz/Mack v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). Richard Mack is also an author and lecturer on the subjects of State Sovereignty, the 10th Amendment, and the proper role of law enforcement in American government.
You can download a copy of the Writ of Mandamus HERE.
