U.S Government Breaches Contract With We The People

U.S Government Breaches Contract With We The People

Recently, I mailed a lawsuit against the United States to the Court of federal claims for breach of contract and taking without just compensation. That suit should arrive at the court today. I filed this suit as a pro se however; This stands as an open offer to any legal firm that wishes to handle the case on a percentage basis. The entire complaint can be read at this link: Breach of Contract as Mailed

For those few who have followed my story and those who are aware of the significance, the complaint is 39 pages long and this post serves as an attempt to provide a brief overview.

While this suit is filed on my behalf, it’s also on behalf of We The People. Government agencies should not be protected from suit for the operation of a criminal enterprise designed to steal We The Peoples’ constitutional right to due process in violation of the government and its officer’s sworn duty to operate legally. The rule of law requires that no one be above the law, not even the king, that the law has been defined before a controversy exists, and that the rights of minorities are protected.

The U.S. Constitution is a law. It proclaims itself as such, in Article V. Clause II. “The Supremacy Clause as “the Supreme Law of the Land” The Supreme Law of the Land states only one law twice called due process. Due process dates back to the Magna Carta and the thirteenth-century promise of Great Britain’s King John that he would act only in accordance with law and all would receive the ordinary processes of law.

Racketeering is a federal crime as defined by Title 18 Chapter 96 §§1961 – 1968. For a government agency to operate a racketeering enterprise as defined by this federal law is in violation of its constitutional obligation to due process.

Title 18 Chapter 96 in essence provides that “Any” individual whose business or property was harmed by a pattern of racketeering activity by “Any” individual participating in “Any” enterprise in a manner forbidden by §1962 is entitled to bring a civil cause of action in “Any” appropriate United States district court in “Any” district court of the United States for “Any” district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.” And such an individual is entitled to the recovery of treble damages, costs, attorney’s fees and bringing to bear the pressure of “private attorneys general” on the defendants.

In regards to this Federal Law the United States Supreme Court and US appellate courts have held the following as precedent: 1. A Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) enterprise animated by an illicit common purpose can be composed of an association-in-fact of government entities and human members when the latter exploits the former to carry out that purpose. 2. The language of §1961(4) unambiguously encompasses governmental units. 3. The substance of RICO’S provisions demonstrates a clear congressional intent that RICO is interpreted to apply to the activities that corrupt public or governmental entities. 4. Congress intended as inducements to achieve the objectives in both the Clayton and Rico Acts the provision for the recovery of treble damages, costs, and attorney’s fees and bringing to bear the pressure of “private attorneys general” 5. The object of civil RICO is thus not merely to compensate victims but to turn them into prosecutors, “private attorneys general,” dedicated to eliminating racketeering and further purpose of encouraging potential private plaintiffs diligently to investigate.

A Congressional committee, the Mayor of Road Island, and the State of Illinois have all been found guilty under RICO of participating in or of being the enterprise through which a RICO enterprise operated. Why would the USDA, NAD, FSA, and affiliated State Mediation programs be protected by immunity when these public entities were not?

When the Federal District Court of Virginia Judge Jackson L. Kiser dismissed my RICO allegations against these entities and, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld them, it did so under the rubric of sovereign immunity and  FTCA. However, 28 U.S.C. §2680(a) Specifies a prohibition against using the FTCA to challenge the validity of a statute or regulation. This ruling effectively granted the USDA an opportunity to settle out of court these charges for a sum certain. However, while the law is not a contract, every law is an offer to those aggrieved, to redress the civil wrong, and a notice to the people, certain actions have consequences.

A contract, in the modern sense of the word, has been defined as an agreement containing a promise enforceable in law. The term “agreement” implies that there are at least two parties involved since one party cannot agree to a proposition unless another party makes it to him. The term further implies that one party proposed a promise or offer to which the other party agreed or accepted. Thus, an agreement is the result of an offer by one party and an acceptance by the other party, which creates a binding contract.

Title 18 Chapter 96 §§1961-1968 establishes the terms of an offer. Section 1964(c) extends this offer to any private citizen granting them a private cause of action with very specific monetary rewards. The Federal District Court of Virginia converted the terms of the offer after its acceptance and reliance on Supreme Court rulings and prior precedent.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) has specific terms for the acceptance of an offer made under Federal Law. FRCP 8(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:

(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support;

(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and

(3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.

“Allegations of the existence of a RICO enterprise must meet only the ‘notice pleading’ requirements of ” Rule 8(a) see https://blueridgesprings.wordpress.com/2015/06/14/dumb-and-dumber-judges-dont-know-english/ for specifics on these quotes by the Government’s expert G. Robert Blakey ” RICO’s important role in combating political corruption effectively ends when the court chooses to narrow the broad definition of “enterprise”.

The Federal Court ruled it lacked jurisdiction because the King is immune from suit unless he gives his permission. However, the King cannot knowingly violate federal law, nor can he war against the will of the people as expressed by congressional legislation and legal precedent. To operate within the law, the King must abide by the supreme law.

The Tucker Act of 1887 waives sovereign immunity regarding express or implied contracts with the United States. The posting of an offer explicitly stated with terms in Federal Law and the acceptance of that offer providing monetary relief defined by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure creates a binding contract from a statute specifying monetary compensation.

Conversion is the unlawful and inequitable alteration of a contract term once an offer has been accepted. Conversion is any unauthorized act that deprives an owner of personal property without his or her consent. I went all the way to the Supreme Court with my dissent of this unlawful conversion.

There is no language in this federal law or prior precedent of the Supreme Court to suggest this law would not apply to government agencies and their employees. Keep in mind, the operation of a RICO enterprise is a federal crime and in violation of the Supreme Law the constitution, and the people’s power over Government. Furthermore, the requirements of evoking the Federal Tort Claims Act convert the terms of the agreement not only by eliminating the express congressional intent for treble damages, cost, and attorney fees as inducement but, also by providing these criminals an opportunity to continue their illegal operation.

The Supreme Court has reiterated countless times, the RICO statute is to be interpreted broadly, and liberally and has no stated boundaries. The Government’s expert, G. Robert Blakey a contributing author of the statute argued on the government’s behalf “ RICO’s important role in combating political corruption effectively ends when the court chooses to narrow the broad definition of “enterprise”. How then does the Federal Court justify granting this government entity sovereign immunity protection from its contractual obligation to operate legally, within the law, and in violation of the Fifth Amendment take the personal property legally conveyed by an offer explicitly stated in federal law and officially accepted in accordance with the Federal rules of civil procedure? A valid offer, a valid acceptance, a valid contract, and a Government Breach!

Today the Court of Federal Claims should receive a complaint filing suit against the United States Government because the U.S. Federal judiciary breached the explicit and implied offer of Federal Law between the Government and We The People.

Corruption in the U.S. Government is terminal cancer and it’s being aided and abetted by same cancer in the Judicial branches fueled by money and graft.

Elbridge Gerry refused to sign the U.S. Constitution objecting to the judiciary would be oppressive.

He was right!

Wake up America the U.S. Government has become an entity of its own, criminally operating in its own self-interest with the aid of a judicial branch refusing to hold the Government accountable to the law, its constitutional obligation to keep Government actions in check for the protection of We The People. RICO’s important role in combating political corruption effectively ended when the court chose to narrow the broad definition of “enterprise” in my suit against the USDA granting them sovereign immunity protection from this law in direct conflict with its stare decisis and congressional intent.

  CB Julian – Pro Se

Update – Interesting perspective on this case. Constitution as Power of Attorney

Watch this Video and then read more of my blog. Andrew Breitbart died of a heart attack at the age of 43? Read the article on it:


Update- Case docketed Federal district court of Claims Washington D.C. Case # 1:15-cv-01344 EJD

Update: 1-14-2016 Given this case should be of immense public interest I have started a Google folder where the fillings can be obtained free of charge by all who wish. Link to Google Drive Folder with court filings and responses on this case. 

Assigned Superior Judge Edward J. Damich – ADR Superior Judge Eric G. Bruggink

Update- 1-8-2016 DOJ files motion to dismiss 12b1 and 12b6 and pleading judicial immunity. My questions are. How do you grant immunity to a Federal Judge who aids and abets a Federal Agency in a racketeering operation to steal constitutional rights? With an oath of office to uphold the Constitution it seems more like treason. Here is a link to court documents in this case. The Key Documents Chronologically.

Update 1-24-2016 To date the Clerk has not docketed the notice of appearance filed by the attorney for the defense on November 23, 2015.  Prior experience tells me that based on the defense motion to dismiss under 12b & my Pro-Se status the court should have issued a Roseboro notice but did not. Two Motions filed by the Plaintiffs on January 14 2016 also have not appeared on the docket and while the Motion to proceed in forma pauperis is docketed no ruling on it has been issued. It’s beginning to look a lot like the Federal District Court of Claims intends to intentionally deny a private citizen Due Process. Perfect fit with the court’s Mandate. “It is as much the duty of Government to render prompt justice against itself, in favor of citizens, as it is to administer the same, between private individuals.” Abraham Lincoln. 

Update -1-26-2016 There has been no change from the update above. Today I sent a letter via email to my congressional representative petitioning for a congressional hearing. I believe since the Federal Court of Claims was created under Article 1 authority and is, therefore, an agent of Congress performing congressional duties they are not providing due process and therefore I’m entitled to petition Congress for a hearing. Gmail – Responding to your message

How do you justify calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors of “We The People”?

How do you justify calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors of “We The People”?

Like This!

On April 27th, 2015 the Supreme Court denied Certiorari to petition 14-1051. This Petition asks three questions but the number #1 question was “Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) Enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act 18 U.S.C. 1964(C) for violations of 1961 and 1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or by provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)?

The Federal Court and the appellate court upheld that failure to evoke the FTCA was a fatal flaw in my case. However, Civil Rico is not a suit for any TORT. It requires the commission of multiple felonies or torts to be invoked but, the federal statute states the law applies to the operation of an enterprise defined in 1962 causing damages to an individuals business and property stated in U.S.C.18 1964″ (c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee” Additionally, all precedent history indicates an Enterprise to be a  separate entity that does not enjoy sovereign immunity protection.

On March 24, 2014, The Federal district court Of VAWD ruled it lacked jurisdiction in the matter because I had not asked the USDA for permission  (i.e. filed form SF-95 requesting permission from USDA to sue them for being corrupt). The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this ruling!. Neither court offered any explanation of any kind as to how this was the case when all the precedent and stare decisis and prior statements of the supreme court were contrary to this ruling.   I found no record of any precedent being set for a Federal Agency being charged with violation of this Federal crime nor any suggestion in any case precedent or Supreme Court decision this statute would not apply to the USDA or any other government agency for that  Matter

. ” In United States v Angelilli 660 F. 2d 23, the second circuit stated in paragraph 27 available here http://openjurist.org/660/f2d/23/united-states-v-angelilli the following.” 27 ” In sum, we view the language of § 1961(4), defining enterprise, as unambiguously encompassing governmental units, and we consider that the purpose and history of the Act and the substance of RICO’s provisions demonstrate a clear congressional intent that RICO be interpreted to apply to activities that corrupt public or governmental entities. We note that this view is shared by virtually every other court that has considered the question.

”  In United States of America v. Lawrence E. Warner and George H. Ryan, Sr. (2007) p 74-75. The Second Circuit addressed Sovereign immunity and provides a significant list of precedents to support that a Racketeering enterprise does not benefit from immunity. ”

“In arguing that states may not be considered “legal entities” under the racketeering statute, appellants miscast a straightforward issue of statutory interpretation into an issue of federalism. Br58. Their reliance on cases dealing with federalism or state sovereignty, such as Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 748 (1999), is misplaced. Nothing in RICO precludes the states from addressing corruption or infringes in any way on the legitimate functioning of state government or on its sovereignty.” “Appellants overlook the fundamental principle that the racketeering enterprise, whether it be a legitimate business, governmental entity or association in fact, is merely the vehicle through which defendants conduct alleged racketeering activities.”
     See also U. S. Supreme Court on United States v. Turkett: 452 U.S. 576,580 (1981) (“[t]here is no restriction upon the associations embraced by the definition” of “enterprise”).” The precedent, issues, and laws around Jurisdiction and Sovereign immunity are too lengthy to discuss in detail for the purpose of this post But! I suspect this entire line of defense was used by the Federal Courts to aid and abet this criminal government racketeering enterprise in avoiding litigation.  A look at why I believe this was just BS on Jurisdiction in the next blog post!
How long this racketeering operation has been going on in the USDA I’m not quite sure. I know at the least it was in operation in the early 1990s when the then Secretary of Agriculture established the National Appeals Division his own judicial tribunal reporting directly to him like all other agencies under the USDA who NAD holds hearings for. Judge &  Jury, of themselves! with no rules of evidence, no stare descisis, no rights to present evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and no judicial history available like the Federal Courts but, only the rulings of officers directly reporting for the preservation of their mob bosses and the preservation of the enterprise and their own jobs. All the precedents, laws, and legal challenges in the cases preceding the Supreme court were completely ignored.

This RICO enterprise is operated by the USDA’s budget for risk management. There is nothing wrong per se with having a risk management operation or even a legal risk management operation. There is, however, a serious problem with running a risk management operation illegally, in violation of individual constitutional rights, and in violation of Federal Law with the unlimited financial support of the U.S. Government and the largest Legal firm in the world at your disposal. For the express purpose of denying constitutional rights to due process. It is this very conflict of interest- The DOJ can not prosecute a U.S. Agency for crimes and that’s a prosecutorial gap civil Rico was designed to remedy.

The USDA uses illegal tactics, and illegal processes under the RICO Act to operate this enterprise. They further abuse government power in its operation and every legal trick they can pull using federal protections as shields for their corruption. Furthermore, as in my case, they have used deference to avoid attaching legal damages to 14 federal violations by a lawyer’s count. I personally find the count much larger but, I have information he did not.

This illegal unconstitutional racketeering operation is run by the USDA to avoid accountability and responsibility for the criminal acts of its employees and the incompetent mismanagement of the people’s resources. Which their doing with our tax dollars and this whole operation is designed for tranny, oppression, and utter despotism of farmers, often poor farmers. The RICO statute 1964(a) grants the Federal Court the right to order “dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, making due provision for the rights of innocent persons.Therefore,  had the courts heard this case the opportunity existed for the Judicial Branch of Government to perform their duty to the American people and put an end to the executive branches’ operation of this tyrannous enterprise.  An absolutely heinous act of terrorism operated by a Federal Agency for its own self-preservation to the detriment of farmers and others. 

It is precisely the duty of the Federal Courts to apply the law as written and to uphold the constitution of the United States. They are “We The Peoples” only protection from a Government bent on tyranny and oppression. This case lives on and if the Government continues to get its way likely on, and on, and on!  It was not dismissed in the Federal Court with prejudice. I would also contend that based on crimes committed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser the entire case history is void and unenforceable.

In mid-April, I delivered my request for permission from this corrupt organization to sue them for being corrupt. See my letter to the President posted on this blog. However, and this is why I’m so bothered by the court’s denial of this petition. In making that request Government Form SF-95  I had to sign my name agreeing to accept as settlement a sum certain as stated on Form SF-95. If the USDA now wishes to put an end to this legal battle they can simply pay that sum certain.

The real disappointment here is – then this racket can continue to operate and frankly they will get off much cheaper by just paying me the large sum than open themselves to the potential litigation that could follow me from all their prior criminal acts over the last 3 decades. Consider for a moment they have already settled multiple class action filings for several billion dollars.

That’s why The Supreme Court are Traitor to the American People. They were given the opportunity to potentially do their Job to protect “We The People”: from tyranny and put an end to this heinous, criminal, illegal, and unconstitutional racketeering operation. A Chance to permanently end a reign of terrorism that has punished farmers for seeking help for more than 3 decades, They traitorously passed on it. How many more poor individuals will get raped, robbed, and financially destroyed by this oppressive government agency? Because the Federal Courts protected this racket and the Supreme Court decided to let this petition and the USDA’s racketeering operation have a pass to continue on and on until?

If you never heard about the USDA’s despotic history I suggest these articles for a little history lesson.

1. http://old.seattletimes.com/text/2017876971.html From Old Seattle Times.

2.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113730694 From National Public Radio/NPR

3. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_015583.pdf NRCS USDA. Gov

4.http://deltafarmpress.com/white-farmers-suing-usdafsa Delta Farm Press “A particular favorite of mine” 

5.http://www.ebony.com/black-listed/news-views/alabama-black-farmers-sue-usda-981#axzz2dehBlOEK “Ebony Magazine “follow the links on this one to more if you like”

   I’m interested in any intelligent conversation on this subject. Please feel free to leave your comments!

I believe the Media will not cover this story because they fear retribution in the courts and government. Telling the people there really is no justice system could anger a mob.

Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist essays describing the proposed new constitution.” I am not well versed in history, but I will submit to your recollection, whether liberty has been destroyed most often by the licentiousness of the people, or by the tyranny of rulers. I imagine, sir, you will find the balance on the side of tyranny.”

In June of 1776, delegates of the Virginia Convention adopted a declaration of rights that included the following statement:…In controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred.” Less than one month later, representatives of all 13 colonies signed the Declaration of Independence, which cited “depriving us in many cases of the right to trial by jury” – a right granted to every British subject by Magna Carta in 1215 – as one of the chief reasons for breaking with the King and Mother England.”

The Court took this path to the BS of jurisdiction to deny a trial by jury as demanded in the original complaint. While I find it interesting the Media will not report on this story. More interesting is the lack of remarks from a single legal pundit!

A blessed warm Christmas cheer to the Supreme Court, 4th circuit court of Appeals, and especially the dishonorable Judge Jackson L. Kiser whose demise I await with great anticipation that I may raise my glass to the glory of God upon his death and drink to his eternal life in Hell!


Christopher B. Julian Pro-Se.

Supreme Court of the U.S. Government!  No longer a court of Law but of Men.

Supreme Court of the U.S. Government! No longer a court of Law but of Men.

In September 2013 a Civil Lawsuit was filed alleging Racketeering by the USDA and seven affiliated defendants. The court granted the Government a lengthy extension of time to respond. No evidentiary hearing was ever held. No discovery was ever allowed. No Amendment to the complaint was ever allowed.

A hearing of approximately 30 minutes was held in late February 2014 and a ruling claiming the court-lacked jurisdiction on 90% of the cause of action was published in late March 2013. For all intense purposes, this ruling reflects the court’s opinion that Federal Agencies are protected by sovereign immunity for racketeering.

It requires a plaintiff first to request permission from a corrupt government agency permission to sue them for being corrupt. It grants them the opportunity to simply pay you to avoid court. I contended this itself was a violation of Due process beyond common right and reason. A constitutional challenge to the FTCA in the matter was presented and completely ignored.

In all prior precedent rulings on Governors, judges, legislators, and even the State of Illinois the courts found racketeering enterprises are not protected by Sovereign immunity. See United States of America v. Lawrence E. Warner and George H. Ryan, Sr. (2007) p 74-75 . Perhaps this is a Supreme Court Question but, they denied answering it and neither the Federal court nor the appellate court properly addressed it.

An Interlocutory appeal was filed in June requesting an appellate review of the court’s ruling. The district court continued to delay and ruled in favor of the defendants granting them deference to actually change the wording of their own regulations as well as extraordinary deference in changing their interpretative rules and applying those changes long after the rules as written had been relied on.

The District Courts rulings by the dishonorable Judge Jackson L. Kiser are fascinating not for the countless acts of deceit, deception, obfuscation, intentional acts of misdirection, or even the outright lies. But for the absolute disregard for the rules of civil procedure, blatant disregard for all judicial precedence, and the absolute intense and malicious degree with which they are written to exonerate the Government and their criminal employees.

Continue reading

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !

Supreme Court or Supreme Government Puppet

Recently the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari to petition 14-1051. In denying this petition the court dismissed its constitutional duty to all of America. They sold their judicial powers under the constitution of the United States to an executive branch of the U.S. Government.

They dismissed the judicial “check” on the political branches. Unlike the Legislative and Executive Branches, each of which possesses several political checks on the other, the Judiciary has one primary check on the excesses of political branches. That check is the enforcement of the rule of law through the exercise of judicial power.

In denying petition 14-1051 they allowed the USDA to continue racketeering operations they have operated now unconstitutionally for decades. Subjecting tens of thousands of poor American farmers to tyranny and despotism while destroying their lives, livelihood, families, and futures.

This decision by the Supreme Court (Government Puppet) shirked the greatest obligation to the American people the Supreme Court has. A constitutional obligation to exercise their judicial checks on the other branches of Government subjecting the American people to precisely the abuses the Framers of the Constitution sought to prevent!

I respectfully request “We the People” of the United States of America stand up and demand at the top of our lungs to rectify the despicable, shameful discharge of the Court’s primary responsibility to We The People and the Constitution. It is precisely the usurpation of judicial powers by an executive branch of Government that leads to the very tyranny the founding fathers intended the separation of powers and the provision of trial by jury to prevent.

The Court failed to grant this petition even though numerous justices had just recently provided lengthy dissertations on these very issues and the court’s obligations to them in Whitman v. United States, 574 U.S. (November 10, 2014), Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association (March 9, 2015) and United States V. Kwai Fun Wong (April 22, 2015) Even though this case had all the elements of these recent decisions and was a perfect vehicle for addressing the one unresolved major constitutional issue. The Court denied this petition presenting the very question they stated a desire to address.

There are numerous articles on these cases and their subjects to be found in the National Law Review and on the SCOTUSblog.com Denial of Petition 14-1051 demonstrates just how hypocritical the Supreme Court Justices can be! It Demonstrates the Court’s willingness to protect criminal operations by the other branches of Government. It demonstrates the Court’s unwillingness to perform its duties to the constitution and the American People.

I’m sure there are countless other cases in the libraries of the Federal Courts that demonstrate the Federal Courts’ willingness to ignore Federal Law, to ignore all Legal precedent, to willingly protect the Sugar Daddy and his merry band of thugs. But I seriously doubt there are many denied petitions if any that demonstrate such a  serious lack of moral and ethical integrality by the Supreme Court than this!

There’s no evidence anyone has ever brought a case to the Federal Court or the Supreme Court with the power this case had to grant the court the constitutional right to dismantle this heinous racketeering operation run by the USDA. You can read a little about USDA’s history of Oppression here.http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_015583.pdf There are many more relevant articles to be found here. http://www.blueridgesprings.com/yourusda.html

While the petition may have been mine I took it this far for the tens of thousands of farmers who came before me. Now I need the people’s help to let your legislators and the President know you do not wish to be subjects of a criminal unconstitutional tyrannous Government aided and abetted by a Corrupt Federal Judicial system!

This court sold out the American People, the Constitution, and justice for my family and friends to Government corruption!! I’m sure I’ll have critics but I can assure you those critics will not have done their homework!

Having presented form SF_95 to the President of the United States the court’s lie about a lack of jurisdiction has been cured this case will come back to court in 6 months unless corruption intervenes again. I want America watching on the next round, please.

see the letter to the Mr. President all that’s necessary for the triumph of Government evil is for those in power to do nothing!

                                QUESTIONS PRESENTED By Petition 14- 1051 Denied April 27, 2015

  1. Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act Chapter 18 §1964(c) for violations of  1961 and §1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or provisions of the Federal Tort Claims FTCA?
  2. Should a court grant deference to an administrative agency’s statutory interpretation where it can affect the outcome of civil or criminal litigation?
  3. When a Federal Agency denies an appellant opportunity to present evidence of negligence, fraud, and discrimination, relevant to an agency decision, and judicial review is limited to review of the administrative record and the provisions of 5 U.S.C. §706, Have the administrative procedures in conjunction with the limits on judicial review not effectively violated the appellants constitutional right to due process and a jury trial?