Press release Update| Andy Ostrowski sues “American System of Justice” as corrupt …”many thousands across the country who have suffered through the courts.”

Update: 8/11/2017, Andy Ostrowski files Brief Reconsider Fee Waiver Ostrowski v ASJ 2

Andrew J. Ostrowski/Pennsylvania Civil Rights Law Network has filed a Ostrowski v. American System of Justice (Filed) (1) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, naming the “American System of Justice” as a
Defendant, along with the Federal Reserve, the Rothschilds, Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and others who are alleged to have compromised our access to justice, and the loss of basic rights and protections.

The lawsuit claims that the American System of Justice, as reflected by the Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System, lacks constitutional checks and balances by the other two branches of government, and has failed its self-disciplinary feature, making it impossible to achieve justice in certain cases and classes of cases.

It further identifies, and sues, corrupting influences alleged to be behind the culture of secrecy in the courts.

The kids for cash, Penn State/Sandusky, and porngate email scandals are cited as examples of these influences.

These “Justice Day” filings were made on May 2, 2017, and were combined with a public worship and political demonstration filmed by Ostrowski at the Pennsylvania Judicial Center in Harrisburg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XuWIiv7DS4

The lawsuit also includes the Federal Reserve as a Defendant, and seeks to have the Federal Reserve System declared unconstitutional. In other words, it seeks to end the Fed.

The multiple additional persons and entities identified as Defendants, or possible Defendants are widely recognized in the alternative media as being the source of the corrupting influences on and in our government, with abundant research and anecdotal evidence to support these claims, and the lawsuit simply seeks to get to the source of some of these matters, and present the evidence to support the claims.

The importance of the courts in resolving these matters is addressed in the separate media statement attached.

The lawsuit is part of a combined media and political effort to shed light on the centrality of the judiciary to the loss of our rights and freedoms, and the proliferation of government corruption, which was Ostrowski’s campaign platform when he ran for United States Congress in 2014, and as he has blogged about extensively at www.pennsylvaniacivilrightslawnetwork.com since 2011.

Ostrowski and his law partner/colleague of over 15 years, Don Bailey, have both been suspended by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and Ostrowski has recently been denied reinstatement. Don Bailey may be the most prolific civil rights litigator in the history of the country, and he and Ostrowski have a combined nearly 50 years of experience in civil rights.

The claims are also be supported by over 100 hours of interviews done by Ostrowski on his “Justice Served with Andy Ostrowski” broadcast testing and trying various of the theories relevant to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit is part of a long-term plan to address core issues in our country, fist announced by Ostrowski with a February 26, 2013 “Occupy for Justice” article addressing these matters, and built in since that time.

http://pennsylvaniacivilrightslawnetwork.com/2013/02/26/ostrowski-settlement-demand-reform-the-system-call-goes-out-to-occupy-for-justice/

Since April, 2015, Ostrowski/PCRLN has been further developing and implementing a plan to give alternative access to persons who believe they have been subjected to injustices through the courts. It will be part of a print and video media effort to shed light on these issues, and urge for political reform.

http://pennsylvaniacivilrightslawnetwork.com/2015/04/09/pennsylvania-civil-rights-law-network-project-proposal/

It is further supported by a May 2, 2017 letter to President Trump, with specific proposals to seek judicial reform, with a one-year forecast.

The deceptively simple lawsuit reflects the combined experience of Ostrowski/PCRLN and Bailey, and their witness to many thousands across the country who have suffered through the courts.

It cannot be denied that there is a political problem that needs to be addressed in the judiciary – there are too many email chains, google groups, facebook groups, and letters with all public officials’ names on them, and protests, office visits, etc., to credibly deny it. The question is what can be done.

The answer, due largely to the construction of the judiciary across the country, is nothing, because there are no adequate checks and balances, and it can only be done by exposing the problems to create the political will to address it fundamentally.

The lawsuit historically seeks to have the courts litigate their own fairness.

It is as aggressive, deliberate, researched, and strategized lawsuit as has ever been filed, and could encompass domestic courts issues, mortgage foreclosure cases, guardianship abuse cases, and all of those multi-billion dollar legal industries that are destroying lives and families in service of the almighty dollar.

In the end, it is the only way the people can take back their government, and it begins with taking back our courts, which have been overtaken by the big banks, multi-national corporations, and lawyers.

The courts really are the center of self-government, and they need to be returned to the people.

2 Comments

  1. Just wondering if there will be an updated post/ article or press release letting the readers know why this case was dismissed?

    • Yes we will update this story as information becomes available. The case has been dismissed ‘without prejudice’ for failure to pay the filing fee. The Order reads as follows: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 6 Amended Complaint, filed by Andrew J. Ostrowski, 1 Complaint filed by Andrew J. Ostrowski.We recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the requisite filing and administrative fees and that the Clerk be directed to administratively close this case. See Lindsey v. Roman, 408 Fed. Appx 530, 53233 (3d Cir. 2010) (per curiam); Parker v. Harrisburg City, Civil No. 1:17-CV-00653, 2017 WL 3015880, at *2 (M.D. Pa. June 7, 2017) (report and recommendation), adopted by 2017 WL 3008583 (M.D. Pa. July 14, 2017). Objections to R&R due by 8/10/2017Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr on 7/24/17. (ms) (Entered: 07/24/2017)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*