On October 26, 2023, a Motion for Rehearing filed at U.S. Supreme Court by Bill Windsor. It was filed by Bill Windsor.

From March 2006 to the present, federal judges have acted in a corrupt manner and have committed a variety of felonies to damage Bill Windsor.

On May 15, 2023, a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Writ of Prohibition was filed with the United States Supreme Court by Pro-Se Windsor.

Each year, approximately 8,000 petitions are filed, and all but an average of 180 are automatically denied.

Jake called Windsor from the office of Justice Clarence Thomas to say the Petition was docketed and would be considered by all nine of the justices. Windsor thought this was just a courtesy extended to all 8,000, but Jake explained that Windsor’s was one of about 180 from the 8,000 or so submitted that were deemed warranted for full consideration.

Jake was unaware of any Pro-Se party who had ever had their request granted by the Supreme Court. Windsor found there had been one and only one in 1971.

On July 20, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court Docket showed the Petition was to be considered on September 26, 2023. “DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.”

On October 2, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court Docket indicates the Petition was denied. “Petition DENIED.” SICKENING!!! Windsor has never received a letter. All the Clerk’s Office would finally say is that a letter was sent with one word: DENIED.  There was no order issued.

There was no opinion issued, but there has to be.  Here’s the process explained by the U.S. Supreme Court:

“The Court usually is not under any obligation to hear cases, and it usually only does so if the case could have national significance, might harmonize conflicting decisions in the federal Circuit courts, and/or could have precedential value.”  In fact, the Court accepts approximately 180 of the more than 8,000 cases that it is asked to review each year.

Of the cases remaining after thousands are disposed of by not meeting the required criteria, the Justices screen the problems closely—by a process they explain freely in outline.  They meet in a conference room as secret as any in government.  The Court keeps private matters private.  Reporters may speculate; but details of discussion are never disclosed, and the vote is revealed only when a decision is announced.  No outsider enters the room during conference.  The junior Associate Justice acts as “doorkeeper,” sending for reference material, for instance, and receiving it at the door.

Five minutes before conference time, 9:30 or 10 a.m., the Justices are summoned.  They exchange ritual handshakes and settle down at the long table.  The Chief sits at the east end; the other Justices sit at places they have chosen in order of their seniority.  Before each Justice is a copy of the day’s agenda.  Each decides when he or she should refrain from taking any part in a case.

The Chief Justice opens the discussion, summarizing each case.  The senior Associate Justice speaks next, and comment passes down the line.  To be accepted for review, a case needs only four votes, fewer than the majority required for a decision on the case itself.  Counsel for the litigants (and the almost never involved Pro-Se parties) are directed to submit their printed briefs so that each Justice has a set several weeks before argument.

Supreme Court historical documents state: “It acts only on matters of public record; it hears counsel’s arguments in public; all its orders and opinions are on the record; all materials presented to the Court for reaching its decisions are available to the public.

“All conference decisions are published. The disagreements among the Justices are fully exposed to the public in the written opinions, and on occasion the language of dissent becomes vehement.”

See the U.S. Supreme Court Docket for proof of the filings —

Windsor gave up on ever receiving this letter, and if he had received such an outrage, his motion for rehearing would be due the 27th.  So, off it goes on October 26, 2023 for overnight delivery.  Motion for Rehearing filed at U.S. Supreme Court by Bill Windsor

Windsor should be the second person in history and the first person in 52 years to have a Pro-Se Petition granted.  There is no legal basis whatsoever for it to be denied.  There is no legal basis for a petition that is considered to be denied with one word.  There is no legal authority for a letter.  There is no legal authority to conceal the vote.

The proper decision in this case should be a landmark decision for Pro-Se parties and those unable to afford to even be considered.

Windsor is demanding a grant of his Petition or an order with a full opinion and the votes of each of the nine justices.  Windsor will file civil and criinal charges against all who voted against it.  If this proves to be fraud by the Clerk’s Office, he will go after the Clerk.

William M. Windsor

I, William M. Windsor, am not a lawyer.  This website expresses my OPINIONS.   The comments of visitors or guest authors to the website are their opinions and do not therefore reflect my opinions.  Anyone mentioned by name in any article is welcome to file a response.   This website does not provide legal advice.  I do not give legal advice.  I do not practice law.  This website is to expose government corruption, law enforcement corruption, political corruption, and judicial corruption.  Whatever this website says about the law is presented in the context of how I or others perceive the applicability of the law to a set of circumstances if I (or some other author) was in the circumstances under the conditions discussed.  Despite my concerns about lawyers in general, I suggest that anyone with legal questions consult an attorney for an answer, particularly after reading anything on this website.  The law is a gray area at best.  Please read our Legal Notice and Terms.