​joealterinc@gmail.com
​​​​
​"Good trouble" is a phrase that describes the idea that meaningful change often requires disruption and challenging unjust systems. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lewis were both advocates for "good trouble" during the Civil Rights movement. Harry Dunn recently brought it to mind on Cleanup on Aisle 45 and it just fit what I was trying to do.
​​​​
Hard to find a lawyer willing to ruffle the feathers of the courts, they need some ruffling, at least call them out on inconsistent application of the law in court, not just on your podcasts (credentialed lawyers who know better). Get a result. Even a fail. It matters. Each fail clarifies the rules and furthers a predictable court.
​​​​​​​​​​​​​
I have worked in visual effects in LA for movies and tv since 1985, sometimes as an artist, sometimes as a programmer. Obviously, this is not my field.
​​​​​​​
Work being slow in my field though, due to strikes/covid/ai/fires, after talking it over with my family, I decided to make use of my time, and relying on savings, to try something different for a while and arrived at this, strangely enough. It's evolved a bit in the last year and a half, as have I.
​
I am not a lawyer. Just an ordinary person - the system really failed us here though. It's not OK. We shouldn't have to just "let it go" when the perpetrators show no remorse at all, and ask for no forgiveness and even promise to do it again, like this is just a normal way to act.
​​​​​​​​​​​​
All 4 of the cases on this blog are related to failures of every branch of government to respond to the January 6 insurrection. The cases are STILL active and in various stages of appeal in the Federal Courts.​​ As Scotus has made things complicated, the cases might require some laps up and back in the appeals process to untangle constitutional interpretation caused by Trump v Anderson and Trump v US.
​​​​​
Fraud, intimidation, tampering with witnesses, obstruction, and finally violence, is not on the menu of Constitutional behavior.
​
Disappointed in this DOJ for side stepping the core issue (disqualification), and certainly the Scotus conduct and elected Republicans has been shocking. There will always be more Donald Trumps if this is allowed to stand as normalized. The DOJ may drop it because of a change in leadership, but why do I have to?
​
Maybe they can explain that to me.
​
I'm self representing in these cases, because I can't afford to hire a lawyer to do it for me, and aclu, and naacp won't touch it, or a lawyer that will do it without attorney's fees or damage awards. I shouldn't HAVE to drop it, without being permitted to try. As a self represented plaintiff, I am not permitted to file a class action suit, but isn't this what we ALL want? Clear rules, a predictable court, and justice of some kind?
​​​​​​​​​​​
Most of this is in the hands of the US Court of Appeals and SCOTUS at this point, and is a lot of waiting, but I sleep well knowing that at least I tried to do something, and intellectually, navigating my way through it has been interesting.
​
Read them, they're short. Let me know what you think, I can always use objective feedback, more than you can realize. It's hard to remain objective when you're so close to it for so long.​​​​​​
​
Disclaimer: I'm NOT an Attorney. Any information shared on this site should not be construed as legal advice​
​​​​
