I am Bill Windsor. I am 74 years old and disabled. I have the use of only one finger.
I live alone full-time in an RV. It is currently at an RV Park in the Orlando, Florida area.
On May 25, 2023, I filed a petition with the United States Supreme Court. I typed every word with my right index finger and the mouse.
U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS GAVE BILL WINDSOR’S PETITION A BIG THUMBS UP.
Bill Windsor qualified for In Forma Pauperis and had his Petition reviewed AND APPROVED by Justice Clarence Thomas.
So, that was two hurdles successfully jumped. There are only three hurdles. ALL of the justices have now been sent Bill Windsor‘s Petition for consideration.
The main issue is so fundamental that it’s hard to imagine that I won’t get 18 Thumbs Up. But they grant very few original petitions for extraordinary relief.
Judges often exert their essentially unlimited powers and just deny such petitions or never let them get past either of the first two hurdles.
I was informed on June 1, 2023 by Jake in the United States Supreme Court Clerk’s Office that the Petition will be decided by a vote of all nine justices. BLOW ME AWAY!
I think they should give it to me just for being able to type a 77-page document with only one finger.
I am VERY EXCITED about this because a personal goal has been to set some precedents that could benefit other pro se parties. This will do that.
This may be EXTRA SPECIAL because I have been able to find just one U.S. Supreme Court Petition from a Pro Se Party that was granted. Mine could be the second and the first one in 52 years. I would looooove that.
- James Blumstein was the first. He represented himself before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1971. Blumstein had recently moved to Tennessee, and he had sought to register to vote. At the time, Tennessee refused to allow anyone to register to vote unless the registrant had lived in Tennessee for at least one year. Blumstein argued that the durational residency requirement for voter registration was unconstitutional. Blumstein won his case 6–1.
- Bill Windsor should be the second.
- Two Defendants have won pro se over the years:
- Edward C. Lawson, an African-American civil rights activist, was the pro se defendant in Kolender v. Lawson (461 U.S. 352, 1983), in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a police officer could not arrest a citizen merely for refusing to present identification.
- Sam Sloan is the last non-lawyer to argue a case before the Supreme Court. in SEC v. Sloan in 1978. The Court ruled in his favor, 9–0. The Court prohibited non-lawyers in 2013.
In the past decade, approximately 7,000-8,000 new cases are filed in the United States Supreme Court each year. Plenary review, with oral arguments by attorneys, is granted in about 80 of those cases, and the Court typically disposes of about 100 or more cases without plenary review — fewer than 3% of the total.
Can you even imagine the significance? My Petition is one of 8,000. 180 of those get reviewed, and mine is one of those 180. I’m proud….and just a little bit humble.
The Petition is about pro se rights. One of my favorite lines in it is: “Poor people deserve justice, too.”
You can read Bill Windsor’s U.S. Supreme Court Petition here.
Very, very, very few attorneys ever get to have a case before the United States Supreme Court. This is my second. Nanny Nanny Boo Boo.
If you know me, you are aware I rarely pull many punches. This Petition is only slightly tamer than most, but I flat call the judges involved corrupt again and again.
I hope this case gets national publicity. That will be great for the fight against INjustice and corruption.
July 24, 2023 was not a good day for me. But at 3:11 a.m. on July 25, 2023, I checked the Docket of the United States Supreme Court, and I found this!
On September 26, 2023, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson will sit around a table in DC and decide if they will grant little Billy Windsor’s Pro Se Petition.
Approximately 8,000 petitions were submitted. 180 made the cut, and mine is one of the 180 to be decided by THE SUPREMES.
Two months ago, a man named Jake who claimed to be a Clerk for Judge Clarence Thomas called to inform me that my Petition was accepted. I guess he really was a Clerk. I couldn’t help but worry this was some kind of hoax.
From my research, I appear to be only the second Pro Se party in history to reach the United States Supreme Court with a chance to get a favorable decision by all the justices.
So, September 26, 2023 is THE BIG DAY. The Opinion will issue sometime thereafter — probably the first of October as that is when the 2023 Term begins.
Notice the Jun 01 2023 Docket Entry. The Solicitor General of the United States read my Brief and chose not to file a response. I take that as a “We can’t beat this guy on the law, and he’ll come after us if we file a frivolous brief, so we won’t oppose it.” YAHOO!!!!!
*** *** ***
These are the QUESTIONS PRESENTED for the consideration of the justices:
The Petitioner brought suit in Case No. 2011-CV-200971 in the Superior Court of Fulton County Georgia for Violation of state laws.
Case No. 2011-CV-200971 was unlawfully removed to federal court where the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (“DISTRICT COURT) never addressed the removal and never determined jurisdiction. A series of Void Orders and Void Judgments were issued by the DISTRICT COURT, including Permanent Injunction Orders that purported to deny William M. Windsor (“WINDSOR) the right to file any action in a state court anywhere in America.
WINDSOR was denied appeals by wrongful denial of In Forma Pauperis status.
This Petition arises out of orders in the DISTRICT COURT and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the ELEVENTH CIRCUIT (“11TH CIRCUIT”).
I. Is a federal court order void when jurisdiction is never determined? If so, every order of the DISTRICT COURT and 11TH CIRCUIT is invalid, and this Court’s task is simple.
II. Does a federal court judge lack jurisdiction to place restrictions on the operation of state courts?
III. Is a federal court order placing restrictions on the operation of state courts a void order?
IV. Did the 11TH CIRCUIT err by denying appeals of William M. Windsor (“WINDSOR”) that incorporate the jurisdiction issue and the state court authority issue?
V. Did the DISTRICT COURT and the 11TH CIRCUIT err by denying In Forma Pauperis status to WINDSOR?
VI. Are there exceptional circumstances that require this Court to issue a Writ?
*** *** ***
The impact may be that we will have a modern-day U.S. Supreme Court decision clarifying what constitutes a void order.
We will have the first-ever U.S. Supreme Court decision declaring federal courts have no jurisdiction over state court matters. The Eleventh Circuit should be hammered for making me the only appellant in history who can’t file anything in a state court. Hundreds of decisions of appellate courts make it clear that federal courts have no jurisdiction over state courts. The Eleventh Circuit has said so repeatedly, except in my cases. LMFAO.
Hopefully, the Court will clarify that far more people will qualify for indigent status — those in bankruptcy and those from states that do not have community property.
Bottom Line: This Windsor case will be cited by attorneys and courts forever.
Unfortunately, this does not involve the case of my attempted murder. Praying Justice Thomas will like it as well.