IN THE  THREE-JUDGE PANEL OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Basil MarceauxPro’se ombudsman for allback up By A Protect and defend oath for lifev
Tennessee Election Process et al
            Declaratory judgment action under Voting Rights Act in 1965 
Comes the moving party as a Pro’se ombudsman for all , back up by a protect and defend oath for life for a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, through a declaratory judgment action under  the Voting Rights Act in 1965 .  (42 U.S.C. §§ 1973–1973aa-6)[1] was a landmark piece of national legislation in the United States that outlawed discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans in the U.S.[2] Echoing the language of the 15th Amendment, the Act prohibits states from imposing any "voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure ... to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote
The moving party argue that the first page of the Voting Rights Act mention the 13th Amendment, which was ratified in 1865 after the Civil War, abolished and prohibited slavery and secured a minimal degree of citizenship to former slaves. Then the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all people “born or naturalized in the United States,” and included the due process and equal protection clauses. This amendment did not explicitly prohibit vote discrimination on racial grounds.
The civil right act of April 15, 1866 was adopted into the 14th amend. which make it a law to fights slavery and constitutional right violations while making it a crime and punishment of one year in jail and $1000.00 per violation in the future of the U.S. This act talked of a freedmen bureau commissioner who is equal to the U.S. Attorney General but failed too say who they will be in the future.
The moving party who is a Army Navy civilian did business as a Marine, force recon argued if one read the Library of Congress archives you will find no mention of a freedmen bureau commissioner /agent past April 1866 except at one location. A freedmen bureau commission in a provision of the federal law 241, the Freedman Bureau revise act of 1866. In Congressional Globe 39 Congress page 3841and page 3842 starting on in column 3 on page 3041 first paragraph saying who are they, in this subversive law requires a soldier who never smelled  the muster of gunfire, “A Great Man" to come  fourth, as a judge of the freedom Bureau until the federal election commission is a Republic.
 The moving party is  going to argue the part of the Constitution that says where one in one state can enjoy the Voting Rights Act in 1965, then the  Voting Rights Act in 1965 can be enjoyed in all states . Now moving party a subversive federal judge is adding the state of Tennessee to the list of states that is covered by the voting right act of 1965. Let us say this is a metaphor story starts with city police pulled drivers over while in a horse and carriage for a state crime at a traffic in Chattanooga Tennessee, then went to a city court, found guilty The moving party is adding  the state of Tennessee, it is Counties, it cities who is violating the voting right act of 1965 two hundred years longer than it enactment because no party,  individual or club ever used the word, due process that is connected with the Voting Rights Act in 1965.  The word due process is an vague word which covers may be different subjects like media, lawyers, judges courts, cities, counties, states, military, jails, let me break this down.,The moving party asked for an appeal, went to Hamilton County criminal court, founded guilty of state crimes ask for appeal and ended up with Tennessee Supreme Court ruling.says cities are civil and must go out circuit court for an appeal in 1865 in meaher v mayor and alterman 1 head 74,8 tenn 74 1858.instead the cities and counties did not listen and all appeals went to a County criminal court until Chattanooga v myers 787 s.w. 2d 921, 922 tenn 1990 where they said all cities, are civil can only do city ordinances can not do state crimes all cases must go to circuit court and if you go to a criminal court it is double jeopardy violates state and federal Constitutions.
 Instead the cities and counties did not listen and all appeals went to a County criminal court until Chattanooga v davis ruling 54s.w. 3d 248, 259 tenn. 2001 and city of where they said all cities, are civil can only do city ordinances can not do state crimes all cases must go to circuit court and if you go to a criminal court it is double jeopardy violates state and federal Constitutions. And the same time, they said we for said this in meaher v mayor and alterman 1 head 74,8 tenn 74 1858 and now we say city cannot hirer or being contract with any sheriff department to coming into a city to arrest anyone for city ordinances and if this he was running correctly it will be a anarchy. 
Instead the cities and counties did not listen and all appeals went to a County criminal court still and after Basil marceaux the moving party received three mandated ordered from the Tennessee criminal court of appeals all cities are civil and must go to circuit court for appeal court double jeopardy is in place in aug.2010 filing e2010-01497-cca-ot-co.  This order was handed to Hamilton county criminal court judge Stern and was force to say i do not have jurisdiction in this case and she sent it back to the city. Now the city holds the court papers and my appeal to circuit court still didn’t take place yet. 
Then six month later   in Dec. 2011 filing e2011- 02643-cca-r10-co this court ordered the same thing , now in Feberary 2012 -filing-e2012-00271-cca-wrm-wm your also said the same thing. But when the moving party handed the order to the same judge in this new double jeopardy loop case refused to send it back to the city court and at the same time the moving party advised the judge that when she sent the case back to the city o chattanooga in 2010 she excepted knowledgement. With this in mind thousands of cases that came to her from the city court in one year was illegal and all the people are a case of double jeopardy loop including the ones in jail times three other judges.

Hamilton county criminal court judge Stern did something that the moving party did not expect ok I’m a circuit court judge too so i can here civil cases and i will give you an appeal here criminal court at the same time i’m having criminal court. The moving party is going to have the first civil court in a criminal court in history and end up with a criminal court docket number. Then the the moving party argue that she can not do it that because it is still double jeopardy loop case and as a judge criminal court for year and finding the moving party 10 times over the years and thousands of other guilty on suppose city ordinates and scared all of us that we would to jail, the probation, aim guns at us she would be very bias and must step aside in this civil court in a criminal court case,she refused to step aside. 
The moving party came back in two months, then argued the law says a criminal court judge can hear civil cases only if there no circuit court in the county and Hamilton county has four circuit courts and she must send this case back to the city of Chattanooga like before and suggest that it goes to circuit court as mandated many times by this court. 
At the same time there were motions filed, like a jury trial, Summons,A  list subpoena requests, a visual reordering of the  in this civil court in a criminal court case and to be added to the record for appeal purpose. It was even ask her to move her court to a new court out of criminal court, all declined. 
A motion to get better standing was granted============did you I can record with a document from the Congress had been maintained at the Chattanooga library ever since 1914, and they say there is 85 copies of this book in United States and the world.  I found five copies of this document and  introduced one.  Copy to judge Stern to relieve her of her jurisdiction from a city court case that the Tennessee criminal court in Knoxville claims to be civil at least six times.
  After  the federal law 241 as seen Congressional Globe 39 Congress page 3041-42 was read in open court she stopped reading when the Congress said the now dominant party invaded our country.  the moving party said to trial court  judge that her decision goes against rem because July 16, 1866 in the Congressional Globe 39th Congress page 3841 and 42the Congress said in the first paragraph of this depository document that the Constitution is  a dead letter and today 2010,11 and 12 it is still dead because lower court do not listen to the higher court decision to collect money to balance a budget.  What would happen if there was a Marine who can remove the any judge in the state, and when he ruled there is, no appeal.  


Well, of course judges of those courts would be very biased. But the moving party is not here for that in this court.  Today only too get better standing in this court.  After reading this document the moving parties opinion would be if the judge does his best to follow the Constitution, they should have any fear of this act of 1866.  But now the judges are breaking Constitution every day for that he or she has a lot of fear.  Now, this court already proved to the moving party in cases like meaher v mayor and alterman 1 head 74,8 tenn 74 1858, then in Chattanooga v davis ruling 54s.w. 3d 248, 259 tenn. 2001 and city of Chattanooga v myers 787 s.w. 2d 921, 922 tenn 199.
When these cases was argued the lawyers who represented either side did not cover all the time lines that will be involved in a ruling of there magnitude, just to earn money to balance budgets for the Corp. and public offices,   More important, the right of the citizens as this court does  for years to be honest of the best ability.  This subversive law of the land  was signed by the Congress,veto by the president,over ruled by the Congress..  this trial court judge decided to overrule the United States Congress.this moving party wonders how this court will handle the most subversive law that was never seen before where they said that the now dominate party invaded our country.  They will not always listen to this law, but once the United States is a Republic again, we will not need this Law .
The moving party will try to summarizes this part I saying that all cities and County courts in Tennessee over ruled the Tennessee Supreme Court and the Tennessee criminal Court of Appeals for 198 years.  At the same time media failed to report these rulings to the public, the Tennessee Bar Association  members if asked, do you know of these rulings the answer would be no.  In the city of Chattanooga v Davis decision there is a loser and there is a the winner attorney would be nice to know what they are doing and October 20, 2012. The city attorney Fritz is still a city attorney and did nothing honor the decision ,the winner Jerry Summers went on to be the city judge of Soddy Daisy in 2012  found  citizens and myself guilty of state crimes and sent the cases to county criminal court over ruling his own win 30 years ago
At the same time this attorney never used any of the rulings, in any of his cases for this clients in 30 years. with this in mind, there are10 hundreds of thousands traffic stops that were handed out since 1990. The city policeman who was declared civil process servers stopped the carriages during the hundreds of thousand and found state crimes of no acknowledgment that violates knowels v Iowa  525 U.S. 113 (1998) a Supreme Court ruling and all the way back to 1865
Tennessee  have a traffic stop program during the program that process server  arrest citizens at gunpoint like you see on cops on TV if they do not stop you will get forces off the road ,then force out out car . They  know the higher court said no, they cannot do it then takes to city court find you guilty anything that  promote misdemeanors or felones  lots of felones  . So doing, this time.  Hundred of thousands of citizens who are not voters because they think the state, County government are crooked , at the same time, it had produced hundred of thousand feloniers over the years and can never vote or have a gun. The moving party witness that when judge stern  gave myself 10 days contempt court and served it at Hamilton County jail and Silverdale prison there were eight black to one white  where most of them were felonier, but all  of them that came from a city court are slaves under the 13th.and this is generic though out the State. 
What about all those who paid fees for their attorneys, all the public defenders and  attorney general .  All be illegal search and seizure traffic stops violations and every public official in state by taken a paycheck is taking part of this illegal money. They stop voting  in Mississippi  way back, but you never thought about illegal court cases in Tennessee and other state. The media never told anyone, even after the moving party told them with copies after receiving  three orders from Tennessee criminal court of appeal court .Which means the 3 million permanent citizens of Tennessee watches cops on TV but know inside of them it not so and  no news told them any different even when the process  servers  killed at least 10 citizens and shot 54 glad the two were shot 40 to 50 times while the majority of the bullets was in the groin area. Well i do not think I’M for this what about you.

Tennessee civil appeal Court ruled previous civil case filed by the moving party were dismiss  but the Tennessee criminal Court of Appeals said wrong and did nothing and the Tennessee Supreme Court says do not send us any more appeal we will not take anymore filings from you concerning one case that is now pending waiting to see what happened when i file new appeal next week.
Now let take a little about car insurance ticketing the U.S. Supreme court ruled  gaming car insurance is gaming and has no insured interest and violate the insurance act B,C, stat. 1925,chap. 20 *810  like stated 72 A.L.R. 1384 and back up with Vandepitte v Preferred Accci.ins. co (1929) 255 (1930) 2D. l.r. 562,. and Violate Knowels v Iowa. Having car insurance on a three party property when i do not know the name and address of the person who i will hit was gaming. But in Tn. we can not  gamble. These tickets if not paid a person loses their driving  which stops the right to movement to the polls by the thousands.
As stated in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 500:Due process of law.  Law in its regular course of administration through courts of justice.  Due process of law in each particular case means such an exercise of the powers of the government as the settled maxims of law permit and sanction, and under such safeguards for the protection of individual rights as those maxims prescribe for the class of cases to which the one in question belongs.  A course of legal proceedings according to those rules and principles which have been established in our systems of jurisprudence for the enforcement and protection of private rights.  
To give such proceedings any validity, there must be a tribunal competent by its constitution—that is, by the law of the creation—to pass upon the subject-matter of the suit;  and, if that involves merely a determination of the personal liability of the defendant, he must be brought within its jurisdiction by service of process within the state, or his voluntary appearance. 
 Pennoyer v. Neff, 96 U.S. 733, 24 L.Ed. 565.  Due process of law implies the right of the person affected thereby to be present before the tribunal which pronounces judgment upon the question of life, liberty, or property, in its most comprehensive sense; to be heard, by testimony or otherwise, and to have the right of controverting, by proof, every material fact which bears on the question of right in the matter involved.  If any question of fact or liability be conclusively be presumed [rather than proven] against him, this is not due process of law.
An orderly proceeding wherein a person with notice, actual or constructive, and has an opportunity to be heard and to enforce and protect his rights before a court having the power to hear and determine the case.  Kazubowski v. Kazubowski, 45 Ill.2d 405, 259 N.E.2d 282, 290.  Phrase means that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, property or of any right granted him by statute, unless matter involved first shall have been adjudicated against him upon trial conducted according to established rules regulating judicial proceedings, and it forbids condemnation without a hearing.  Pettit v. Penn, LaApp., 180 So.2d 66, 69.  
The concept of “due process of law” as it is embodied in the Fifth Amendment demands that a law shall not be unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious and that the means selected shall have a reasonable and substantial relation to the object being sought.  U.S. v. Smith, D.C.Iowa, 249 F.Supp. 515, 516.  Fundamental requisite of “due process of law” is the opportunity to be heard, to be aware that a matter is pending, to make an informed choice whether to acquiesce or contest, and to assert before the appropriate decision-making body the reasons for such choice.  Trinity Episcopal Corp. v. Romney, D.C.N.Y., 387 F.Supp. 1044, 1084.  Aside from all else, “due process” means fundamental fairness and substantial justice.  Vaughn v. State, 3 Tenn.Crim.App. 54, 456 S.W.2d 879, 883

Embodied in the due process concept are the basic rights of a defendant in criminal proceedings and the requisites for a fair trial.  These rights and requirements have been expanded by Supreme Court decisions and include, timely notice of a hearing or trial which informs the accused of the charges against him or her; the opportunity to confront accusers and to present evidence on one’s own behalf before an impartial jury or judge; the presumption of innocence under which guilt must be proven by legally obtained evidence and the verdict must be supported by the evidence presented; rights at the earliest stage of the criminal process; and the guarantee that an individual will not be tried more than once for the same offense (double jeopardy).
High court have often recognized that the Class Legislation Clause of Article XI, section 8 is similar to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and this Court has previously applied Equal Protection analysis to questions arising under the Class Legislation Clause.   See, e.g., Riggs v. Burson, 941 S.W.2d 44, 52 (Tenn.1997).   To this end, we have recognized that Article XI, section 8 “guarantees that persons similarly situated shall be treated alike,” Evans v. Steelman, 970 S.W.2d 431, 435 (Tenn.1998) (citation omitted), and that it “prohibits the General Assembly from suspending the general law or passing any law inconsistent with the general law for the benefit of any individual [or group of individuals]․” Finister v. Humboldt Gen. Hosp., Inc., 970 S.W.2d 435, 440 n. 3 (Tenn.1998)


The moving party ask the court to issue an injunction to stop the Tennessee election until all the  parties involved get their voting rights back, order all cities charters changed to say that the city is civil.
If it  your power.  If the moving party is a force recon Marine civilian who said an protect and defend oath to constitution the highest in the nation who ask to go a Republic in 1972 and killed them in the name of a democracy. Then come back to my republic and find  in my military parks in Nashvill,Tn. a soldier bigger than the best soldier of the nation, a Greek soldier who never served in any of wars and was never a citizen of the U.S. who represents the Troyen Horse at the state of Tennessee capitol is 10 feet 5 inches. While the best soldier of our nation  is 3 feet  and 5 feet that stand on the side of the capitol where the ground cellar is. The representatives of the state walks by the troyen horses that look like  a 10 feet Greek soldier made of pewter standing on marble with the best soldier of nation standing on concrete made of junk metal  and the U.S. flag and the state flag fly equally and  violate the U.S. flag code and nobody cares except for basil Marceaux.
 Please order the statues that represents the Troyen Horse removed from our  country.At the same time if I say pledge of allegiance to Republic Constitution then the federal election commission must be for the first time made a Republic.  Democracy does not rule we do not take an oath to democracy while every elected official in the country take oath to a Republic.  The day when I became a U.S. Marine i said an oath to a republic was ask to go to a country that was a republic and republican and make them democracy. 
 We are Republic we must help other Republic to survive as the pilgrims the founder of the  first Republic city of Plymouth Rock. Before the pilgrims came ashore they did the Mayflower compact that said: Lord help . Then  the Republic that the people that died at the  Revolutionary war .  They all died for nothing.  These Troyen Horses, force  every state to do exactly what Tennessee is doing,
, I would like to have an oral argument, but the moving party has  agent  orange and the Troyen Horse says he did not give it to me like thousands of other veterans who never had a foot in Vietnam. so the moving party only gets  a small check instead of a big check and cannot afford to come to Washington DC. or to create more than one copy of the filing.  Please send a bus ticket
P.S. This is a true story
Respectfully submitted by an act to kindness
basil Marceaux423-362-0088739 ashland tr # 209Chattanooga, Tn. 37379
                                         certificate of service                                              to. State election