Michael Nowik

Friday, April 02, 2004

No. _03-9695__





Michael H. Nowik,


State of North Dakota, et. al,





Michael H. Nowik

Appellant Pro Se

Independent Federal Prosecutor

P.O. Box 1162

Dickinson, North Dakota 58602-1162

(701) 225-0507


All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. This is a case extending back to 1994 and involves numerous and multiple parties who participated in the extortion and obstruction of justice circumstances encompassing this civil rights and racketeering legal situation. North Dakota, through the obstruction of justice acts of its officials throughout this case has apparently chosen to represent all official and private civil and criminal defendants.

List of Defendants editted out by poster

Note: Petitioner reserves the right to name numerous additional parties later, in an appropriate legal or public forum, who were involved in this civil rights case since 1994, and who have participated unlawfully and unconstitutionally to perpetuate obstruction of justice and persecution and oppression, up to the present time.


Appendix A: Order Denying Petition for Rehearing (1-6-04)

Appendix B: Order Affirming U.S. District Court Decision (11-25-03)

Appendix C: U.S. District Court Order (5-29-03)

Appendix D: U.S. District Court Order (5-6-03)

Appendix E: Fargo Forum Article - Employees questioned secret site (12-19-03)

Appendix F: Bismarck Tribune Article -

Former president of horse-betting company pleads not guilty (12-19-03)

Appendix G: Fargo Forum Article -

Text of Timothy Newman’s letter to the N.D. Racing Commission (12-17-03)

Appendix H: Fargo Forum Article - Longer racing season sought (12-07-03)

Appendix I: Dickinson Press Obituary - Richard Mueller (3-28-04)

Appendix J: U.S. District Court Affidavit of Richard Mueller (4-9-96)




1. Whether the abrogation, abdication, and renunciation of jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States, and the closure of all United States courts to the People, by the U.S. district court and Eighth Circuit, constitute violations of their First Amendment right to petition for redress of grievances?

2. Whether the abrogation, abdication, and renunciation of jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States, and the closure of courts, constitute violations of Article III Constitutional requirements, and/or the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, criteria for holding any office under the United States?

3. Whether the dismissals and denials of Petitioner’s pleadings constitute violations of his First Amendment rights to petition for redress, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protections, and/or Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4, right to undisputed compensation for services?

BE IT KNOWN, that pursuant to U.S. Supreme Court Rule 14, Petitioner Pro Se,

Michael H. Nowik, North Dakota resident, American Citizen; Vietnam Veteran; Youngest

Known Polish Survivor of the Holocaust; Independent Federal Prosecutor: Private Attorney

General of the United States; legally declared representative of the laws, Constitution, and the

People, hereby petitions for Writ of Certiorari on the 8TH Circuit Court Of Appeals’ denial of

petition for rehearing and review.

Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment below.


The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals’ Denial of Petition for Rehearing and Review by Judicial Council and Judicial Conference appears at Appendix A.

The opinion of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals Panel appears at Appendix B to the petition and is unpublished.

The opinions of the U.S. District Court under appeal appear at Appendix C to the petition.

This Petition for Writ of Certiorari is also supported by U.S. District Court Docket #A1-95-154, and U.S. Supreme Court records for the past 8 years, Docket #97-8533 and #00-10392.


The date on which the Eighth Circuit denied a timely Petition for Rehearing and Review was January 6, 2004.

The date on which the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Panel decided and affirmed in this case was November 25, 2003.

The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 18 U.S.C. § 1346, Scheme to Defraud; § 1952, Racketeering; § 1961, Pattern of Racketeering; and § 1962(a), (b), (c), and (d), Prohibited Activities; 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a), (1), (2), (3), and (4), Civil Rights and Elective Franchise; and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Equal rights under the law; § 1983, Civil action for deprivation of rights; § 1985, Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights; § 1986, Action for neglect to prevent; and § 1988, Proceedings in vindication of civil rights.



2. Because of the grave and imminent, life-threatening nature of the issues involved in this complicated case; the abject closure of all American courts to the laws, Constitution, and the People by federal judges; the serious public importance and concern for the safety and security of United States Citizens in the several states; and the continued existence and survival of a Constitutional United States and its institutions; this document is being released, served, and forwarded to all available state and federal officials, American Citizens, and national media outlets, through the internet and other means of distribution.

3. The Honorable Justices of this U.S. Supreme Court should be made aware that, being a violent extortion crime victim and independent prosecutor in this case, and having violated no laws whatsoever in this case, Appellant has no reason to fear publicity or public knowledge of any of his actions in regard to circumstances of this despicable affair. He does not intend to continue participating in secretive, conspiratorial, drawn out, obstructive, and illegal judicial proceedings or to passively continue suffering outrageous tyranny, genocidal persecution, starvation, torment, and torture.

4. Any denial of this imperative petition at this late hour without appropriate legal basis, reasoning, and opinion, or any unnecessary delay of hearing or resolution, must be presumed to be a ratification of continuing genocidal conspiracy to violate Nowik’s rights through additional official persecution and oppression, obstruction of justice, racketeering, and the renunciation of all judicial jurisdiction over cases arising under the Laws and Constitution of the United States.




2. The primary issues pertain to the precedent-setting, arrogant abrogation, abdication, and renunciation of jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States, through the dismissals, denials, and closure of Appellant’s valid removal action from state court, and denial of default judgment, by U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Hovland, and the improper, unconstitutional affirmation by a three judge circuit panel, and denial of petition for rehearing and review, which effectively close American courts to the People, dissolve the judicial system of the United States, and continue racketeering, persecution, genocide, insurrection, rebellion, and tyranny.

3. They also pertain to the continued and endless judicial malfeasance by federal judges

and courts in this case since at least 1996, and their propensity to excrete consistently incomprehensible legal decisions, rulings, opinions, and orders, in complete disregard of the facts, laws, rules, events, ongoing official oppression, and crimes against humanity, Citizens, and the United States; to obstruct justice in an undecipherable, foreign legal language repugnant to the Constitution and American People. Regardless of the changes of docket numbers and titles, this is still the same case.

4. The questions presented for review on appeal were:

1) Whether the U.S. District Court abrogated and abdicated jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States, through its dismissal and closure of this removal action?

2) Whether the dismissal, denials, and closure of this valid removal action constitute violations of Petitioner’s rights under the First Amendment to

redress of grievances?


"Michael H. Nowik appeals the district court’s order denying Nowik’s motions for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and for default judgment, both filed after the district court dismissed his purported removal of a state court criminal action. We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying either the Rule 60(b) motion, see Swope v. Siegel-Robert, Inc., 243 F.3d 486, 498 (8th Cir.) (Rule 60(b) motion must demonstrate exceptional circumstances for relief; reviewed for abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 887 (2001), or the motion for default judgment. Accordingly, we affirm."

b. Whereas, this extraneous, artificially produced decision of the three judge panel of the Eighth Circuit, on November 25, 2003, by Wollman, Fagg, and Morris Sheppard Arnold, Circuit Judges. affirming the opinion of U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Hovland, that the federal court did somehow mysteriously have discretion and could dismiss Appellant’s valid removal action against the state of North Dakota for its countless civil and constitutional rights violations, including the illegal lifetime confiscation of his driver’s license, because it does not have jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States, and that it could also deny Default Judgment and Protection Order on the failure of any legal, official, or Constitutional state representative to appear, it did not relate to the exceptional issues or merits of the legal appeal, or the jurisdictional questions presented on appeal.

c. By extension and deliberate omission of any proper legal reasoning, this unpublished

opinion thereby also clearly affirmed the intentional, outrageous, judicial misconduct in the federal courts since 1995, throughout this lengthy legal situation, and also substantiated that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has now also deliberately and knowingly renounced and repudiated jurisdiction over cases arising under the laws and Constitution and effectively DISSOLVED the judicial system of the United States and closed all courts to the People.

5. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals failed to properly act on the Petition for Rehearing and 28, U.S.C. Section 372(c)(1) judicial complaint.

a. On January 6, 2004, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Clerk, Michael Gans, signed a denial of Petition for Rehearing and Review by the Judicial Council and Judicial Conference of the United States, which was without appropriate judicial attribution, opinion, review, or signature, clearly beyond the scope of his duties and in violation of federal court provisions, rules, and statutes, since the chief judge must provide the complainant with written notice and reasons for any dismissal or denial of a judicial complaint.

b. Title 28, Section 372(c)(3) states:

(3) After expeditiously reviewing a complaint, the chief judge, by written order stating his reasons, may -

(A) dismiss the complaint, if he finds it to be (i) not in conformity with paragraph (1) of this subsection, (ii) directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling, or (iii) frivolous; or

(B) conclude the proceeding if he finds that appropriate corrective action has been taken or that action on the complaint is no longer necessary because of intervening events.

The chief judge shall transmit copies of his written order to the complainant and to the judge or magistrate whose conduct is the subject of the complaint.

c. Thereby, it is clear that when Appellant’s Petition for Rehearing and Review for judicial misconduct complaint was denied by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, the reasons should have been concisely stated in writing, signed by the chief judge, and properly filed and transmitted by the office of the clerk of the court, and preserved with a record of the case. The facts are that the denial of the Petition was in violation of Federal Rules, fraudulent, and unconstitutional, in complete disregard of the evidence, facts, laws, rules, and Constitution, and aided and abetted continuing crimes, corruption, insurrection, and rebellion against the United States and its People.

6. All of these judicial acts were misprision of felonies, in express malicious violation of the Rules, Laws, and Constitution of the United States, and continue and promote the malignant, maniacal, genocidal conspiracy to violate Nowik’s rights to life, liberty, and property, and endanger the civil and constitutional rights of Petitioner and all other American Citizens to access liberty and justice. Being committed outside the scope of their official duties, through abuse of power and position, these judges are not immune from punishment or prosecution for their unconstitutional actions.

7. It is clear that the Court of Appeals failed to properly address or adjudicate any of the important Constitutional and legal issues presented on appeal which remain of grave public concern, and has contributed to the conspiracy to keep Nowik a virtual prisoner in his home under constant threats to his life, liberties, and property for more than an additional year.

8. As it is abundantly documented and evidenced in the record, there is no legal, official, law enforcement, or Constitutional representative of the state of North Dakota, yet officials have espoused their objective to unlawfully represent and protect all private criminal and corrupt defendants in this situation. This is a despicable case of state officials failing to properly execute the laws of the state, to supervise, discipline, direct, or control their agencies or employees; failing to respond to and neglecting to prevent a grave legal and constitutional controversy and crisis; failing to provide an honorable public forum to settle the issues; and failing to legally appear, explain, justify, or substantiate just how and why they should have any unjust power and authority over Appellant, or any other United States Citizen, for the willful and wrongful facilitation of ongoing official apostasy, obstruction of justice, persecution and oppression, and criminal conspiracy to deprive him of his civil, constitutional, and human rights for the rest of his life.

9. Having renounced the laws and Constitution, their oaths of office, and thereby their United States citizenship, through their actions ratifying, condoning, covering up for, and failing to correct the unlawful effects of corruption, insurrection and rebellion, all official defendants in this civil racketeering case, and the federal courts and judges, are now operating illegally and unconstitutionally and must be immediately removed from office, operations suspended, closed, and reorganized.

10. American Citizens cannot be forced to submit to illegal or unconstitutional authority and jurisdiction, or to recognize corrupt courts or states as legitimate. As a private attorney general of the United States and independent federal prosecutor in this case, in 30 days Nowik intends to again exercise his federal rights to travel in his car, to tend to his lawful affairs, needs and necessities, with or without state or federal approval, and restore a Constitutional American city, county, state, and country. Any attempt to unreasonably and unlawfully interfere with his Constitutional immunities and privileges by criminals or corrupt officials in North Dakota, or in any other state, will be viewed as an act of aggression against the United States and the People, and will be adamantly and appropriately resisted to the death.


A. The First Amendment grants American citizens the right to petition the government "for redress of grievances".

1. That is also the primary purpose of each subsequent constitutional provision for protection from corrupt government policies and practices. This right includes the power of the people to press criminal and civil charges against criminals, racketeers, and corrupt officials who have been inflicting wrongful injury on the inhabitants of the United States. That is the sum and substance of the First Amendment, without semantics.

2. Since 1994, Nowik has been attempting to assert his constitutional and civil rights to liberty and justice through the state and federal courts, by lawfully pursuing criminal and civil prosecution against a large group of greedy, violent, extortionist gamblers and racketeers in the illegally state-controlled, financed, promoted, and regulated interstate gambling industry.

3. He has been corruptly obstructed at every turn by discrimination, slander, defamation, and libel, bias and prejudice, denial of due process and equal protection of the laws, unreasonable seizure from his home, false arrest and malicious prosecution, perjury and false statements, involuntary commitment, imposition of excessive bail, deprivation of each and every possible civil or constitutional right, the retaliatory lifetime confiscation of his driver’s license to continue to persecute him, and the denial of his civil rights to prosecute, to sue, or to demand legal remedies according to the laws and Constitution of the United States, all direct violations of Title 42, United States Code, Section l981 which states explicitly:

"All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other."

4. For the past decade, city of Dickinson, Stark County, and state of North Dakota officials have clearly abrogated and abdicated any authority or jurisdiction over the people of the United States. The Governor of North Dakota has refused to fulfill his responsibilities and duties to faithfully administer or execute the state of North Dakota’s laws. Members of the legislative assembly and judicial department have refused to fulfill their duties or responsibilities to the people and United States Constitution.

5. The N.D. Attorney General’s Office and Racing Commission are responsible for both promoting and regulating horse racing in North Dakota at the same time, permitting extortionists or racketeers to run interstate gambling operations, and in funding a new race track with the public’s tax money (See Appendix G & H). It has used its office illegally and without constitutional authority to protect, as Counsel of Record for all civil and criminal Defendants in this case, officials and private individuals, agencies, institutions, and instrumentalities, who have been engaging in a continuing conspiracy of violent extortion, racketeering, obstruction of justice, and persecution and oppression.

6. There is no longer any legitimate, legal, lawful, official, or Constitutional representative of the state of North Dakota or its inhabitants. None have properly appeared in the courts for all these years. All have repudiated their representation of the state and its people, and thereby their United States citizenship, through their corrupt and fraudulent actions, deliberate indifference, neglect to prevent, and ratification of unlawful and unconstitutional activities and enterprises, for the corrupt purpose of sustaining illegal control of the state and its people, and are no longer eligible to hold any office or position under the United States of America.

7. The powers of the state have been illegally usurped and dissolved, and it is now being maintained under "color of law" as nothing more than a racketeering enterprise under the delinquent authority of the United States bureaucracy. It remains a territory of the United States and its derelict acts of domination by a despicable, rebellious, tyrannical regime certainly are within the jurisdiction of the United States, the Constitution, and the People.

8. Appellant will never recognize or submit to any traitorous officials in the state of North Dakota or the United States for anything. They clearly have no authority to hold their offices illegally or unconstitutionally and must be removed immediately. It is up to Citizens to respect their own "natural, inalienable, inherent and God given rights" through their reserved powers in the Tenth Amendment, to ensure their own safety and security, and no state or federal officials have the authority to interfere with that process.

9. City, county, and state officials have violated each and every possible law, and deprived Nowik of every civil and constitutional right, on the books, to obstruct justice and protect criminals and themselves from accountability for depredations.

a. Under constant threats to his life, liberties, and property each day for the past decade, Appellant has been forced to be a virtual prisoner in his own home, because as an American Citizen, he will never recognize or submit to their criminal and totalitarian demands, authority, or jurisdiction, and drop his federal prosecution.

b. Because of the retaliatory and illegal lifetime confiscation of his driver’s license, he has been deprived of his federal right to travel to tend to any of his needs and necessities, to work and assist in family interests, buy groceries, or tend to other lawful affairs. Without legitimate law enforcement or government services in the state of North Dakota, there is also no protection outside his sequestered home against further retaliation from the criminals, racketeers, and corrupt officials that Nowik has been attempting to prosecute for all of these years.

10. Officials have neglected their duties and responsibilities to defend, enforce, and uphold the laws and Constitution of the state of North Dakota and the United States, to ensure the safety and security of inhabitants, in violation of:

18 U.S.C. § 4. - Misprision of felony.

"Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."

11. Nowik is clearly entitled to Default Judgment for compensatory damages and redress, for failure of state officials to properly appear and for contempt of court.

a. Because of the continued corruption, racketeering, and persecution by city, county, and state officials, and their unlawful efforts to maintain illegal control of the People, and their offices and institutions, Nowik is entitled to Default Judgment for compensatory damages for injuries incurred, and Protection Order, in his favor, and also for his services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, as provided by the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4, which states that:

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."


1. After previous attempts to remove this valid action from the unlawful and

unconstitutional authority or jurisdiction of the state court of North Dakota were abjectly denied by U.S. Magistrate Judge Dwight C.H. Kautzmann on June 19, 2002, and March 30, 2003, Petitioner, as an independent federal prosecutor, finally filed this removal action, with countless counterclaims and countercharges, on April 10, 2003, in this ongoing, decade long, federal civil racketeering and persecution case, pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C., Section 1443 (1), deprivation of and denial of equal civil rights of citizens of the United States, 28, U.S.C. Section 1446 (c)(1), Title 42, U.S.C. 1983, Conspiracy to violate rights, and Title 18 U.S.C. 1961 (1), racketeering.

2. Originally instituted in United States District Court in Bismarck, North Dakota on December 6, 1995, Docket # A1-95-154, where District Judge Patrick A. Conmy issued a dismissal ruling, legalizing extortion, obstruction of justice, racketeering, and official oppression, which was denied hearing on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, this case now involves thousands of violent and atrocious criminal, civil rights, and constitutional violations, additional multiple defendants, and continuing threats to kill or eliminate Nowik, and constant official persecution and oppression to obstruct justice.

3. It includes the conspiracy to abridge Nowik’s immunities and privileges as a violent extortion victim, Citizen of the United States, and lawful private prosecutor, a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause, the retaliatory lifetime confiscation of his driver’s license in 2000, malicious prosecution, denial of due process, and deprivation of his federal right to travel to tend to his lawful affairs, which have illegally and unconstitutionally kept him a virtual prisoner in his home for these many years, unable to properly tend to his needs and necessities for survival.

4. Because of countless and continuing genocidal obstruction of justice acts of

city, county, and state officials, and the failure of the federal courts to provide access to judicial resolution of any of the legal or Constitutional issues in this very serious decade-long, civil racketeering prosecution, Nowik, who has never violated a single law in this 10 year old case, although he has been fraudulently and maliciously prosecuted on manufactured charges, legally invoked his absolute immunities and privileges from the unlawful and unconstitutional authority and jurisdiction of state of North Dakota officials in August 1999.

5. In late 1999 and early 2000, state officials continued to interfere with this federal prosecution, illegally confiscated his driver’s license forever, and have through abuse of power and process attempted to force him to resubmit to their totalitarian authority, control, and jurisdiction. In state court at trial on a fraudulent driving under suspension charge, he was denied each and every right to present affirmative defenses, countercharges and counterclaims, facts, evidence, and witnesses in his favor, under which he had no liability whatsoever, and the state clearly did not prove otherwise.

6. On appeal, the state supreme court appeals panel ruled unconstitutionally that Nowik was not entitled to due process or equal protection of the laws, a completely illegal opinion which supported and perpetuated continued corruption, illegal control, and racketeering in the state. The U.S. Supreme Court denied petition for writ of certiorari in January of 2002, leaving Appellant a prisoner of a totalitarian regime and state inhabitants under the illegal control of a tyrannical bureaucracy.

7. Nowik immediately confronted the city, county, and state as to what their intentions were in restoring Constitutional government to the People. The North Dakota governor refused to respond to certified mail delivery and documents, and the city and county commissions stated at their commission meetings they were satisfied with the current situation and weren’t going to do anything to return Constitutional government to the People. Upon leaving those meetings, having violated no laws, Nowik was approached and threatened by city and county law enforcement and warned against exercising his federal right to travel by automobile.

8. In April of 2002, after writing and notifying all state and national officials, including the President and the Justice Department, that they should immediately resolve this atrocious situation, and that Nowik intended to drive to tend to his lawful affairs, to buy groceries and necessities, with or without any state official approval, he began driving in May to tend to his lawful affairs, to try to visit and assist his dying stepfather, and was immediately, illegally, and unconstitutionally stopped by a convoy of law enforcement vehicles, a block from his home, assaulted, falsely arrested, and his car was stolen.

9. Thereupon, Nowik filed for removal to U.S. District Court in June, with countercharges and counterclaims, which was contemptuously denied by federal magistrate Kautzmann. Upon motion and order in July, his illegally impounded car was returned, and state officials immediately followed with more threats to have him mentally committed which he was forced to oppose and resist by filing more motions.

10. On October 30, 2002, Nowik underwent another fraudulent, unfair and hurried one day trial, where he was again denied his rights to present any affirmative defenses, objections, or counterclaims, and thereupon hastily kidnaped upon fraudulent conviction and delivered illegally to the state mental hospital 200 miles away for the second time in this case, since February 1995 when he had been declared mentally competent, where he objected strenuously and was released and provided transportation home in a week.

11. Undergoing a number of sentencing hearings and further violations of his civil rights, and the death of his ailing stepfather on New Year’s Eve, he was told to go and reinstate his driver’s license and drop his federal prosecution, an unconstitutional condition, he refused to do so, and finally was able to file his huge removal action on April 10, 2003. With the state failing to appear, the federal judge Daniel L. Hovland dismissed the case on grounds of lack of jurisdiction, denied motions for reconsideration and default judgment, and closed the case.

12. Nowik appealed, and the three judge appeals panel affirmed with an obviously obstructive decision, stating, with deliberate disregard to the issues of default and lack of jurisdiction or questions presented, only that the District Court judge Hovland had discretion to dismiss the case.

VII. Additional Related Intervening Facts and New Evidence:

1. In August of 2003, the U.S. Justice Department finally began federal prosecution of Racing Services, Inc., of Fargo, North Dakota, the company licensed by the state to operate all of the simulcast horse and dog wagering sites across the state of North Dakota, for recent illegal interstate gambling operations with $99 million in unreported wagers, (See Appendix E &F), and income tax evasion of over $6 million in the past couple of years, and for operating secret, illegal, and off-shore interstate and internet gambling sites. Trial has been delayed until August.

2. This is the same company which is involved as an unnamed defendant in this case through other entities under its control. The failure of the state, U.S. Justice Department, and the federal courts to take appropriate action since 1994 on the facts and evidence in the court records obviously led to continued officially-protected, interstate criminal racketeering. The Text of Timothy Newman’s letter to the N.D. Racing Commission, one of the federal witnesses to the illegal activities, printed in the Fargo Forum, 12-17-03, criticizes the Commission and the state for failure to regulate the interstate gambling industry (See Appendix G).

3. Another Fargo Forum article of 12-07-03, Longer racing season sought, reveals that Les Schmidt, one of the original Dickinson, North Dakota, extortionist defendants in this instant case, who has been protected for all of these years by state officials, and was made track manager of Horse Race North Dakota, of Fargo, a nonprofit organization that operates a new horse racing track financed, built, promoted, and regulated by the state in the last few years, is still there and asking for more state financing to operate (See Appendix H).

4. A notorious con man, swindler, and major extortionist racketeering defendant in this case, Richard "Dick" Mueller, owner-operator of the Paragon Bowl, Inc. of Dickinson, North Dakota, the local simulcast horse wagering site, well known for his dishonest, disreputable, and dishonorable deeds and dealings throughout the states of North and South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana, who has been a major defendant in this case from the very beginning, was taken off life support and died on March 25, 2004 at the age of 79 (See Appendix I). He left a legacy of no legitimate city of Dickinson, Stark County, or state of North Dakota governments, and no Constitutional courts in North Dakota or the United States, as well as a wife and children.

5. This was the second chief violent extortionist defendant who has passed on in this case over the past decade, along with a number of other participants, including one of Appellant’s original lawyers and important witnesses.

6. In 1996, Mueller filed an affidavit (See Appendix J) with the U.S. District Court in this racketeering case, falsely stating that he was not the owner or manager of the Paragon Bowl, Inc. In the attached obituary, it clearly confirms that he was the owner and operator until his death.

VIII. Summary of Laws and Arguments

A. The wrongful and unconstitutional dismissal on grounds of lack of federal jurisdiction, closure of the courts, affirmation, and denial of petition for hearing and review did not decide this case on its merits, and did not exculpate or relieve any of the respondents in this case from liability or trial by jury for continuing crimes.

B. The United States is obviously a pyramidal structure of social units established by the Founding Fathers for the public good of the Citizens inhabiting this country.

1. The top of this pyramid is undoubtedly the People, who chartered this state and country and created the Constitution, to ensure their future safety and security. All men, women, and children within the United States are subject to the jurisdiction, protections, and guarantees of the Laws and Constitution. All military men and women fall under the jurisdiction and control of the Pentagon. And all courts and judges in the United States fall under the jurisdiction, control, and supervision of the United States Supreme Court.

2. The judicial system is unquestionably inferior to the demands of the People and their petitions, as indicated and provided for by the First Amendment. Just as any corporate officers or entities operating illegally and unconstitutionally against their own shareholders would soon find themselves in court, so too must all cities, counties, states, and the judicial system, as they are all incorporated entities, of, by, and for the People.

3. Under our Constitution, the same principles were established with the United States, whose Founders provided caveats against usurpations of power. Under Article III, and the 14th Amendment, Section 3, no official or judge may hold office in periods of bad behavior, aiding and abetting such, or when they fail to properly defend, enforce, or uphold their oaths of office, the laws, and the Constitution to protect the People.

4. The U.S. Supreme Court is charged with the supervisory responsibility for every court and judge in the United States, to regulate policies, practices and procedures, and to ensure that each Citizen is provided reasonable access to an honorable judicial system with protections of rights, immunities, privileges, liberties, and speedy justice.

5. Issues of fairness and substantial justice trump irregular and improper judicial proceedings and fraudulent discretionary rulings that aid, abet, or perpetuate corrupt criminal activity and clearly establish appropriate federal jurisdiction and the right of the People to exercise their reserved powers to redress valid grievances.

6. The burden on the multitude of official and private defendants in this case to properly appear, the interests of the forum state’s inhabitants, Petitioner’s interest in obtaining relief, and the interest of a Constitutional judicial system to find a solution to the legal problems and issues, clearly outweigh the federal judges’ opinions over the years in this case that violent extortion and racketeering, and genocidal persecution and oppression, are legal, may continue without end, and are somehow beyond the jurisdiction of the federal courts, laws, and Constitution. The causes of action are certainly a federal issue under Title 28 U.S.C. §1331: "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."


A. American judges do not have the discretion to legalize extortion and

racketeering, obstruction of justice, official oppression, to deny access to the courts, to delay justice, or to renounce the laws and Constitution, and no longer have legitimate authority to hold court in the United States.

1. The fact alone that this case is ten years old, that Appellant has been denied proper access to the courts, suffered countless abominable civil rights violations, been kept a virtual prisoner in his home under constant threats to his life for all these years, and received nothing but completely incomprehensible and unconstitutional decisions, rulings and denials, and no resolution of any of the issues or relief from unlawful ongoing persecution in all this time, is evidence enough that the courts are operating illegally and without regard for rampant judicial misconduct or justice.

2. By failing to control, discipline, and supervise judicial operations and procedures, to provide speedy and reasonable access to the courts and appropriate proceedings and rulings, and by failing to administer justice, through malicious neglect of duty, deliberate indifference, obstruction of justice, and ratification, all judges and courts in the United States are now operating illegally and unconstitutionally. All courts clearly must now be closed, reestablished, and restaffed with American Citizens who will defend, enforce, and uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States.

3. The U.S. District Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals judges have therefore deliberately, knowingly, and maliciously abrogated, abdicated, and renounced their duties and responsibilities, their oaths of office, and their United States citizenship, through their obstructive actions and inactions in this decade long case, and by ruling, affirming, and denying petition for rehearing on federal judge Daniel Hovland’s obtuse opinion that the federal courts have no jurisdiction on Appellant’s removal action, in this outrageous, ongoing federal civil racketeering and persecution and oppression case (See Appendix D).

4. By continuing to complicate the issues of this lengthy case through improper judicial conduct and opinions, the federal courts have perpetuated the conspiracy to violate rights, to protect crime and racketeering for nearly ten years, and have now issued a clearly precedent-setting decision, disowning the United States Constitution itself, which affects all American Citizens, by relegating them to predatory or discriminatory extermination by tyrannical and treasonous officials at any time, obviously serving to maintain flagitious official corruption and illegal control of public institutions and instrumentalities in North Dakota and throughout the United States.

5. The United States Supreme Court should now immediately utilize its supervisory authority and powers to restore the integrity and principles of the judicial system, to control, close, reestablish, and reorganize Constitutional courts and an honorable judiciary for the People of the United States, to reinstall liberty and justice and the Supreme Law of the Land. The important implications of these political questions and issues must be resolved and the judicial branch cannot continue to lock their doors and run and hide from the facts that the judicial system is in complete disarray and corrupt disorder.

B. The court system is not just the judges or jury alone. It is supposed to be all the public being represented by honorable and responsible representatives in every aspect. On the bench, on the witness stand, in the prosecutor's or defense lawyer's chairs, and in the audience or through the media.

1. All of these elements must be present and they must all have integrity and principles or there can be no legitimate, Constitutional court system in America. The fact is, that right now, without any of those components, America’s judicial branch is closed and operating illegally.

2. The courts belong to United States Citizens, and only a court with a real party to the action conducting it, including the People, may have lawful jurisdiction. A court conducted by fraudulent attorneys posing as judges without any legal, lawful, official, or Constitutional authority or living party representing or controlling it can only be an abomination.

3. As the federal judges in this case since 1995 have deliberately and maliciously designed and fabricated reckless and irrelevant judicial decisions, non-decisions, opinions, and rulings, to deprive Nowik of his rights to properly access the courts in this outrageous situation, it is they themselves who have closed the courts to the Laws, Constitution, and the People.

4. Title 28, U.S.C., FRCP RULE 82: Jurisdiction and Venue unaffected:

"These rules shall not be construed to extend or limit the jurisdiction of
the United States district courts or the venue of actions therein."

a. These rules grant extensive power of joining claims and counterclaims in one action, but as this rule states, such grant does not extend or limit federal jurisdiction. The rule is declaratory of existing practice under the former Federal Equity Rules with regard to such provisions as former Equity Rule 26 on Joinder of Clauses of Action and former Equity Rule 30 on Counterclaims.

C. Judges are bound to rule according to the law and the Rules, not to impede and alter the outcome or course of any particular case for the benefit of favored parties.

1. No District Court judge has the authority to misconstrue any of the Rules in favor of any party. These federal judges have completely ignored, and deliberately disregarded every applicable material fact, law, event, rule, and circumstance of this case or intentionally engaged in deceitful misconstruction of the Rules and laws and denial of due process which constitute violation of the contract with the People of legal rights provided by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

2. By these actions they have knowingly and maliciously aided and abetted and

permitted perpetuation of more vile and vicious human rights violations. Apparently they have no compunction in legalizing the most vile, vicious, or violent crimes and genocidal elimination of American citizens through persecution if they seek to access the judicial system against corrupt officials. 3. HARLOW v. FITZGERALD, 457 U.S. 800 (1982):
"The public interest in deterrence of unlawful conduct and in compensation of victims remains protected by a test that focuses on the objective legal reasonableness of an official's acts. Where an official could be expected to know that certain conduct would violate statutory or constitutional rights, he should be made to hesitate; and a person who suffers injury caused by such conduct may have a cause of action."

a. Judge Patrick A. Conmy knowingly legalized extortion, racketeering, fraud, and official corruption with that specific motive and purpose in mind when he dismissed the federal case in 1996 and permitted these gross genocidal crimes against humanity to continue unabated and unresolved.

b. The Eighth Circuit in 1997 and U.S. Supreme Court in 1997 and 2002 did the same with their denials of petitions without hearing or appropriate review, when they completely ignored the issues of continued abuse of power and corruption and denials of due process and equal protection of the laws.

c. Now, almost a decade later, with the opinion of District Court judge Daniel L. Hovland dismissing Appellant’s valid removal action, the federal judges have absolutely renounced any jurisdiction over the laws and Constitution of the United States, thereby closing all American courts to the People of this country. Yet, they traitorously maintain their audacity and arrogance by maintaining illegal and unconstitutional control of their offices and positions to persecute and oppress United States Citizens.

d. It is clearly time for Americans to be informed of the true status of their judiciary, and for the Honorable Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court to use their supervisory authority to determine and decide through investigation and review which qualified and learned judges are available to preside over the courts in this country and restore their Constitutionality and integrity.

D. The Constitution of the United States is not some drab and insignificant document. It is the most vital basic foundation for the nation and every state, and the control instrument for every citizen and official.

1. No American is beyond its jurisdiction or its reach. Without it, there could be no Congress, U.S. Supreme Court, or a president. It is the primary source of encouragement, incentive, and support for soldiers in Iraq, that they are fighting and dying for rights and liberties secured for their families, friends and country, as well as those being oppressed or victimized by domestic enemies here at home.

2. All Americans, rich or poor, are subject to its jurisdiction and entitled to its protections and provisions, whether they take an oath to defend, enforce, or uphold it or not. Those who devalue its importance in any manner, or believe themselves superior to its provisions, must be deemed criminals or traitors.

3. It, and Congress, has given the power to federal courts to enforce the substantive guarantees of the Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment against abuse of power.

4. Article III, Section 1, specifically states, "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." The Supreme Court is the top of the pyramid encompassing the judicial system. All state and federal courts and judges are under it and must conform to its control, policies, supervision, and rules, and fall under its authority and power.

5. The U.S. Supreme Court has the power to supervise the practices of all American Courts.

28 U.S.C. § 2072. - Rules of procedure and evidence; power to prescribe

(a) The Supreme Court shall have the power to prescribe general rules of practice and procedure and rules of evidence for cases in the United States district courts (including proceedings before magistrate judges thereof) and courts of appeals.

(b) Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right. All laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect.

(c) Such rules may define when a ruling of a district court is final for the purposes of appeal under section 1291 of this title

5. The founding fathers of the states applied for statehood for the guaranteed protections and provisions of the federal Laws and Constitution. So they could become civilized instead of wild and lawless. Until about 25 years ago in the state of North Dakota the principles of the founding fathers still existed, and they still remain in the library and memories of many North Dakotans who grew up with them.

6. U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, states: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority."

7. As the legally declared representative of the laws, Constitution, and United States Citizens in the state of North Dakota, Nowik has every legal and Constitutional right to demand tyrannical officials be removed from the People’s backs, including the closure, reorganization, and reestablishment of all courts within the jurisdiction of the United States. It is clearly the duty of U.S. officials to protect them against malignant invasion, insurrection, and rebellion by domestic enemies and against continuing threats of official violence and racketeering.

a. Pursuant to the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 4:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

b. There is clearly no longer a legitimate state legislature to be convened, as none of them have properly appeared on the scene in this case and they have failed to appear to support, defend, enforce, and uphold the laws and Constitution in the courts for 10 years. There is no question in the court records that they are in knowing and deliberate violation of the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, which clearly states:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

E. Judges and Justices may be appointed for life, but there are clearly caveats provided for in the U.S. Constitution.

1. Supreme court justices and district court judges must be citizens of the United States and be learned in the law. They must also possess any additional qualifications prescribed by law. Whether they are elected or appointed, all judges and officials in the United States, under Article III, Section 1, "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour", and must defend, enforce, and uphold its provisions to the fullest extent of their abilities. If judges, or other officials, abuse their power or positions illegally and unconstitutionally, they are without authority to hold their offices, as prescribed by the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3.

2. A renunciation of their oaths of office and failure to properly perform their duties and responsibilities to the People and defend, enforce, and uphold allegiance to the Constitution and Laws of the United States is clearly a resignation of their offices by judges and justices under the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, orelector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitutionof the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid and comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

3. 28 U.S.C. § 453. - Oaths of justices and judges

"Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: ''I, _ _ _ _ _ _, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _ _ _ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.'

4. The oath’s importance and significance to all public servants in the performance of their duties is of great concern to United States Citizens. Those bureaucrats who devalue the importance of their oaths and protections secured by the Constitution, for each and every American, must suffer its adverse effects upon themselves, no matter how high their stature in our bureaucracy or society, and that those consequences are also provided for in the Constitution and in the Fourteenth Amendment. Many honorable public servants die for it, and others ignore it to oppress the people.

5. Refusing and failing in their performance by deliberate, serious violation of their oaths, they are renouncing their citizenship and their allegiance to the United States itself. Yet, we still have officials and public servants here who treat the Constitution as a dowdy and petty document, and who are deliberately violating their oaths without qualm and without accountability.

F. There cannot be multiple court systems in competition with those legitimate ones created, ordained and established by the Constitution for the United States of America, unless only to do something there that cannot legally be done in the lawful tribunals.

"The powers of the general Government are made up of concessions from the several states-whatever is not expressly given to the former, the latter expressly reserve. The judicial power of the United States is a constituent part of those concessions,-that power is to be exercised by Courts organized for the purpose, and brought into existence by an effort of the legislative power of the Union. Of all the Courts which the United States may, under their general powers, constitute, one only, the Supreme Court, possesses jurisdiction derived immediately from the constitution, and of which the legislative power cannot deprive it. All other Courts created by the general Government possess no jurisdiction but what is given them by the power that creates them, and can be vested with none but what the power ceded to the general Government will authorize them to confer." UNITED STATES v. HUDSON, 11 U.S. 32 (1812)

"Will these powerful considerations avail the plaintiff in error? We think they will. He was seized, and forcibly carried away, while under guardianship of treaties guarantying the country in which he resided, and taking it under the protection of the United States. He was seized while performing, under the sanction of the chief magistrate of the union, those duties which the humane policy adopted by congress had recommended. He was apprehended, tried, and condemned, under colour of a law which has been shown to the repugnant to the constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. Had a judgment, liable to the same objections, been rendered for property, none would question the jurisdiction of this court. It cannot be less clear when the judgment affects personal liberty, and inflicts disgraceful punishment, if punishment could disgrace when inflicted on innocence. The plaintiff in error is not less interested in the operation of this unconstitutional law than if it affected his property. He is not less entitled to the protection of the constitution, laws, and treaties of his country. This point has been elaborately argued and, after deliberate consideration, decided, in the case of Cohens v. The Commonwealth of Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. It is the opinion of this court that the judgment of the superior court for the county of Gwinnett, in the state of Georgia, condemning Samuel A. Worcester to hard labour, in the penitentiary of the state of Georgia, for four years, was pronounced by that court under colour of a law which is void, as being repugnant to the constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States, and ought, therefore, to be reversed and annulled." WORCESTER v. STATE OF GA., 31 U.S. 515 (1832)

G. The closure of the American judicial system is obviously a sub-conscious,

self-fulfilled augury of judges acting in bad faith and through warped behavior.

1. The federal judiciary does not have the authority or power to assist in the dissolution of any of the states, courts, or of the United States and its Constitution. By their own nonfeasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance, they have illustrated their desires to close the courts to American Citizens and to deny access to justice by improperly protecting selected individuals, interests, and parties.

2. Consequently, they have purposely achieved their objective, closed the courts, and are operating illegally and unconstitutionally. The People, through the U.S. Supreme Court, being fully aware and informed of their intentions, must now respond to these overt motivations and threats to the principles of the United States, and complete the task of removing them from office under the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3.

"What shall be the supreme law of the land...only laws that are made in pursuance of the constitution have that rank...All laws repugnant to the Constitution are void of law." - Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 at Sec. 180, (1803)

"When a legislature undertakes to proscribe the exercise of a citizen's constitutional rights it acts lawlessly and the citizen can take matters into his own hands and proceed on the basis that such a law is no law at all."
- Justice William O. Douglas
"The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people."

- Justice William O. Douglas

"The mere necessity of uniformity in the interpretation of the national laws, decides the question. Thirteen independent courts of final jurisdiction over the same causes, arising upon the same laws, is a hydra in government, from which nothing but contradiction and confusion can proceed.- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 80

at page 299:
"Hence, public offices have always been taken away from the incumbents, by the sovereign act of the people, without consulting the incumbents, without informing them, without hearing them in their defence, and yet [71 U.S. 277, 299] nobody ever supposed this to be a punishment of the incumbents. It is not a punishment, because it deprives them of no property whatever. The public, it is true, had given them a trust, but the public had created that trust for their own purposes, and the public can resume it whenever necessity or convenience require it. And the public alone can judge of that necessity or convenience."

H. Iraqis apparently can freely travel in their country, but law-abiding

American Citizens can be killed for exercising that federal right?

In the new, provisional Constitution for Iraq, citizens apparently have the right totravel freely, but in the United States, an independent federal prosecutor fighting corruption and racketeering can continue for years being threatened to be killed by corrupt tyrants and their minions if he lawfully attempts to exercise that right to buy groceries or necessities...with the support of fraudulent judges corruptly and unlawfully denying access to the courts and justice for decades.


(D) Each Iraqi has the right of free movement in all parts of
Iraq and the right to travel abroad and return freely.

I. Appellant, and every American Citizen, clearly has the right to resist any

unlawful or unconstitutional actions or interference of any officials anywhere in the United States, in the exercise of his Constitutional and lawful rights, to the point of deadly force if necessary.

"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary." Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise
was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad
Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: "Where the officer is killed
in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted
arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the
transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what
it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case
might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might
show that no offense had been committed."

J. Without the informed consent of the People, the state of North Dakota nor the courts of the United States may continue to operate fraudulently and illegally.

1. In this case, it is quite obvious that with all the courts and law enforcement agencies presently operating illegally and unconstitutionally, without proper control or supervision, there can be no lawful interference by any law enforcement official or agent against anyone within the United States, without the prior consent of the Congress or the People. This clearly jeopardizes Nowik’s life and liberties, and that of every United States Citizen, when there is no lawful or Constitutional jurisdiction over state or federal cases.

2. American Citizens cannot and will not tolerate a deliberately unreachable and unresponsive bureaucracy, or agents and instrumentalities operating without proper Constitutional authority, when their lives are being threatened and imperiled by criminals or totalitarian officials and their unlawful activities and practices to defraud the public of honest services..

3. It should also be obvious to the Honorable Justices of this Court that Appellant has the right to pursue these criminals and corrupt officials and obtain justice in whatever way possible, if there is no legitimate state or federal law enforcement and American courts are no longer open and available to the People under the laws and Constitution of the United States.

4. This egregious case requires an honorable In Absentia Federal Jury Trial on all the issues of this egregious case, as Appellant has been demanding all these years.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can be held to the principles of its Constitution."

- Thomas Jefferson

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country."

- Theodore Roosevelt

5. There cannot be three governments here, one secret and conspiratorial, another

fraudulently distributed to the public by the media, and a third that people fight and die

for. Citizens have the right to know and decide if they want to be citizens of the United

States of America and the Constitution, or whether they want to associate with and pay

tribute and support to a state or federal government run by tyrants.

Ayn Rand said this in Atlas Shrugged about controlling people:

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any

government has is the power to crack down on criminals."

6. Thereby, no Federal Judges, public officials, or public servants have the

authority or right to maintenance of illegal control of their offices or institutions and

may be removed by the sovereign acts of the people at any time whatsoever.

Appellant must be immediately permitted to exercise his natural and constitutional rights, to his federal right to travel, to provide for his necessities and survival, to continue his legal affairs, and to alter or reform the government for the public good, with or without state government approval.


The Honorable Justices of this U.S. Supreme Court should conclude that they will not

permit the continuation of malignant judicial misconduct, and assure the People of the

United States that there will be a properly functioning Constitutional judiciary to be relied

upon in the event of emergencies and crisis in the state of North Dakota and the United


There must be a reliable and responsible federal justice system to be accessed to protect

U.S. Citizens' interests against criminals or corrupt public servants, with jurisdiction over

cases arising under the laws and Constitution of the United States. The right to speedy

redress of grievances and the right to Due Process and Equal Protection of the laws must

be preserved and still be a possible and viable alternative to frontier justice.

This Court should provide Appellant and the Citizens of North Dakota immediate

access to law and order, liberty, and justice, by keeping the American judicial system open

to the public.

Thereby, Petitioner demands:

1. That the U.S. Supreme Court immediately overturn the unconstitutional decisions of the lower courts and restore jurisdiction over the laws and Constitution of the United States, over all inhabitants, institutions, and federal case, and provide proper access to the courts for the People to prosecute civilly and criminally all human and civil rights offenses.

2. That the United States Supreme Court order the IMMEDIATE suspension, closure, investigation, reorganization, and reestablishment of all courts within the United States, so they and their officials or employees may be publicly investigated, evaluated, qualified, and certified as competent and capable of serving as Constitutional courts, of, by, and for the People, by independent, local Citizen Review Boards or Committees, before they are authorized to return to properly perform their duties and responsibilities, in accordance and compliance with the laws and Constitution of the United States, to ensure the integrity, ethics, honesty, and responsibility of the American judicial system for the public good.

3 That the U.S. Supreme Court provide absolute immunities and privileges to all United States Citizens, in any open court within the United States, against any actions, prosecutions, or proceedings by state or federal agents, agencies, branches, instrumentalities, or sub-divisions who are interfering with or obstructing justice on any valid official misconduct complaint, grievance, investigation, or prosecution.

4. That Nowik be immediately provided his freedom from this outrageous, unlawful unconscionable, and unconstitutional official persecution and oppression, and quick and speedy justice by a civil In Absentia federal jury trial of law-abiding American Citizens, against each and every one of the multiple defendants in this case, officially and individually, for the numerous civil, constitutional, and criminal violations, in an honorable, unbiased, federal court, pursuant to Rule 38, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution, which he has properly demanded in all his court pleadings and has been unconstitutionally and illegally denied.

5. That Petitioner, and every United States Citizen, be guaranteed the right to take any and all necessary measures or precautions to protect themselves, families, friends, and properties from criminal or official oppression, without reservation, regulation, or tribute to any governmental entity, as provided for by the Second Amendment.

6. That the U.S. Supreme Court order that no state or federal instrumentality may assess or collect any taxation, whatsoever, without proper representation for each and every American Citizen.

7. That the U.S. Supreme Court order the United States Justice Department to immediately begin to uphold the laws of this country and fully investigate and criminally prosecute all flagitious episodes of official corruption, and each valid complaint of other Citizens.

8. That the U.S. Supreme Court order the return of Nowik’s civil, human, and Constitutional rights, complete vindication, his property and reputation, including his illegally confiscated driver’s license, and Default Judgment for full equitable compensatory and punitive damages for services, the recovery of treble damages for racketeering, as outlined in his court petitions, in the amount of $4,431,000,000.00 for the past decade of abominable persecution and oppression, and deprivation of his rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, through March 31, 2004, plus reasonable legal costs.

9. That the U.S. Supreme Court order all state and federal agencies and the Congress of the United States to take immediate and appropriate action to correct the unlawful effects of their previous improper and unconstitutional actions or inactions, to restore the civil and constitutional rights of American Citizens who have been neglected, persecuted, or oppressed by any of their agents and instrumentalities, and/or are being held political prisoners as a direct or indirect result of those human rights violations.

10. That the U.S. Supreme Court order the Congress of the United States to take immediate and appropriate action to cease funding and supporting, in any way, the illegal and unconstitutional activities of the state of North Dakota, its Department of Transportation, Stark County, and the city of Dickinson, or of any other state, through federal grants, tax subsidies, monies, or assistance of any kind or nature, in their law enforcement, mental health, judicial, or legal agencies, or in any other branches or departments which engaged in the discriminatory or unconstitutional administration of justice, or services, in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Constitution, and continue to do so without proper authority or resolution.

11. That, in the event of any denial of this Petition for Writ of Certiorari, the U.S. Supreme Court Justices all individually endorse and sign any such order to that effect at this late date, to certify their ratification of the decisions of the lower courts and the renunciation of jurisdiction over cases arising under the Laws and Constitution of the United States.

12. That the U.S. Supreme Court implement or meet the foregoing measures, steps, and demands within the next month due to its urgency, in the name of justice, democracy, and the American People.

After ten years of this despicable and slanderous persecution and oppression, Nowik is also releasing this PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI to the public through the news media, so that the people of North Dakota and the United States may finally know the truth about this case, rather than only have the false propaganda and outright lies previously issued to the press by the ignominious government defendants in this matter. The American people have the indisputable right to know and be informed about what many of their corrupt elected government officials and employees are doing to them.

Therefore, the Honorable Justices of this Supreme Court should decide if the United States is still to exist, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers. Whether it and the federal courts will continue to represent the laws and Constitution and hold jurisdiction over all Citizens, institutions, organizations, and inhabitants of the United States? And if it intends to culminate this murderous genocidal conspiracy which began in 1994?

WHEREFORE, this Petition For Writ of Certiorari should be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

Date: April_2_, 2004


Michael H. Nowik,

Petitioner Pro Se,

Independent Federal Prosecutor,

Private Attorney General of the United States