Title
Laywers Committee For 9/11 Inquiry vs. FBI and the United States Department of Justice
State or Country
District of Columbia
Judges
Merrick Garland
Defendant
Christopher A. Wray, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation, Merrick Garland Attorney General of the United States and the Department of Justice of the United States
Plaintiff Attorney
Mick G. Harrison, Esq. 520 S. Walnut Street, #1147
Bloomington, IN 47402
Document Links 1 (Scribd et. al)
https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/0001-Lawyers-Committee-Supreme-Court-Petition-for-Cert-with-Appendix.pdf
Document Link 2
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca2/21-1338
Document Link 3
https://judicialmisconduct.us/sites/default/files/2019-09/LC911Inq%3DExecSummary.pdf
Document Link 4
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-caDC-20-05051
Document Link 5
https://www.law360.com/cases/5d7907060ccc1907dfb263f5
Comments
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Depart from the Accepted and Usual Course of Judicial Proceedings to Such
an Extent as to Call for an Exercise of this Court's Supervisory Power When
the Court of Appeals Failed to Provide a Remedy or a Disclosure Regarding
an Apparent Violation of the Federal Judicial Disqualification Statute
Regarding a Judge Who Was a Member of an Appeals Panel in a Case
where the Department of Justice was a Defendant While that Judge Was a
Candidate Under Consideration for the Nomination to be Attorney General
of the United States?
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Err in Deciding the Proper Role of Legislative History in Determining
Congressional Intent in a Manner that Conflicts with Decisions of the
Supreme Court on this Important Question When the District Court
Concluded that an Appropriations Act, which Provided Substantial Funding
for the FBI to Conduct an Independent Assessment of Evidence Related to
the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001, Did Not Require the FBI to
Report or Disclose Any Information Resulting from this Assessment to
Anyone, Including to Congress, Notwithstanding Unambiguous and
Authoritative Legislative History to the Contrary?
Did the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Err in Interpreting the Requirements for Article III Standing in a Manner
that Is in Conflict with Decisions of the Supreme Court on this Important
Question When It Denied Standing to a Father Who Lost His Son in the 9/11
Attacks, and to Two Non-Profit Organizations Asserting Informational and
Organizational Standing, the Missions of which Are Focused on 9/11
Transparency and Government Accountability?
LIST OF PARTIES
Petitioners, who were Plaintiffs-Appellants below, are:
Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc.; Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and
Robert McILvaine.
The Defendants-Appellees are Christopher A. Wray, Director, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States,
and the United States Department of Justice.