No. 21-7199

Bryan Matthew Brewer v. Oklahoma Bar Association

Lower Court: Oklahoma
Docketed: 2022-02-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-rules bar-association civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process emolument-violation free-speech judicial-procedure oaths-and-emoluments remedies republican-form-of-government state-government
Key Terms:
Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-04-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Where does the law originate from?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : 7 re ‘ QUEST TONS PRESENTED __ @Xs_ Ameo dead% __@B where does Vhe_law_ociginuke Com? ___B_wotek is 0 "“regublican Sorm of government” under US Const Ack Ui Sect and ok _._tshak ink is_this Gem e& govsnment violated oc cease t exist? _D)“urnese Mere is_a_cight Wuere isa remedy", but chece is tea _cemedy Cac abuses ff We | US. Gonstihation, and are these remedies Mectve? _@ Ts Yu oathjalimabion ceyuiced toy US. Const ArkG C3 binding upon Hasse that swrear ocdbtimit? eek ig an emdument /omolument violation? _D Nave Mur advantages of an emelument and the yunious privilges and immunsbies Hot tome cite an eresamrak contend gpiecament cRicials with meu ape “Tiles oC Nebikby”Z DLs Mare on oGrmetwe duty on Ste toucks, agencies, oMicers, oiucls,andempbyees to quad __against shoe, and/oc_cepork violahons of the U5. Constitubion especially tae that viehte He Qyhts fa person? OB) Ts_there a casual news between the STE OF OKLAVOMMA ond the Olahoma Bar AssocteHon® | __@D_ Dees Ho STMTE OF OeAMoMA we its Bac Astacation to viclsle the Rykte, rilges, and Smetunities _ ok US. exbinens: Heep its judital department? _Q) Po alminighratue cules and_comedies violate Me US. Onstfution as tensolidabion ff poutcs_in _ the. execuhive te defer to erveuatie agencies Cor gomulgation/ legiclahan of agency cules, procedures, qcievances,— Lech, the execukve ttn gets to_erkocse fags Whete cules /potideh/ sith Ma execdives jst | sees, and, snes af ll the enteative decides ond edpudiaks issues aciving Sem Ave cotes, ining Cmslitahimal’by. Dv hore Hare ace claims of Crnetituhonal volabons, is thece_ang bacden, oblizaHio, ac duty of a goleinmenk _ofRdal_te cepork oc comedy Yee situation? _@Poes_this_ Case showany vislbons oC Yee US. Consthation 2 CLs Wu guise systenn accomplishing wal ik endeavors? Kedt de peofle come oat wut alher | eoteektons” than Hey wee bee? GB Ave. geoghe_ceniiy enttltd bo “egal groWBelion 0 Lhe neo (US. Const Amend.l4) and dees | the Cruel prtection” aptly ko ogplication and enforcement of State lew? “Sunediction \ _ Constikutional And Statukoy Trovisions Ll nydved a Statement of Ye fase i) Fact Reaso as Re tacant 0g te Wed ae : 2 Conclusion —C—s—SS——“‘ WO SB! LLL ns or aeemex ee ne (a (aN 1E8 Remonstranc ER 1 Kecard ot cist aat-408 kt ___| S.¢t Order dledining jurisdiction ‘Record ot ching 1 a uate \— Compas : Voskeards Crom this Case FF Satie tome cin S Av Wer s + —|-tatintghed Oral E Ver Wis bate EH ed Habeas Cary LX_| Pentals: o€ Law Lilbcacy | ~ : Onc a Canadian County Stel Requests | }-®_| Letter by “Sason Lowe VAC | _Letlecs From US. Supreme Conk Clerk Rotord ot Achors = CU-QoIEis? VAD | Letters me fe US. Supceme Coot Clerk Record ot Action “A0TS-GH6 | AS her taste form rid shaiing wecertany_pedachon YT Recortot Acie “dott 4s BAF | Rerainal conc ions fy YAS Quien, Chagses Aeon] a BS [iY | Cases TABLE OF AumoRLTIES es | Alleman v7. Booth, GAUS. Fl, Ql How Soe 4 Nema v. Agosto, 540 F.Supp IAQ Andtews ve Heaton, 493 P3d Jono Bounds _v. Smithy 430 us. 711, 97 $C IN4 G4, 3t Bushv_Octeuns Parish School Board, 20 F.Supp ul afremed 81564754 OY Chambers vu Balbimure 4 DRCO., 207 US 1A, 295.04 3Y ___ Dodge v-_ Woolsey, 54 US. 33), 16 How 33) _ _ 234 Foust _v, Pearman, $50 72s 1047 34352 _ Gibner y Oman, 454 F. Sup. YS 2 SP Morgan Chase Bank Wat_hssin vb ldeidge, 273 Pad GQ | Lee vy, State, "342 US. 375, 33 5-Cb Qe 435 Macleay v7 Satter Conch o& Shute oh Cali, Trand Cor Suaditgo tan, FSU Us. 55e, Wh ais A tary Madi SUS. NST, Weanch 131 \ __Mitnnerata_y. Clover Veal Creamery, 10\ $C. 16 3¢ } Mahinal Aron 0 Proadeastors FLL, 180 US Ag, De. 25% 33 Public Seaeize Commission of Utah y, Weltiel Co, S44 US 237, 73 Sth Qe BT Rly as Stake oC Ohin, Soo us. 4a, TaSeh asp Regal vi loehoan, $65 _US.9a5, NSOh QIZ | Rice vi Siows tity democial Pack Cemelate, YF US. 70, 75 9.é+t IY 3G : _ Stute ve Kiindt, “W9aBad Gol, 1497 CK ORNS | Shaul v. Ciky of Barley, SIF (AS. BS, 3 5.0+ 277 Fe Taglianetti v. US., 84 9-¢4 1099 36 | Tugtor v.

Docket Entries

2022-04-04
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2022.
2022-03-15
Waiver of right of respondent Oklahoma Bar Association to respond filed.
2021-07-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 28, 2022)

Attorneys

Bryan Matthew Brewer
Bryan Matthew Brewer — Petitioner
Oklahoma Bar Association
Gina L. HendryxOklahoma Bar Association, Respondent