No. 24-7216

Dessie Andrews v. Alma Adams, et al.

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-05-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: article-i-powers constitutional-violations ninth-amendment sovereign-rights standing-doctrine tenth-amendment
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Do the People have an unalienable right to sue Congress for systemic constitutional violations without a particularized injury when such actions exceed Congress's power and undermine the republican form of government?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

1. Do the People, as sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, have an unalienable right to sue Congress for systemic constitutional violations —such as replacing constitutional money with valueless fiat currency, lacking intrinsic value, via the Banking Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall), which redirected Federal Reserve profits to Federal Reserve Banks and amended the Federal Reserve Act before its 20-year expiration in 1933, seizing gold in 1933, enacting legal tender laws, and endorsing the Uniform Commercial Code —without a particularized injury, when such actions exceed Congress ’s power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 5, were upheld by a coerced Supreme Court in the Gold Clause Cases (1935), and undermine the republican form of government guaranteed by Article IV, Section 4? 2. Does the Article III standing requirement, as applied by the Fifth Circuit, unconstitutionally bar the People from enforcing their unenumerated rights under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments against Congress ’s imposition of fiat currency and maintenance of a peacetime standing army, contrary to the Declaration ’s mandate that government secure Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness? 3. Are respondents ’ actions and inactions, in their official and individual capacities, reviewable under Article III when they perpetuate an unconstitutional fiat monetary system, lacking intrinsic value, and an unauthorized standing army, causing chaos and eroding the People ’s sovereignty, especially in light of United States v. Lopez (1995), which exposed decades of federal overreach enabled by coerced rulings like the Gold Clause Cases? i

Docket Entries

2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-06-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-06-13
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-06-13
Waiver of right of respondents United States, et al. to respond filed.
2025-02-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 16, 2025)
2025-02-14
Application (24A673) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until February 23, 2025.
2025-01-13
Application (24A673) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until January 24, 2025.
2024-12-28
Application (24A673) to extend further the time from January 24, 2025 to February 23, 2025, submitted to Justice Alito.
2024-12-05
Application (24A673) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 25, 2024 to January 24, 2025, submitted to Justice Alito.

Attorneys

Dessie Andrews
Dessie Maria Andrews — Petitioner
Dessie Maria Andrews — Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
Moez Mansoor KabaHueston Hennigan LLP, Respondent