Dear Supporters of USA Sovereignty, and of Michael New:
16 February 2007
For immediate release.
Government gets another extension in Michael New
case
(Washington) - The Supreme Court has granted the Justice
Department a new extension, that they may be prepared to file their brief
in the case of former Army Specialist Michael New. This is the
government's second request for an extension of time. According to
Daniel New, Project Manager for the Michael New Legal Defense Fund,
"It's easy to see why the government is unprepared. They've
spent eleven years treating this case with contempt and arrogance.
Now, for the first time, they have suddenly realized they are going to
have to produce some serious legal work in order to defend the total
abuse of justice that they have practiced for over a decade."
At issue in this court is the
Standard of Review, along with the
twin issue of
Due Process. Spc. New was court-martialed in
1996, and was denied permission to introduce evidence in his own defence
that would have proven that the United Nations uniform that he was
ordered to wear was unauthorized; that the chain of command under a
Finnish general officer was unconstitutional; and that the deployment
itself to Macedonia was illegal. The Army merely ruled that
"evidence is not a fundamental element of the defence."
That decision was upheld by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and by
the Court of Appeals of the Armed Forces. Not being allowed to
present evidence in his own defence, and acting with orders of the judge,
the panel (jury) found him guilty in fifteen minutes. It has not
been so easy to make him go away since that time.
The brief filed by Michael New's attorneys can be found
here. The
amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief filed by the
National Institute of Military
Justice in support of Michael New may be found
here
.
Should the Supreme Court grant Oral Arguments, after reviewing this case
some time around May of this year, those arguments will probably be set
for the Fall Session.
After Oral Arguments, the Supreme Court can uphold the lower courts'
rulings, or they can remand the issue back to any lower court for an
argument on the merits of the case - something that has not yet happened
in nearly a dozen years.
The ultimate issue is the question of whether U.S. citizend can be forced
to serve in a military capacity under a foreign power, against their
will, having taken an exclusive Oath of Allegiance to support and defend
the Constitution of the United States.
Constitutional attorney, Dr. Herbert W. Titus of Virginia, contends,
"It is nothing less than a bait-and-switch tactic to recruit young
people to serve their country, and then switch them over to serve, and
perhaps die in service to the United Nations." Titus is lead
counsel on the legal team arguing Spc. New's case before the Supreme
Court.
Real Americans don't wear U.N. blue!
www.MikeNew.com/
See what other veterans have to say about Michael New's stand, and if
you're a veteran, add your name:
www.mikenew.com/battalion.html
Veterans organizations have also spoken on this subject:
Offer still stands:
Every person currently in uniform, and as yet to be in
uniform, can be impacted by this ruling. For that reason, all any
active duty or reserve military personnel have to do is go to the website
and request a free copy of the book,
MICHAEL NEW - Mercenary... or
American Soldier?
![[New Book]](http://www.mikenew.com/images/newbk.jpg)
