A COUPLE OF RECENT SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RULINGS THAT AFFECT VIRGINIA VICTIMS OF CRIME, VIRGINIA PRISONERS FAMILIES AND FRIENDS By William Thorpe

Pictures are taken from the internet and are used for illustrative purposes only

The first case ELLINBURG v. UNITED STATES 607 U.S.163 (2026), was a January 2026 unanimous decision by the Court with Clarence Thomas writing a separate concurrence. The case deals with Victims Restitution, specifically THE MANDATORY VICTIMS RESTITUTION Act of 1996 and whether as it relates to the law, if its criminal punishment and if it can be applied retroactively or EX POST FACTO. The reason it made it to the Supreme Court of The United States is there was confusion over what is considered criminal, civil actions and retroactivity or what the Constitution of United States proscribes or prohibits as EX POST FACTO application or use of a law. Clarence Thomas in his concurrence outlined the history, however much of anything Clarence Thomas says has to be considered under the ulterior purpose motive and duplicity of serving one master that only has the singular objective of denying and depriving individual agency and imposing subservience and neo-feudalism and serfdom, so analysis from Thomas is perpetually suspect. Now since the decision of ELLINBURG, The Commonwealth of Virginia nor its Federal District, the Fourth Circuit have applied it, but Federal Circuits of the 2,7,8,9,11 the D.C. Circuit and the State of Tennessee have. The Commonwealth of Virginia has its own restitution or victim compensation law at, VIRGINIA CODE TITLE 19.2-368.1 [COMPENSATING VICTIM OF CRIME] and it has been developed in cases, UNITED STATES v. ROBERTSON 638 F.Supp.1202 (where it defined that additional cost are form of punishment) also in COMMONWEALTH v. PUCKETT 302 VA.455 (2023) VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT went into the formulation of restitution, then in a VIRGINIA WORKERS COMP. CLAIM at 2017 VA.WRK.COMP.LEXIS 455 IN RE:BARBARA LEE PETITT FOR BENEFITS UNDER THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION FUND [and it delves into Virginia's construction of "victim" for purposes of the law].People let me say this, yes all of this is Law and to state it simply its always up to the supremacy of the political moment meaning what The People understand, will tolerate and will put up with so just because we have such and such a ruling doesn't mean no more than that's what the People, their understanding or the politics is for that moment, because who would have thought that human beings would determine then accept the logic and its ruling that some of us are outside of law, which is exactly what the Supreme Court of the United States said a few years back that a President of the United States is outside of law, notwithstanding the fact that opposition to and a rejection of the presumption that any human is outside of law was the animating and creative force of the Nation. The point is as THE PEOPLE WE MUST TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITIES UNDERSTAND THE THINKING AND LOGIC THAT DEFINES OUR EXISTENCE AND OUR SELF REALIZATION, IF WE ARE ACTUALLY DETERMINED ON REALIZING OUR HUMANNESS ON OUR OWN TERMS. The second case is clear forward, reactionary justices on the Supreme Court of the United States are willing to deprive and deny Prisoners unable and incapable of paying the $350 filling fee to commence suit in federal court from splitting it. The case JOHNSON v. HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON 224 L.Ed.2d 179 was denied Certiorari meaning the lower courts ruling stands.

By William Thorpe

I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982