The Jurisprudence of Floydism, part 1

by Douglas Mercer

THE IDEOLOGY OF George Floyd has affected everything. School names have had to change because of it; institutions have radically reoriented themselves because of it; billions of dollars have flowed from corporations because of it; the biggest state in the union is handing out “reparations” because of it; and soon because of it being Black (or even Brown or Yellow or Red or anything but White) will be a silver bullet because of it, and will get the perpetrator off in most any crime scenario. We’re not quite there yet, but we will be soon enough, and the state of Washington is le ading the way: The Supreme Court there has said that if you are Black, that’s a factor that can be taken in to account to set you free.

This is nothing short of a license to kill. For all intents and purposes, they might as well be issuing them.

They say that blackness will be a mitigating factor — but everyone knows it’s an aggravating factor, which is all the difference in the world. But the way it will play out, mitigating will be the least of it — it will set them loose scot free. And in the midst of this crime spree called the Black Lives Matter movement, you know where this is heading: It will make the Ferguson Effect and the Floyd Effect look like child’s play. You see, we now have a state Supreme Court officially declare that if you are Black there will be a presumption that the police did wrong; the scales of justice, far from being blind, will be weighted down in the wrong direction with George Floyd’s crack stash and couple of Jonathan Greenblatt’s gold bars. In this noxious environment, what police officer will want to take the proactive lead to arrest a Congoid? Hell, if he’s not careful, he’ll be made a pariah, jailed for decades, and end up in a “Holocaust” museum as exhibit A.

It’s happened before.

No, better to retire to that donut shop and let the erectus maul and murder and rape — what’s a cop to do when the Negro is the idol of our Jew-rotted society?

Hell, a lot of the cops themselves worship the Negro.

The court in question is the Great Replacement in action. Among the noxious nine there is only one White male and he’s a dyed-in-the-wool-communist. The others are a motley array of race scum and sexual deviants, so it’s not surprising that they put the ideology of Floydism into effect — announcing, in effect, that henceforth it’s open season on White people.

This is the rainbow court of the rainbow future. And it’s only the beginning.

* * *

So now White people are fair game; we will have no recourse to the law (the law which we created); police, lawyers, judges will all be in a great cabal against us. A White person touches one hair on a wooly head and the book will be thrown at them; a Black does anything to a White person and the animal will waltz away free as a bird.

This is not a hypothetical threat. This is real. It is happening now.

The Washington State Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person’s race, and law enforcement’s long history of discrimination against people of color, should be taken into account when determining the legality of police seizures.

The reporter didn’t get it right. The court ruled that it must be taken in to account.

The court also clarified state law to say police have seized a person if an objective observer would conclude that the person was not free to leave or refuse a request. But, the court wrote, that objective observer must be aware that discrimination and biases have resulted in disproportionate police contacts, investigative seizures, and uses of force against Black, Indigenous, and other people of color.

This case was tied to a fairly arcane matter of what constitutes the “seizure” of a person. But out of the gobbledygook of case law they plucked a black dagger and plunged it straight into the heart of what is left of White America. Blacks “must” now be a special class of citizens, “must” be above the law, and the law “must” be a sledgehammer against Whites.

This is formalizing what has been the case for a long time now.

Up will be down and down will be up in this Orwell Meets Alice world. This putative “objective observer” will be as subjective as can be. A Black person, did you say? Send him home. We can’t prosecute him. Were the Black man to be convicted, he’d have a stellar appeal: he’s Black. (And anyone who arrested and prosecuted him, on almost any charge, would be classed as “racist.”) And any appellate court that idolizes Blacks would overturn the conviction on that basis alone.

And they all idolize Blacks — or pretend to as hard as they can.

“Today, we formally recognize what has always been true: In interactions with law enforcement, race and ethnicity matter,” Justice Mary Yu wrote for unanimous court. “Therefore, courts must consider the race and ethnicity of the allegedly seized person as part of the totality of the circumstances when deciding whether there was a seizure.”

Here it is. This is not some crackpot in the “African-American Studies” department at Harvard (though that crackpot influenced it); this is not Rastus and his homies sitting on the filthy stoop; this is not some Communist on WBAI, or a Lawyers Guild defense attorney, or a journalist, or a member of an NGO, or a “human rights” committee at the UN — no, this is the Supreme Court of one of the fifty states.

And they’ve just penned the road map for giving the feral monsters free rein to do what they will with our women and children for all eternity.

Mary Isabel Yu is an American jurist of the Washington Supreme Court. She is the state’s first openly gay, Asian, and Latina Justice. Yu was born in Illinois to a Chinese father and a Mexican mother.

Were this hack a cripple, she’d have checked all the boxes. But as it is she’s just a mental cripple. From the looks of her, she appears to be a very short man whose interactions with us, in better days, would have been mostly restricted to saying “no tickie, no raundry.”

These are the kinds of people we have allowed to rule over us. These are the kinds of people we have allowed to sign our death warrant.

This unspeakable creature is making law in the land of Ben Franklin. Think about that.

The Washington state Supreme Court may be the most diverse high court in the country. Among the nine justices there is only one white man. There are seven women, four people of color, three Jewish justices, two lesbians, the court’s first Indigenous justice, and a Black immigrant from Trinidad and Tobago.

This is not Edward Coke’s English Common Law. In fact, there is nothing English about it. They’ve taken a glorious body of law and twisted it beyond recognition. They’ve taken law created by White men, put their wicked dark stamp on it, and mobilized it a weapon against its creators.

Thanks, Jews.

* * *

Imagine having a case precedent based on someone named “Palla Sum.” Not Bill Nelson or Albert Smith, mind you — no, Palla Sum. And this deadbeat race scum has “rights.” And soon we’ll have none.

You can bank on that.

The case concerns Palla Sum, a person of color, who was sleeping in his car in Tacoma one morning in April 2019 when police came upon him. An officer ran his plates and determined the car was not stolen. The officer knocked on the window, asked Sum questions, and asked him for identification.

We used to be able to roust these deadbeats, no problem. A man sleeping in car is inherently suspicious and getting him “to move along” used to be what law enforcement did in the circs. But now a man sleeping in his car is in his castle — if he’s a “person of color.” Can’t touch him. The irony being that a White man in his home is not considered to be in his castle — he’s fair game for the police.

Sum gave a false name and the officer went back to his cruiser to check records. Sum then drove off, crashed into a front lawn and was caught as he attempted to run away.

So much for Sum. Yet this nonentity is destined to go down in the history books as the man on whose case the judges crossed the Dark Rubicon.

Sum was subsequently charged with making a false statement, attempting to flee police and unlawful possession of a firearm, after a gun was found in his car.

Told you he was suspicious. A drifter with a gun tries to flee police and immediately crashes into someone’s lawn. Typical race scum and a typical menace. Do they really want to build landmark case law on trash like this? Yes they do, yes indeed they do.

But Sum argued his statements to police should be inadmissible, because he was unlawfully seized by police after the officer asked for his identification and said there had been car thefts in the area.

The National Socialists reoriented German criminal law so that it protected society from criminals; the current American way, which began in the 1960s, is to protect criminals from society.

How long would it have taken the Germans back then to dispose of garbage like Palla Sum? It’s the question that answers itself.

“A reasonable person in Sum’s position would not have felt free to ignore the officer,” Sum’s lawyers wrote. They urged the court to adopt a new standard for what constitutes an illegal seizure. The hypothetical reasonable person “should be familiar with patterns of policing in America and the risks a person of color takes in walking away from or disregarding police interaction.”

Read that paragraph again. It is the linchpin of their “reasoning.” It is the fulcrum of the fairy dust they are about to throw in your eyes. The vague phrase “patterns of policing” refers to the fact that the police have more contact (per capita) with “people of color” than they do with us. It’s also true that game wardens have more contact with poachers than they do with philosophers. The (intentionally) missing piece here is that “people of color” have an astronomically higher rate of committing crimes than do White people. And then, being the liars that they are, they’ll turn the fact that the erecti are criminally prone around to make them look like victims and give them even more leeway to commit more crimes.

And so the circle closes, and the noose tightens. It’s not sleight of hand. It’s an egregious carnival of deceit meant to cow the White man into subservience.

So now a “reasonable person” is supposed to conclude that the Palla Sums of the world are being picked on by the police — today’s police, mind you — because they’re not White. A reasonable eight year old could see through it. But the justices of the highest court of Washington state are so blinkered by the brainwashing they can’t see through it, or they are in on the scam and do it intentionally.

And once our would-be executioners have slipped this illegitimate logic under the front door of the courthouse, they have their platform to seize the rest of your freedom and soon your life. Now it’s the issue of “seizures” — soon it will be the entire panoply of the law. Blacks and other pieces of color will be more than a protected class: They will be the locked and loaded and licensed shock troops in the war of White genocide.

No policeman will arrest them; no court will convict them.

Here’s a Black who robs — let him go. Here’s a Black who rapes — let him go. Here’s a Black who murders — let him go.

The future is a Black raping your daughters with impunity forever. And walking away scot free forever.

Sum petitioned to the Supreme Court, arguing the law should consider the effect of race during police contacts. So a question for the Supreme Court was this: Are race and ethnicity factors in those situations? The justices said yes.

Oh yes, they did. And the way the law works is that future case law is based on precedents, and they now have the precedent of precedents. A Black superpredator can be let off — because he’s Black. They’ll couch it in more complex and obscure language than that, but that’s what it will mean.

The State of Washington argued that Sum didn’t provide any evidence that Pierce County officers were more likely to discriminate or be violent against Asian or Pacific Islander people, or that Rickerson was influenced by Sum’s race.

Ah, these people are already behind the time. No proof of actual “racism” will ever need be adduced from this day forward. Being Black (or anything but White) means that they were abused. Now the fall reaches terminal velocity.

* * *

It’s the meeting that will go down in lore. Just a couple of traitors meeting in a parking lot, and damned if they weren’t outraged at some “racism”! George Floyd had just met his inevitable reward and the world was going on a lunatic bender — and these two judges happened upon each other, and by god they were going to do something about it. This was high drama indeed: the famous meeting, the tale that will be told around trash fires in decaying and decrepit neighborhoods in the future as the tellers try to cook their scrounged food and keep the rats away.

Two years ago, as protests spurred by the murder of George Floyd gripped the nation, two Washington state Supreme Court justices bumped into each other in the parking lot.

Fateful serendipity, that. The images of poor George hopped up on drugs and resisting arrest was more than these two stooges could stand. The White man had to fall!

“All of us who work in the system felt a sense of heaviness about what was going on,” Yu recalled. Stephens had been thinking the court should say something. They talked about it in the parking lot. It was very casual. “There was a level of spontaneity to it,” Yu said. “Everybody was feeling something; we can’t just sit here and be silent.”

You can’t be silent in the face of the Minneapolis police’s massive “White racism,” can you? And so the two lackeys penned a letter, a letter which (by rights) ought to be grounds for appeal for any White man appearing in any court in the state. Judges are not supposed to opine on politics. If they do, inevitably they will appear biased. But this was Our Savior Floyd, saint of saints, the holy man of holy men, the canonized of the canonized, and little rules like custom and propriety could be thrown out the window. Hell, White CEOs were shining Negro shoes that fateful summer — do you think anyone (anyone “of importance,” that is) is going to question a strongly-worded letter from some state Supreme Court justices championing “anti-racism”?

Hell no, they’re not!

Yu went home, wrote a draft and emailed it to her colleagues. They hashed out some edits over Zoom. The end result was published on June 4 2020 and was signed by all nine members of the Supreme Court.

That is, the fags, the sapphic sisters, the Yellow invaders, the Negroes, the Toltecs, and the lone White male (a communist).

Believe it or not, the letter appeared on Washington State Supreme Court letterhead. This was no matter of personal opinion. This was anti-White ex cathedra.

In this letter, the nefarious nine wrote that the “devaluation and degradation of black lives is no recent event, it is persistent systematic injustice since country’s founding.”

What this has to do with law, or the law with it, remains unknown. What they were doing had nothing to do with law, but rather with lying and laying down a predicate for violating the law.

The letter, of course, mentioned Jim Crow (dead for nearly a century), “racialized policing,” and then declares that they (they!) must “use justice” to “end racism.”

And here we thought judges were about justice. That lady with the blindfold and the scales now has a BLM hat on backwards and sports a “Black power” raised fist. All nine should have immediately been impeached and debarred — and put on trial.

The state Supreme Court, which normally only answers the legal questions presented to it, went out of its way to call on lawyers, judges, and courts across the state to do more to address longstanding institutional racism.

Normally? How quaint! This is not your father’s Supreme Court; these mixed-race morons with the weird sexuality don’t kowtow to the past, no sir. The past was “racist,” after all. They don’t act as a normal court just calling balls and strikes; they’ve put on a uniform and are on the field tackling the players from one of the teams.

The White team, of course.

George Floyd died, don’t you recall? Why, he couldn’t breathe! Whitey have to go down.

“As judges, we must recognize the role we have played in devaluing black lives,” the justices wrote. “The legal community must recognize that we all bear responsibility for this on-going injustice, and that we are capable of taking steps to address it, if only we have the courage and the will.”

That sounds like a call to arms. This is the letter which paves the way for a carnival of anti-Whiteness.

“In the two years since their letter, the court has made efforts large and small, symbolic and concrete, trying to move toward a more just legal system. The court has overturned decades-old hateful precedents, with little public notice. It has thrown out laws, vacating tens of thousands of criminal convictions. It has ordered pay raises to thousands of immigrant farmworkers. In many cases, it has moved faster than both the state Legislature and the nation in barring practices that it considered unjust or racially discriminatory.”

My goodness, these nasty nine are an “anti-racist” wrecking crew that can decree or “throw out” anything; all the old limits on their power were set by dead White men anyway. They weren’t just talking when they said the law was meaningless, the only thing that still holds meaning is White evil. They clear the decks of any sensible law that was intended to keep Whites safe; they’ll clear all those Blacks out of death row… It be Juneteenth all ober again, I’s telling you. A Black murders his White “girlfriend” — White bitch had it coming! A Black ransacks your house — Whitey be guilty! A lease agreement says no criminals in an apartment complex? It’s Jim Crow all over again! This crew of mixed-race sexual deviants won’t be done until every White man is dead and the last Haka dance is done on the last grave.

And the court has seen lawyers cite its own letter back to it in legal briefs, arguing for the court to go further in heeding its own clarion call.

This is a sick dynamic, a vicious circle. These judges and lawyers will volley their pompous words back and forth in a self-reinforcing anti-White positive feedback loop which will culminate in White genocide without end. Until we put a stop to it.

* * *

The intellectual backdrop to this “movement” does not exist. It seems to consist of them noticing that a lot of Blacks are in handcuffs and in jail cells. They wrongly assume the races are equal, so they posit that something must be amiss. The key thing they overlook (intentionally or not) is that our beloved pieces of color are very often unbridled savages who have no business in a White country, and this lack of ability to govern their actions leads them to kill, maim, and rob at unprecedented rates. If it’s more complicated than that, I’ll eat my hat.

A report from Washington’s three law schools issued last fall, found racial disparities at every level of the criminal legal system, from who gets stopped and searched by police, to who is arrested and convicted, to the length of sentences that are handed out.

These are some real sleuths. They looks at the criminal justice system and see Blacks and Browns everywhere. End of analysis! Has to be racism. Because not in ten million years can they admit the stark fact that the lower races simply commit more crimes. No, if that little factoid got out into the public sphere, all Hell would break loose for them. And their lie, and an entire ideology based on that lie, would crumble to bits before their eyes. Why, even to think that Blacks commit more crime is “racist” — and soon that will be a crime in itself.

A Black person in Washington is still 4.7 times more likely to be incarcerated than a white person.

A fact like this should cause the Black community to hang its collective head in shame and work assiduously to rectify the problem. Instead of taking responsibility for their own feral criminality (which would be costly and painful), they point the finger.

Now they have high court judges to back them up.

To be continued.

* * *

Source: Author