The woodchucks of Upstate New York appellate court have taken up jurisdiction over the confederate flag in defiance of the First Amendment, but in the best interest of a bastard child!!! The old craggy jew Judge Stan L. Pritzker, hailing from the inbreds of Washington County, authored today’s opinion in Christie BB v Isaiah CC which claims the stars & bars is not in the best interest of a child. Oi vey, what the jews will do to rub whitey’s face in the War of Northern Aggression. Pritzker is a jew who oversteps the jurisdictional limits of the appellate court, with the blessing of dyke Justice Elizabeth Garry. Dykes and jews, but no niggers on the appellate bench of the 3rd Department. Note the Jamaican does not count, she ain’t negro.
Judge Pritzker displays his jewness for all to see by overstepping the jurisdiction of the appellate court to claim an object of American history is not to his liking, cloaking his jewish disgust in a twisted best interest argument of a tortured lens of cognitive dissonance. WTF? The intermediate appellate court of NY is limited to the review of final orders of the trial court. In this case, simple custody orders of two people who busted a condom after a night of heavy drinking. An unmarried white woman and a black-ish bachelor fucked each other into family court with a child; a rather common horny drama of upstate New York peasants. The kid is not white or black, but the best interests require that she not have a confederate flag painted on a small rock at the end of the driveway. Here is Pritzker’s drivel on the rock’s graffiti:
“Mother has a small confederate flag painted on a rock near her driveway. Given that the child is of mixed race, it would seem apparent that the presence of the flag is not in the child’s best interests, as the mother must encourage and teach the child to embrace her mixed race identity, rather than thrust her into a world that only makes sense through the tortured lens of cognitive dissonance. Further,and viewed pragmatically, the presence of the confederate flag is a symbol inflaming the already strained relationship between the parties. As such, while recognizing that the First Amendment protects the mother’s right to display the flag (see generally People v Hollman, 68 NY2d 202, 205 [1986]), if it is not removed by June 1, 2021, its continued presence shall constitute a change in circumstances and Family Court shall factor this into any future best interest analysis.”
Pritzker is one of those woodchuck lawyers who got his law degree at night school, being a principal in the local pedo ring. A known child trafficker and minor attracted person, Pritzker exposes his jewness in a laughable manner. According to the 3rd Department, the jews in black robes must invade parent-child bonds to ensure mom teaches a bastard child that the civil war was bad, absent any state interest. That seeing the battle flag of the Northern Virginia Army is “cognitive dissonance”. Pritzker admits that a display of such artwork is protected by the First Amendment, but he orders it removed, because mom fucked a black-ish guy who did not want to have a family, which included the little girl and her mom. So Pritzker ignores the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, while overstepping the limits of review of the appellate court. Un-wed parents are fine, but a rock painted in the image of an American battle flag is bad! Pritizker is just a jew doing jewish things while draped in a black robe that is not bulletproof.
The analysis of the jewish directive to remove the decorated rock reveals that there was no order from the trial court concerning the rock or its artwork. Pritzker lacks jurisdiction to address the rock. Article 6 custody matters do not involve personal property, like rocks. Pritzker acknowledges that the rock display is protected under the First Amendment. Jew Boy Pritzker orders the rock art removed, falsely claiming that it is not in the best interest of a non-white child, ignoring the court’s restrictions on prior restraint. Pritzker cloaks his jewish critical race theory in a high court order veiled as best interest of a slighty tanned child because her father is not white, because of incompetent interpretation of the War Between The States. Pritzker erroneously believes that the North sent troops to free black folks from slavery. Pritzker is quite the educated fool.
What if mom is Hindu, dad is a jew and the maternal grandma painted the rock with a Tibetan good luck symbol … a swastika … to protect her grandchild’s home? What is the appellate court’s best interest analysis in that case? What jewdicial censorship flows down from the terrorist in black robe? Must society beg our jewish overlords to tell parents what to do just because they come before the family bench? What interest did the sovereign present in censoring the art form on the rock? What if two unmarried parents of German descent teach their children that the holocaust was a hoax? That six million jews did not exist in Europe during WW2, that Zyklon B does not flow through shower heads, that there is not even a bone fragment or a tooth at the site of Treblinka II where the jews claim 1.5 million of their own were gassed, burned and buried? Oi vey, would Judge Pritzker and his band of miscreants claim that such truth is not in best interest of children, but merely another tortured lens of cognitive dissonance? The goy must beg our masters to raise the four-legged calves in the name of jewdicial discretion!!! Or maybe just shoot them.
Note that Judges John C. Egan, John P. Colangelo, Sharon A.M. Aarons, and Molly Fitzgerald concurred with Pritzker’s constitutional overreach, absent any interest by the state. Just jews on the state payroll violating oaths of office. A veritable pentagram of evil inciting imminent lawless action. Why would any court entertain a claim of sole custody by nigger dad over a child whose mother he did bed but refused to wed? More irresponsible plantation nigger behavior, but Pritzker is setting mom up to lose the kid over a rock that is owned by the landlord. Niggers and Jews, a dangerous combination. Note that nigger daddy could not afford a lawyer, but had Andrea J. Mooney, a professor at Cornell Law School, represent him on the state’s dime to plead of sole custody against a white mother he refused to marry. Mooney is a dyke and a critical race theory proponent supported by jews like Pritzker. Nothing to do with best interest of children.
So when does Pritzker and his pals get a .50 cal to the head for being constitutional terrorists?
A more formal discussion of the jew’s error can be read here. New York Post article here. Albany Times-Union article here.
Frank Costello sucks cock
ajm31@cornell.edu
Editor’s Note: The inflammatory court drivel over a painted rock obscures the pedo effort in this case. The little girl exhibits all the signs of a sexually abused child, fear of dad, crying, behavioral issues. Dad’s claim for sole custody is a red flag that the pedo ring is using this kid and wants mom cut out of the picture. Pritzker’s order on the rock is just setting mom up to lose the kid on round two. Dryden, NY is out in the sticks, the pedos have limited inventory. Promising dad free meth in return for use of the little girl is a fair deal, Pritzker is in on it. Justices are simply pedophiles in black robes, trafficking children for deviant jewish pleasures. The case has nothing to do with a confederate rock or the First Amendment, just child trafficking.
