SC Rule 28 (G) Petition for Expedited Relief

SC Rule 123 is UnConstitutional

The Civil Rights of 997,554 people of Pima County are now being denied per the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Everyone must be granted equal access to justice.

Under Article 6 Sect 3 of the AZ Constitution the Chief Justice has the authority to sign an Administrative Order to correct these violations today, and is compelled by the US Constitution to do so. There exists no provision in AZ or US Constitution granting the Chief Justice discretion to wait a year to grant the people their Civil Rights which are guaranteed to them, today.


A.R.S. Sup.Ct.Rules, Rule 123. Access to the Judicial Records of the State of Arizona

(a) Authority and Scope of Rule. Pursuant to the administrative powers vested in the supreme court by Article VI, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution.......
/
/
/
(1) A court may provide remote electronic access to case records as follows:

(A) Parties, Attorneys, and Arbitrators. Parties, attorneys, and arbitrators may be provided remote electronic access, upon registering, to case records that are not sealed in all case types in which the person is an attorney of record, arbitrator, or named party, including an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or public or private organization. An attorney of record on the staff of a public or private law firm may extend access to any other attorney or person working for or on behalf of that public or private law firm, upon the other attorney's or person's registration. THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT MUST BE OBSERVED. EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE SHALL BE GRANTED TO ALL. NO ONE MAY BE GRANTED SPECIAL PRIVILEGES NOT GRANTED TO EVERYONE.

Martin Lynch
1120 W Broadway Rd. Apt 55
Tempe AZ 85282
602-550-6304

Filed February 1, 2017

Would amend Rule 123(g)(1)(A) to provide the public with the same opportunity for remote electronic access to case records.

Comments due May 22, 2017.

ORDERED: (Petition Re SC Rule 123) =DENIED.