On February 27, 2025, I—Manuel P. Asensio, Chairman of the St. Johns Republican Presidential Executive Committee—came before Florida Supreme Court Justices Renatha Francis and John Couriel, and former Justice Alan Lawson at the Federalist Society’s “Judicial Philosophy” event in Jacksonville, Florida, and delivered the following public challenge:

​

“Will you debate the Florida Supreme Court’s use of Per Curiam Affirmation (PCA)—a practice that denies legal reasoning, suppresses public accountability, and serves as a tool to protect entrenched judicial and political corruption in our state?”

 

All three declined. Their silence answered the question.

 

If President Donald J. Trump has given America one undeniable gift, it is this: He has exposed the corruption of our federal courts, and more importantly, the lawyers and judges who have manipulated the Constitution to consolidate their own unchecked power. These individuals—led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. not as judge but as an executive at the US Judicial Conference—have used the judiciary not to protect liberty, but to shield themselves from accountability.

​

It is time to stop pretending that Roberts is an impartial umpire calling balls and strikes. He is not. He is the presiding officer of the U.S. Judicial Conference, where he exercises executive power over the administration of the entire federal judiciary. He appoints the chairs of every rules committee, including the Judicial Conduct Committee, and he has used that power to bury judicial complaints—including mine—while fabricating a national family policy under the Domestic Relations Exception (DRE) that evades constitutional scrutiny.

​

In Mach 2025, Roberts threaten President Trump with a statement steeped in fiction, invoking “200 years of tradition” to declare that impeachment was inappropriate for judges. He did this to protect Judge James Boasberg, another Judicial Conference policymaker and former FISA court presiding judge, who had just halted deportations of Venezuelan gang members under an oral order and a series of 15 so called "minute" orders he entered machine gun fashion the day after the case was filed.

​

This followed the warning Roberts issued January 2025 when he published his 2024 Annual Report on the State of the Federal Judges. This was not a defense of principle. It was a calculated power move to stir up the media built on the myth of Marbury v. Madison, fabricated in 1803 by John Marshall—the worse of the infamous Midnight Judges. Marshall was simultaneously Secretary of State and Chief Justice. Marshall's ruling enshrined the false doctrine of judicial supremacy, after executing a political fraud with John Adams to pack the federal courts with loyal Federalist judges.

​

But the American people rejected that ideology. Thomas Jefferson dismantled Adams’s scheme, removed Marshall’s judges, and sent the Chief Justice into the countryside to ride the circuits. Something Marshall detested. Jefferson did not protest Marbury—he ignored it. He defeated the Federalists, and with them their vision of a lawyer-controlled Republic.

​

Yet the Federalist vision never died. It was rebranded, passed down through Salmon P. Chase, FDR's court-packing scheme, and the judicial activism of Roe v. Wade. Today, it lives in Roberts, in the Federalist Society’s worship of judicial supremacy, and in the Wall Street Journal's editorial silence, which refuses to report on Roberts’s administrative regime or the corruption it enables.

​

On the very day before the Jacksonville event, the Florida Supreme Court dismissed my appeal in Asensio v. Cammack by a lawless Per Curiam Affirmation, which is a meaningless order other than as a marker of judicial corruption. This was not coincidental. My appeal challenged a case that protects not just Florida corruption—but the secret fabrication of national family policy within the U.S. Judicial Conference. It is the only case in America that exposes the closed administrative network of judges and lawyers who craft policy in secret, outside the law, and then block all review.

​

Yet I stand here today as Chairman of the St. Johns Republican Presidential Executive Committee not because I played-along-to-get-along but because I won a landmark free speech case against the Republican National Committee, the Republican Party of Florida, and Governor Ron DeSantis, at the World Intellectual Property Organization in Zürich, Switzerland. That case affirmed that our work exposing judicial corruption is legitimate, protected, and urgent.

​

Now, we demand a real debate.

 

Not on judicial philosophy—but on the executive power hidden inside the federal judiciary, and the role of the media in concealing it. We demand that Roberts be recognized not as an impartial guardian of the Constitution, but as a central figure in the deliberate perversion of it. And we demand that the press, especially institutions like the Wall Street Journal, stop parroting Federalist dogma about Marbury and begin confronting the real story: the judiciary has become an unconstitutional executive regime.

​

Will the Wall Street Journal cover this? Will the Florida Supreme Court answer our challenge? Will the media tell the truth about Roberts’s misuse of the Judicial Conduct Act and the suppression of the DRE scandal? Or will they continue, as they have, to protect corruption with silence?

​

The time for myth is over. The Constitution belongs to the people—not to lawyers, not to judges, and not to those who would use the robes of the judiciary to disguise corrupt  executive power.

 

— Manuel P. Asensio
Chairman, St. Johns Republican Presidential Executive Committee