Sotosecsupcom - (Sotosecsupcom)
1/15/10 , b.32, c.,  m.   n.  p.3

United States District Court
         for  the
District of  Columbia
Robert J. More, ISMA’s Campaign to Make the World Safe For Innocence
Once Again, Every Person God Can Still Justify Not Hating as Third
Party Plaintiff, All Those in Such Group Lacking the Use of Reason as
Next Friend
V                               Case # 09-1487
Mr. L. Gainer - Sergeant at Arms of  the United States Senate, Ms
Nancy Erickson, Secretary of  the  United States Senate, Majority
Leader of  the United States Senate, Mr. Harry Reid,

1. What is enclosed herein in brackets “[]”constitutes the document
which but for the Court’s and/or Clerk’s refusal to provide RJM a
means to either file this document electronically or to get it
adjudicated via the emailing thereof to the Court on 8/5/09 or 8/6/09
and/or the Court’s accessing it off of  the URL listed herein supra
(which website went out of  existence on 10/26/09) (which URL and
notification of the posting of  documents thereto on 8/5/09 and 8/6/09
was repeatedly provided via telephonic voice mail messages on such
dates), would have been filed by RJM on 8/5/09, in the case this
document concerns (“this case”) prior to the conducting of  the
Sotomayor vote, but since such vote was perpetrated upon the
Anti-degenerate Component of  the American People  and against
everything His Majesty, Christus Rex, can still justify not hating,
RJM now seeks to have such vote recalled and to enjoin the conducting
of  any future vote until the actual, true judicial record of  Judge
Sotomayor would be read into the public  record of  any  proceedings
which would ever be conducted in regard to any possible future
endeavor to procure a confirmation of  Sotomayor to the SCOTUS.

[Petitioner/Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment declaring the
unconstitutionality of  the collection of promulgated procedures which
have been utilized by the Senate of  the United States of America
(“USS”) in the confirmation proceedings of  nominee to the Supreme
Court of  the United States (“SCOTUS”) Judge Sonia Sotomayor (“SS”) as
such have been applied or in the alternative a declaration of
unconstitutionality of  the entirety of  the criminal codes of  the
United States of America and of every individual state of the union of
which it is composed  as any of  such might ever be applied to the
activity of  Robert J. More (“RJM”) in the absence of the issuance of
such types of  orders as are  herein sought,  in regard to any
activity in which RJM might ever find it necessary to participate
which would have to be conducted for purposes of accomplishing  the
just vigilante rectification of  the injustice presently prevailing in
the matters Appeal # 08-1263-cv (“08-1263”) in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit (“CCA 2”) [ concerns],  relative to any
confiscation and/or destruction of assets and/or property to which SS
would make claim, which  vigilante injustice rectification would have
been necessitated  by the perpetration of  the crimes, torts and
malefactions perpetrated by SS in her participation in the
adjudication of Appeal # 08-1263 and a TRO preventing any vote on the
nomination of SS unless and until evidence super-eminently relevant to
her qualifications and condition of  (un)fitness for the office of  a
justice in the SCOTUS (“QCF”)  would have been presented to the USS
and read into the Senate record regarding the confirmation proceedings
referenced herein supra, and then an injunction enjoining the USS to
enter into such record the evidence regarding the concealment from the
Senate Judiciary Committee of  the participation of SS in the  cases
of  More v Monex  - 08-1263 and Cordero v Delano (__-____) (CCA 2) as
an appellate judge via the omission of  such cases in the list of
cases in regard to the adjudication of  which SS admitted to having
been  a participating panel member in the answers she submitted to the
questionnaire she received from the Judiciary Committee  of  the USS,
and the evidence of  the activity of  SS in the actual adjudication of
More v Monex, Cordero v Delano and U.S. v Schulz (517 F.3d ___) (CCA
2) on the basis that  the utilization of  such collection of
promulgated procedures to the consideration of  the QCF of SS has
resulted in a legally cognizable and remediable  injury to RJM in that
RJM  has been denied -  among other measures of  consideration to
which he has been entitled and correlatively which he cannot be
justifiably denied and upon which he is dependent  in order to conduct
his activity according to a high enough standard of accountability so
as to ensure that the quantum of  moral liability for which RJM is
responsible would not be left not adequately covered -   the measures
of  consideration guaranteed to him by the Appointments, Freedom of
Speech – right to receive information,  and Due Process clauses of
the Constitution of the u.S. of A.
At its core, this case is a checks and balances/separation of powers
case. RJM is a member of the Fifth Branch of  the Government of the
u.S. of A (“Government”). Beyond the first three branches of  the
Government,  The Fourth Branch of  the government is of course the
grand jury as the authors of  the Constitution of the u.S. of A.
(“Constitution”) understood the nature, purpose and function of  such
entity. The Fifth Branch of  the government is of course the
unorganized militia consisting of  all able-bodied persons or at least
males between the ages of 17-65, who are obliged as were our ancestors
pursuant to the provisions of Magna Charta Clause 61 to participate in
morally legitimate vigilante measures ordered to the confiscation
and/or the destruction of property sufficient in a given case to
ensure that no predation or crime would remain not adequately avenged,
and/or domestic insurrection (if  vigilante remedies prove to be
unfeasible at a given juncture) in order to keep exercises of
government authority within acceptable limits, to punish crimes which
absent the utilization of such measures in a given case would remain
unpunished and to deter the predations to which human beings possessed
of  fallen human natures subject to the temptations of the Father of
Lies – He who was a murderer from the beginning… (Jn. 8:44) (aka - the
Roaring Lion who goeth about seeking whom he may devour) (1 Pet. 5:8)
and not amendable to the  burdens imposed by the requirements of  the
moral law -  are ever malevolently predilected.
In fact, were it possible for RJM to procure a nihil obstat from the
Institute of Saint Michael the Archangel (“ISMA”) Common Law Tribunal
(“CLT”) for participation in vigilante injustice rectification
measures in regard to the amount of assets which 08-1263 concerns
and/or the need to ensure that the crimes perpetrated by SS and the
rest of  the miscreants who have incurred criminal liability in the
adjudication thereof  do not remain not adequately punished, without
the filing of  this document, RJM most definitely would never have
filed it, as the research, composition, printing, mailing and
follow-up are an enormous burden to understate the case. But the ISMA
CLT will not issue any nihil obstat absent the demonstration of the
inavailability of  any alternative remedy not susceptible to the types
of  risks, hazards and potential harms which characterize the
utilization of vigilante measures for injustice rectification purposes
in regard to any proposed injustice rectification project.
This document is being composed  under severe time constraints via a
stream of consciousness method and will be superceded, Providence
willing on 8/5/09 and subsequently. Errata to this document will be
included in superceding components thereof.
It is herein admitted, that the primal audience of this document is
not any human person(s) conducting activity in the theatre of earthly
existence, but rather is  His Majesty, Christus Rex, and the angels
and saints whom he commands. Nor is the primal earthly theatre
audience any Court. On the contrary, the primal earthly theatre
audience hereof is that component of  the population of the world
which consists of  persons at least not heartless, merciless and
barbaric, whom are capable of  overthrowing the presently prevailing
Reign of Terror Regime of  the Edomite Supremacist Movement
Slave—keepers who control and run the Government not only of  the u.S.
of A. but of  all European Countries and Countries colonized by
European Countries through their control of the money supplies of all
such Countries,  at this juncture in the world’s ever accelerating
descent into an ever deeper barbarity.
There is no evil, malefaction, crime and/or injustice  this document
concerns which cannot be punished, defeated and/or rectified via the
morally legitimate use of force. It is not expected that any
individual not patently lacking the requisite combination of
adequately adjusted priorities and moral fiber necessary to exercise
the authority of  a judicial office  according to a minimally
acceptable standard of accountability will ever consider this
document. Were such  type of  an individual to ever consider it, RJM
would be most grateful to God and invigorated. Nonetheless, at this
juncture, notwithstanding the deplorable condition of all branches of
the Government, RJM did not see how he could retain a claim to
participate in the vigilante measures, he presumes will have to be
utilized in order to ensure that Lucifer would not get away with any
unjustified victory on RJM’s conscience at the expense of the Roman
Catholic Church  in regard to the matters this document concerns,
without filing this document and its successors and participating in
proceedings in regard hereto.
As many of the documents listed in the “Document List of…8/4/09”
which accompanies this complaint will be filed alongherewith as RJM
can get printed and transmitted on 8/4/09. RJM will endeavor to
supplement such filing with email and/or  electronic filing
transmissions as soon RJM would succeed in speaking to a Judge
regarding this case. In the alternative, RJM would propose that he be
permitted to post documents online regarding such case, accompanied by
the provision of  notice of whatever URL it would be at which any
given document(s) would be posted, as such type arrangement would
substantially lessen RJM’s burden in the prosecution of  this case.
Should SS be confirmed, this complaint will become a petition to have
her confirmation negated and appropriate proceedings initiated to
ensure that in the end, Lucifer does not get away with any malefaction
at the expense of the Catholic Church on the conscience of RJM
according to the principles present in the axioms: Qui nocentibus
parcit, innocentibus punit and Fiat Justicia, ruat caelum!!!!!!!!!
It is hoped by RJM that the injustices this complaint concerns can be
acceptably rectified without any of  the types of consequences which
characterized The Battle for Athens Tennessee or John Brown’s Siege of
Harper’s Ferry. The Lynching of Leo Frank  was an example of American
vigilantism in which no prosecutor or member of any policing entity
endeavored to interfere with nor address post hoc actus termina  the
measures implemented in order to efface the  monstrous evil Frank’s
conduct and Mary Phagan’s victimization constituted. What is at stake
in the crimes SS has committed which this document concerns,  are as
in the case of the tea dumped into the Boston Harbor in the Boston Tea
Party claims to quantums of property and correlatively property
rights. The preferable alternative regarding such matters would be for
SS to admit guilt, withdraw her nomination, resign her judgeship, make
restitution for the wrongs she has perpetrated, plead guilty to
violating 18 USC 241, 242, 1346,  1503 and 1961 et seq, and
voluntarily spend the rest of her days working for the true common
good, but RJM will not hold his breath in such regard.
A notice to any prosecutor and/or policing entity member who would
ever, for whatever reason, consider the contents of  this document
will be provided shortly and/or in response to any request received in
regard hereto, of  his or her potential criminal and/or civil
liability, potential subjection to decertification proceedings and
suchlike for, on the one hand -  any mis or mal feasance which might
be perpetrated by him or her in regard to the matters this document
concerns (“these matters”) , or on the other hand - benefits to be
received from any beneficence,  ever demonstrated in regard to the
matters such document concerns.
As a side note, RJM herein acknowledges that one of  the highest
priorities of  ISMA is to provide assistance and support to – to “run
interference for” as it were – members of  policing entities and the
military and beyond that, government officials in any and all
capacity(y)(ies), who would ever refuse to comply with a morally
unjustified order on the basis, that in a given case it would be
unjustified and end up incurring any type of retaliation therefore, as
the presence of  such type individuals in positions in government is
indisputably one of the most effective deterrents to predations of
every sort and stripe.  While committed to the position that the Iraq
War is a morally unacceptable conflict, conducted according to morally
unacceptable terms, ISMA strongly supports the endeavors of
Oathkeepers regarding the “Ten Orders an Oathkeeper will not Obey”.

Robert J. More  the Petitioner/Plaintiff in this case is a resident of
Chicago, IL who was the appellant in Appeal # 08-1263-cv in the CCA
The Secretary of  the USS, Sergeant at Arms of the USS ,  and Majority
Leader of the USS are agents of  the USS named as
Respondents/Defendants in this case, along with the USS itself.
This Court possesses jurisdiction over this case pursuant to the
provisions of  28 USC 1331  (federal question) and 28 USC 2201 and
2202 (declaratory judgment).
There is no case RJM has read in which a House of Congress was listed
as a Defendant which had not been filed in the USDC for the District
of Columbia, so RJM presumes that this Court must be the appropriate

14. On 1/23/08, USDC-EDNY Judge R. Dearie (“JRD”) dismissed Case # 04-3214.
15. On 2/1/08 and again on 2/4/08 via express mail, RJM filed
components of a post-trial motion pursuant to the provisions of Fed.
Rule of Civ. Proc. 59(e) (“59(e)”) via the mailing thereof to the
16. On 2/15/08 RJM mailed a notice of appeal regarding 04-3214 (“NOA”)
to the USDC-EDNY.
17. Prior to 1/23/08, JRD had issued  orders barring either Robert J.
More or Thomas A. More from having any document presented to the Court
in 04-3214 entered into the electronic docket (“ED”) maintained in
such case without the permission of JRD, without providing any
explanation for such conduct.
18. On 3/3/08, the USDC-EDNY entered the NOA into the ED in 04-3214.
19. On 5/12/08, JRD denied the 59(e) motion
20. Fed Rule of App. Procedure 4 …(b) states that a notice of appeal
filed prior to the issuance of a ruling on the first post-trial motion
filed in a given case, becomes effective at the date of the denial
21. Thus, the NOA RJM mailed to the USDC-EDNY on 2/15/09, which was
entered into the ED on 3/3/08 became effective on 5/13/08.
22. Between March of 2008 and 6/16/08, RJM filed four motions with the
CCA 2 regarding the appeal then pending in 08-1263.
23. On 6/16/08, SS and Judges Richard Wesley and Clifford Wallace
issued an order dismissing 08-1263 on the allegation that the NOA was
not filed in a timely manner.
24. On 6/27/08, RJM mailed for filing a preliminary component of a
motion to reconsider the judgment of 6/16/08 (“MTR”) .
25. On 6/28/08, RJM mailed for filing a second component of  such motion.
26. In these two motions, RJM explained what has herein been explained
and demanded a reversal and reinstatement or  an explanation for any
non-provision of such.

27. On 7/24/08, the three judge panel denied the MTR without comment.
28. In May of  2009, RJM learned that SS had been nominated to replace
retiring Justice D. Souter on the SCOTUS.
29. RJM applied himself to the task of getting SS indicted prior to
the conducting of any confirmation hearings in regard to  the
nomination of SS.
30. This task was very time consuming and labor intensive.
31. On 7/3/09, RJM emailed the U.S. Attorney for the SDNY a evidence
of  the activity described herein supra and demanded that it be
presented to a special grand jury (“SGJ”) pursuant to the provisions
of 18 USC 3332(a) (“3332(a)”) .
32. Subsequently, RJM transmitted to such official a superceding
component of such document.
33. RJM left numerous voice messages on the voice mail of  the US
Attorney for the SDNY demanding that he comply with the requirements
of  3332(a) or, if he would not do so, that he  explain why he would
not do so.
33. On 7/12/09 at 0:10 a.m. RJM mailed the USDC for the SDNY a
Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of  Mandamus along with all the
documents RJM had transmitted to the US Attorney for the SDNY to
compel such official to comply with the requirements of  3332(a).
34. All such documents can be accessed here:
35. RJM has never discontinued calling the Office of the Clerk of  the
USDC for the SDNY and the Deputy of the Chief Judge demanding that the
Petition for an Emergency Injunction contained in such document be
adjudicated without delay.
36. RJM is committed to present evidence to the SGJ regarding the
activity of  the US Attorney for the SDNY and the Chief Judge of  the
USDC-SDNY, regarding the matters herein addressed, if an explanation
for the conduct of each in regard to the matters this conveyance
concerns (“these matters”) is not provided demonstrating that no
criminal liability has been incurred by either, respectively, in
regard to these matters.
37. RJM has transmitted the information transmitted regarding these
matters  to the USDC-SDNY to Senators R. Durbin and R. Burris of IL.
38. Burris responded with a letter praising SS and Durbin never
responded at all.
39. RJM also transmitted such documents to the Office of Senator J.
Sessions of AL.
40. RJM has continued to call the Offices of Senators regarding the SS
confirmation hearings and what can be done to expose the crimes herein
41. RJM is cognizant of the activity conducted by SS in the matter of
U.S. v Schulz (517 Fed. 3d _) and recently contacted Mr. Schulz in
regard thereto.
42. Mr. Schulz, founder of We the People Foundation referred to the
activity of SS in regard thereto as “reprehensible”.
43. Recently, RJM became aware of  the evidence which Dr. Richard
Cordero possesses of  crimes committed by SS in Cordero v Delano.
44. RJM also became aware of  the evidence Dr. Cordero possesses that
SS claims over 3 million dollars of earnings over the past 20 years
but a net worth of  less than $600,000.00, while having no children,
no record of exceptional donations to any charity and claiming to lead
a modest lifestyle.
45. RJM is also cognizant that SS never upheld a single judicial
misconduct complaint in some twelve years as the CCA 2 Judge
responsible for the review thereof.
46. On 7/29/09, RJM became aware that SS did not list Appeal #08-1263
in the list of cases in whose  adjudication  she participated in which
she had not written an opinion, notwithstanding that the question (13©
if RJM’s memory serves him right) regarding  such type cases in whose
adjudication she had participated, required her to list “all”  such
46. The list of cases in which SS had participated as a judge without
writing any opinion was actually contained in the appendix to the
answers she submitted to the Questionnaire not in the answers to the
questionnaire contained in the main component of such response.
47. On 7/29/09, RJM became aware that Cordero v Delano was not
included  in the answer to such question either.
48. RJM will transmit to this Court all documents  which constitute
exhibits to this complaint and/or otherwise constitute supporting
documents thereto as soon as RJM can accomplish such objective.
49. For the time being this complaint and all supporting documents in
regard thereto can be accessed at the URL cited herein supra.
50. RJM  respectfully demands that once this case is transmitted to an
Article III Judge, that RJM be permitted to transmit to this Court his
“First Superceding Component of  8/5/09 of  Complaint of  8/4/09…” and
any and all accompanying documents (ie, “First Superceding Petition
for a Temporary Restraining Order..”, “Memorandum in Support of
Petition for TRO,” etc. etc.)
50a. RJM will answer any and all questions the Court to which this
complaint will be assigned would posit in any TRO hearing that would
be conducted in regard hereto.
51. On information and belief, RJM avers that it is RJM’s
understanding that RJM  `could have comparatively easily wrought
vigilante injustice rectification upon any of  the judges whose
crimes, torts and malefactions have resulted in the case of More v
Monex  still remaining in the entirely unacceptable condition in which
it is found to be.
52. In Non-counterfiet Catholicism there is no such thing as
unconditional and unlimited abstention from  vigilante injustice
rectification/forbearance (see Magna Charta Clause 61, Christmas
Message of Pope Pius XII of 1956 etc. etc.) and the matters this
document concerns are of course being prosecuted up the continuum
described in the Roman Catholic Litigation Chart (“RCLC”) (see the URL
included herein supra at which a copy of  the RCLC is posted).
53. At this juncture in RJM’s endeavor to rectify the injustice
perpetrated upon him by the Appellees in Appeal #08-1263 in the CCA2
in the matter which such appeal concerned, and  their attorneys  and
the judges who have participated in the adjudication thereof at every
level at which such case has been adjudicated, the only terms and
conditions according to which RJM understands that he can morally
justifiably herein provide an  unreserved and absolute  promise of
continued abstention (for which he may still be receiving condign
merit or credit of a lesser character regarding his claim to eternal
salvation for the practice of  the virtue of  forbearance from the use
of  the  ultimate means, not requiring either the return of  Christ,
or  Divine intervention, which  Providence has provided for rectifying
injustices in circumstances in which means less likely to result in
the types of harms which foreseeably result from any  choice to
utilize morally legitimate  vigilantism and/or participation in
domestic insurrection as a means of rectifying (a) given injustice(s),
or in regard to which he may in fact actually be incurring demerit for
dereliction of  duty in unjustifiably continuing to abstain from the
utilization of   such type means for the rectification of  the
injustice still prevailing in such matters)  from resorting to the
type of  property confiscation and/or destruction mandated in Magna
Charta Clause 61 in situations similar in all relevant respects to the
circumstances in which this document is being composed regarding the
matters 08-1263 concerns against  assets and/or property to which
Sonia Sotomayor has made or in the future would make, claim, for the
malefactions, torts and crimes perpetrated by her in regard to a.) her
participation in the adjudication of Appeal #08-1263 while a judge in
the CCA 2, and b.) her  concealment of  her adjudication of  Appeal #
08-1263 from the Senate Judiciary Committee, and thereby, from the
Senate at large, which in turn has resulted in the denial of  all
whose condition  would be effected by the appointment to a SCOTUS
position of  SS upon a  judicial adjudicative  record which simply
does not constitute her actual judicial adjudicative  record as a
federal appellate judge  of their right to the measure of protection
guaranteed to all such persons by  among other provisions of  the
Constitution of  the u.S. of A., the advise and consent clause wording
of   the Appointments, the right to receive information aspect of  the
Freedom of Speech, and the Due Process clause(s)  of  the Constitution
of the u.S. of A., would be terms and conditions in which this Court
would either enjoin any vote on Sotomayor’s nomination until the
relief sought in the declaration sought in body of  this complaint in
the form of a declaratory judgment or  a declaration of  the
unconstitutionality of  all criminal laws…RJM  according to the terms
and conditions described herein supra and/or according to the formula
delineated in the accompanying “Proposed
Declaration…Unconstitutionality…RJM” or something similar would be
54. For the record, there is no threat of any kind contained in this
document. On the contrary there are only provisions of  notice
necessary to ensure that RJM’s moral liability in regard to the
matters this document concerns would not be left not adequately
covered pursuant to the requirements of  the moral law as application
of such to the circumstances which RJM is presently encountering in
the theatre of earthly existence during his tour of  duty herein, is
subjectively apprehended by RJM, and which conception is corroborated
by and in no way evidently  incompatible, with,  the types of similar
subject apprehensions which undergirded the provisions of Magna Charta
Clause 61, the decent respect for the opinions of mankind and
acknowledgement of a duty to abolish forms of government which would
have become inimical to the interests the protection of which is the
asserted purpose of governments, in the Declaration of Independence
and the Petitions clause and Second Amendment to the Constitution of
the u.S. of A.  (Const. u.S.”) – all of which are the legacy left to
RJM by his forbearers and which RJM in turn is obliged to help
transmit to the members of future generations, and beyond such
provisions of notice,  a public acknowledgement that as an able-bodied
adult male, RJM is subject  to a grave obligation to contribute to the
protection of  the Mary Phagans and Teresa Schiavos of  this world and
all human persons who would ever be subject to predations of  any
stripe or sort, from predations of  any and every sort and that the
prospect of  the use of force and/or the actual use of force are in a
world as brutal, cruel, dangerous and barbaric as a world in which a
person with  Sonia Sotomayor’s record of conduct  could even be
considered for any judgeship  of any type, much less that of  the
highest court in the u.S. of A., are often the only morally legitimate
means by which to keep human persons created in God’s image and
likeness from ending up victims of  predations, malefactions, crimes
and iniquity perpetrations – all of whose ultimate origin are of
course the activity of  the Enemy of  the Human Race who ever goes
about seeking the ruin of souls and the destruction of everything His
Majesty, Christus Rex cannot justify not hating.
55. As such, such averments are completely protected from any type of
retaliation in regard thereto not only by the Free Speech, but by the
Free Exercise of Religion and Prohibition of  the  Establishment of
Religion, clauses of  the Const.  of  the u.S.
55.a Amongst those members of  “law enforcement”  and/or military
entities who have participated under the color of law and the pretext
of legitimacy at various junctures in history in various places in the
enforcement of iniquity and/or the perpetration of  predations  who
have had to  learn  the hard way the lesson that not only is it the
case that no one is obliged to unlimitedly abstain from using force to
defeat evils of various sorts in a given situation, but that in some
instances, there is no morally legitimate choice for those afflicted
by a given iniquitous agenda  except to participate in the use force
to protect interests of greater importance than the concern to avoid
causing serious bodily injury or death to other human beings and  the
duty  to endeavor to avoid unjustifiably subjecting oneself to such
type risks, the tragic cases of  those who entered into eternity
opposing:  a.) John Brown’s raid on  the federal arsenal at Harper’s
Ferry, West Va, b.) Michael Collins endeavors to liberate the
Catholics of Ireland from English enslavement and c.) the endeavors of
patriots in Athens TN in 1946 to restore a republican form of
government to such local, based upon RJM’s understanding of the
evidence available regarding such historical cases, come to mind.
56. RJM is no way, shape or form, here  intending to tempt Charles
Schumer, Abraham Foxman, or for that matter,  the Pied Piper, Judas
Goat - Barry Soereto,  nor the Rothschilds and the rest of  the
Puppeteers who pull the strings of  such barbarians to “push the
domino” that might result in the commencement of  the very final stage
of  the implementation of  the final solution of  the problem of
non-sycophantic, uncompliant and/or otherwise  unnecessary goyim by
including the averments contained herein in this document.
57. On the contrary, RJM is only endeavoring to  do what RJM
understands that in the circumstances present regarding what RJM is
herein endeavoring to accomplish, has to be done in order to ensure
that the requirements of  the moral law as such apply to RJM’s conduct
in regard to these matters would not be left not adequately covered
and  in particular in such regard, the requirements of  Canon 1325.1
of  the 1917 Code of Canon law requires RJM under certain circumstanc