Raven Files 3 Preliminary Motions in Lawsuit Against Smithsonian Officials Roberts, Bunch & KurinIn case number 25-cv-02332 TSC, Plaintiff Julian Raven filed 3 motions to get out in front of the issues that he claimed would confuse & derail his latest clams of fiduciary breach of trust by Smithsonian Chancellor, Secretary & The Board of Regents
By: Julian Raven Artist The filings include a motion to answer the unresolved legal question before the U.S. Supreme Court to finally define the legal status of the Smithsonian Institution, a motion for judicial notice of ten undisputed public facts, and a procedural motion to file electronically as a pro se litigant. Raven's central legal question: What is the Smithsonian Institution— This unresolved issue has plagued the courts and public discourse for years. "If the Smithsonian can claim government powers while dodging government constraints, we've lost the rule of law," Raven said. The motions were filed just one day after the New York Times published a 3000-word exposé titled "Roberts' Dual Role at Smithsonian Faces Scrutiny"—which featured Raven's litigation and critiques. The motion for judicial notice includes facts such as:
Raven's ongoing litigation gained fresh relevance after President Trump named Raven's case as reason #4 to remove Sajet. Her resignation followed weeks later. Now, Raven is calling on Judge Tanya S. Chutkan to certify the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and help resolve what The Washington Post recently called "the Smithsonian's curious legal status." Raven is also seeking removal of the Chancellor, Secretary, and Board of Regents for breach of fiduciary trust, and calls on the Court to return control of the Institution to Congress, the original trustee of the Smithson bequest. For more information and to read the briefs goto: https://www.smithsoninstitution.com/ End
|
|