U.S. President Barack Obama hosts a reception for Elena Kagan in the East Room of the White House after the U.S. Senate voted in favor of her being a Supreme Court Associate Justice yesterday in Washington, August 6, 2010.  REUTERS/Larry Downing (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS)

A former federal prosecutor turned into a watchdog on Washington’s antics, legal and otherwise, is calling for a citizens’ grand jury to seek an indictment against the newest Supreme Court justice, Elena Kagan, for her “fraud” in changing the testimony of a medical organization.

Larry Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch and Judicial Watch, and the only lawyer ever to have obtained a court ruling that an American president committed a crime, said the high court’s own cases allow for the procedure.

He said the case against Kagan is overwhelming.

“In the days leading up to her confirmation, Freedom Watch and Declaration Alliance, based on evidence provided by pro-life groups, filed a complaint before the Supreme Court to have Elena Kagan disbarred for her having falsified a report, when she was associate counsel in the Clinton White House, by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists finding that partial-birth abortion was in no medical circumstances a necessary procedure to save the life of a mother,” Klayman said.

“To the contrary, newly confirmed Justice Kagan altered the report to show that partial-birth abortion was the preferred procedure. The Supreme Court relied on this fraudulent evidence in overturning Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion and this set the stage for other court rulings nullifying the total ban nationwide,” Klayman continued. “In effect, Justice Kagan’s actions resulted in the inhumane killing of very late-term unborn infants, and her conspiracy to defraud the Supreme Court in order to defy the expressed will of the American people made our nation needlessly complicit in these heinous acts. Kagan’s actions rise to the level of criminality.”

So Klayman said, now that Kagan has been confirmed, the organizations also will seek her impeachment.

“However, this punishment is not sufficient to right the wrongs of Justice Kagan’s criminality,” he said. So he said a citizens’ grand jury will be assembled under the proper rules and procedures to take up the case.

There have been numerous citizens’ grand juries whose members have met and tried to bring charges against President Obama, but Klayman said his study of those cases revealed that there were procedural defects, such as holding the event in the wrong district.

He said the procedure specified by the Constitution and Supreme Court, if followed, can force the system to address the issue being raised.

“We the people have been providentially provided means of legal recourse to address the criminal conduct of persons themselves entrusted to dispense justice,” Klayman told WND.

He said in the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Williams, in 1992, “Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government ‘governed’ and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights.”

Klayman said the Founding Fathers wanted the grand jury to not be part of the judicial branch, and they wanted a route through which citizens could seek redress of their grievances without having to ask permission of the state, as the state will nearly always seek to protect its own establishment interests.

“Thus, citizens – ordinary Americans – have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present ‘True Bills,’ which are indeed indictments, to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding upon which the accused has full constitutional right to present a defense and seek to prove her innocence,” Klayman said.

“Importantly, even the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which allow federal prosecutors to present indictments after a grand jury has issued them, does not preclude citizens from so doing.”

Klayman quoted from the Williams decision: “Rooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history … the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the … branches described in the first three Articles. It ‘is a constitutional fixture in its own right.’ … In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people.”

“In this way, the ‘Rule of Law,’ not violence, may seek to preserve the Republic, and to avoid armed revolt among the people as occurred in 1776,” Klayman said.

“Here, Justice Elena Kagan not only falsified evidence, thereby obstructing justice, but her fraud resulted in the barbaric deaths of unborn late-term infants. Nothing could be worse, and she should be indicted and tried in a court of law for her crimes. Certainly the Obama Justice Department will not seek an indictment, so it is left to ordinary Americans to seek justice. And, if, after an indictment is obtained, the lower courts refuse to institute a criminal proceeding, then Freedom Watch and Declaration Alliance will appeal this case all the way to the same Supreme Court on which Justice Kagan is now seated,” he said.

“Pursuant to the Williams case we will, ironically, have the Supreme Court order – as it is required to do under its own case precedent – that the district court commence a criminal proceeding against one of its own,” he said.

As WND reported, dozens of pro-life organizations previously asked the Senate to investigate Kagan’s 1997 amendment to an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists report, which was then used by the Supreme Court as justification for overturning Nebraska’s partial-birth-abortion ban in 2000.

Perjury may have been committed when Kagan, during hearings in the Senate, said, “My only dealings with (the College) were about talking with them and how to ensure that their statement expressed their views.”

According to the Declaration Alliance, “there can be no doubt that this testimony is false and misleading.”

Her changes in the document, the organization said, “dramatically changed the meaning.”

Klayman, a former U.S. Justice Department prosecutor whose battle against “the seedy underbelly of Washington” is chronicled in his book “Whores: Why and How I Came to Fight the Establishment,” is the only lawyer ever to have obtained a court ruling that a U.S. president committed a crime.

He is still known in Washington as the biggest enemy of the city’s elite, having made a name for himself suing Bill and Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and foreign dictators such as Castro, Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. His battles against corruption in the Clinton administration became so well-known that a character in the hit TV series “West Wing” was based on him, Harry Klaypool.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.