.jpg)
Role in People v. Michael Taylor (XNEGA111132)In his capacity as California’s Attorney General, Rob Bonta had agency-level authority and responsibility to investigate and respond to constitutional violations reported by individuals—especially those committed under “color of state law.” Mr. Taylor sent multiple complaints—fully documented—to Bonta’s office detailing prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, suppression of exculpatory evidence, unlawful psychiatric commitment, and forced medication. Bonta never acknowledged receipt, launched any inquiry, or replied in any fashion.
Summary of Involvement
Rob Bonta actively pursues high-profile legal actions to safeguard the privacy and fairness rights of Californians, including:
Filing suit on July 1, 2025, along with a multi-state coalition, against federal agencies for illegal transfers of personal health information to Immigration and Customs Enforcement — claiming this threatens due process and privacy protections.
Yet when Mr. Taylor’s case—filled with sealed orders, destroyed evidence, false psychiatric claims, and prolonged detention without due process—was fully and repeatedly presented to Bonta’s office, the result was dead silence, not representation.
See here.
Why He Is Defendant #21 in the Dossier
- He leverages government power to protect Medi-Cal beneficiary privacy rights, yet suppresses the rights of a criminal defendant under identical legal theory—namely, rights to due process, privacy, and fair adjudication.
- His inaction violates Equal Protection—asserting vigorous defense of standing rights for some, while denying basic recourse to another in analogous circumstances.
- As Attorney General, Bonta had the duty to investigate constitutional injuries allegedly perpetrated by state actors, especially when documented and verified—but elected to remain passively complicit.
- His silence demonstrates selective law enforcement and double standards—a prosecutorial strategy that elevates political convenience over legal principle.
> “Rob Bonta stood tall on the national stage defending privacy — while standing mute at the threshold of Taylor’s constitutional ruin. In the Dossier, his silence reveals both betrayal and unequal accountability.”
Comments
Post a Comment