- Chapter Twelve`
Declaration
of
AMERICAN` LAW`
by Johnny Liberty`
Dedicated
to the thousands of pioneers` who came before and contributed to the research` and
creation of this handbook.
De Jure Nations Are Defined By Law`
“You have rights antecedent` to all earthly governments;` rights
that cannot be repealed or` restrained by human laws;` rights derived from the
Great` Legislator of the Universe.”
— John Adams, Second President of the
An important
distinction is between de jure and de facto. De` jure means legitimate, lawful,
by rights and just title. De` facto means the acceptance of a government, an
action,` public policy or state of affairs, but is at the root illegal or`
illegitimate.
The constitutional
republic of the united states of America` and its sovereign “state” Citizens
are the de jure government` and lawful authority, while the legislative
democracy of the` federal United States is presently a de facto government`
having extended its power by coup d’etat and deception.4`
> DE JURE —
lawful government derived from the right and` just authority of We the People
in a republic.
> DE FACTO —
government by default, an imposed` authority or foreign power usurping the law
and subjugating` We the People in a democracy.
Restoring the
American Common “law of the land” to` protect the American people from the
continued` encroachment of government and corporations is an` essential
component of rediscovering
Law is the
philosophy of a nation in action. With 220 years` of American law and thousands
of years of substantive` Common law, there is a rich history to draw upon for`
preserving the rights of American National OR “state” Citizens and limiting the authority and
intervention of` government.
We the People must
restore the “substance” of American law` which is today rarely practiced in the
We must expose and
challenge the “color of law” practiced` through the Uniform Commercial Code
(UCC), a system of` law administering an undeclared bankruptcy against the`
property and rights of the American people by an` unconstitutional banking
authority operating on behalf of` foreign sovereign Power structures.
Every year there
are thousands of criminal-making` “statutes” passed controlling behavior,
lifestyle and the` commercial activities of ordinary Citizens.
Editor’s Note:
There were 286,000 new laws, statutes, rules` and regulations passed in all
jurisdictions in
These extensive
volumes of statutes make un-convicted` “criminals” of virtually all Americans.
All a maligned
prosecutor has to do is find the appropriate` statute that penalizes, punishes,
persecutes or prosecutes` any targeted individual or business, find a
rubber-stamp` grand jury to indict, and destroy their lives with litigation.
It` happens every day in these
Plaintiffs almost
always win in court. In federal court,` Plaintiffs, often the State, wins
convictions about 95% of the` time. That’s pretty poor odds for Defendants. So
being on` the offensive is strategically necessary to secure an` advantage in
the court system.
The court system as
we know it does not seek justice in any` sense of the word. How much justice
can you afford? How` much could O.J. Simpson afford? How much can President`
William Clinton afford? How much can you afford?
Are you prepared to
be sued? Are you judgment-proof?
Corporations,
including our governments, are presently in` the business of “legally” stealing
your property and rights` everyday. We the People must reassert the power of
justice` in this land by taking responsibility for insuring that the` American
law stands.
The American law
can only stand if the American people,` regardless of status, stand behind it.
You must take the` Constitution and Bill of Rights seriously and demand your`
elected representatives do the same.
“The first step in liquidating a people` is to erase their
memory.”
— George Orwell 1`
Natural Law & Unalienable Sovereign Rights`
“Natural rights”
are those unalienable sovereign rights such` as life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness, inherent to all` human beings.
As a human being,
you have the unalienable right to breathe,` to walk and talk, to eat and sleep,
to exercise all your` unalienable rights as a free individual, providing you
do` violate or infringe upon the unalienable rights of other free` individuals
or damage or cause injury to them or their` property.
As free
individuals, We the People must respect the laws of` the land as they were
intended to be upheld — that all men` and women are created equal, that all men
and women have` natural rights with equal protection of the law.
These natural laws
and unalienable rights were then codified` into constitutional laws and
statutes — unalienable rights` protected by the Common law, the Constitution
for the` united states of America, and the Bill of Rights. These` unalienable
sovereign rights include:` •
right of due process` • right
to a trial with jury` • right to choose applicable law in your jurisdiction` • right
to travel`
• right to contract` • right to work` • right
to marry and bear children` •
right to own property` • right
to alias` • right to entity` • right to privacy` • right
to keep and bear arms` • right to freedom of religion, speech, and assembly`
Natural law defines the relationships between free sovereign` individuals based
on the “golden rule.”
All men and women
are created equal under the “natural` law” regardless of race, class, creed, or
color. This is the` foundation of the Law of Nations, which is the code of`
conduct and behavior between sovereigns, nations, or other` free entities.
“Natural law” and
unalienable sovereign rights exist whether` or not enacted as acts of Congress
or by any state legislature.
Civil liberties are
immunities from government interference,` while civil rights are statutes
granting benefits, privileges.
Civil rights are
given by statute or administrative law, and` can be regulated or taken away at
any time.
Any “right” granted
by the government is not an unalienable` sovereign right, but a privilege or
benefit.2`
“Law is defined as a habit of obedience to a person or` people who pretend
to a higher authority over others.”
Regardless of your
choice of Citizenship— a sovereign` American National OR sovereign “state”
Citizen, or “U.S. citizen”— a basic comprehension of law, jurisdiction, due` process
and contracts is necessary to exercise either your` “unalienable sovereign
rights” or your government-granted` “civil rights”.
You will learn
about the Common law, “color of law,” the` Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), how
to get Common law` remedies in an Admiralty/Maritime OR Equity jurisdiction,`
and courtroom strategies.
You will learn to
present yourself in your sovereign capacity,` or defend yourself in propria
persona, or pro se.
You will learn
advanced tools for exercising and defending` your “rights” including
affidavits, constructive legal notices,` non-statutory abatements, cross-claims
and cross-libels,` civil rights or Title 42 actions, and commercial affidavits
and` liens.
You will learn how
to diplomatically and effectively deal with` government officials who are
stepping outside their lawful` authority or jurisdiction and violating your
unalienable` rights and immunities, or constitutional rights as a sovereign`
“state” Citizen. Although, the courts are confrontational,` your posture doesn’t
have to be belligerent and angry.
These are
ineffective strategies and will get you in trouble.
You will learn how
to handle a traffic stop, how to use your` constitutionally guaranteed rights
as a jurist to judge not` only the facts, but the law itself, and how to
challenge the` constitutionality of a statute.
Nothing in law is
ever certain, or absolute. American law is` only enforceable if We the People
are willing to stand behind` it and use it in our daily lives.
“The only thing necessary for evil to triumph` is for good
men/women to do nothing.”
— Edmund Burke 1729— 1797`
Basic Concepts of Law`
Law, like many
other professions, has its own language and` basic concepts that must be
understood. In law, “black” could mean
“white” and “white” could mean “black.”
Always refer to a
good law dictionary (e.g. Black’s Law` Dictionary, Bouvier’s American Law
Dictionary) for the legal` definition of any terms.
For example, in
popular usage the word “person” has come` to mean you and I as human beings,
people or individuals.
We often refer to
each other as “persons” without` comprehending the jurisdictional trap.
But the legal
definition of “person” is very specific. In fact, in` the Oregon Revised
Statutes (ORS) alone, there are over 162` unique definitions and applications
of the word “person.”
Sometimes it means
a natural-born human being, but not` consistently. So when I ask, “Are you a
person required to` file an income tax?” You best know what context or`
definition is being applied.
> PERSON — legal fiction, corporation, trust or other` commercial entity;
natural-born human being or individual;` in common usage, the term ‘person’
does not include the` sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are`
ordinarily construed to exclude it.
This discrepancy between
the legal definition and the` common-use definition of terms has created a lot
of` misconceptions about the law, due process, and courtroom` procedure. These
have served those who would benefit from` our ignorance of the law.4` An important distinction exists between “lawful” and
“legal.”
What is “lawful”
always pertains to the substantive Common` law of the land— including the
Declaration of Independence,` the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (e.g.,
your lawful right` to contract or right to travel).
What is “legal”
pertains to the statutory forms and usages of` the law— commercial,
administrative, legislative, rules and` regulations (e.g., business licenses,
driver’s license). “
Unlawful” pertains
to a violation of the Constitution for the` usA or the Bill of Rights.
“Illegal” pertains to a breech or` violation of a private, statutory contract.
An activity or
behavior can be both “unlawful” and “legal”
simultaneously, or vice versa (a bad law can be unlawful and` legal at
the same time). “Legal” is not necessarily “right.”
“Illegal” is not
necessarily “wrong.” Law is the philosophy of` a nation in action.
“An unconstitutional act is not law; it conferred no` rights; it
imposes no duties; affords no protection; it` creates no office; it is in legal
contemplation, as` inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
— Norton vs. Shelby County, 118 US 425 p.442`
In 1998, the
Constitution is still the “law of the land” of the` united states of America.
“Statutory” laws (i.e. legislative,` private, corporate, police and
administrative law), created by` the federal legislative democracy of the
United States, and` those created by the corporate States must conform to the`
principles and original intent of the Constitution.
“No statute or Code can work to violate the` common law rights
of the sovereign people.”
— Bouvier's Law Dictionary` There are many “bad” statutory laws on the books that do` violate
constitutional law and principles, (providing we` haven’t “waived” these rights
by contract). Bad laws require` legally enabled, sovereign “state” Citizens to
challenge them.
U.S. citizens have
no such right.
“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute,` though
having the form and name of law, is in` reality no law, but is wholly void, and
ineffective` for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates` from the time of
its enactment, and not merely from` the date of the decision so branding it. No
one is` bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no` courts are bound to enforce
it.”
— 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177, late 2d, Sec 256`
The Constitution is Controlling`
In any
administrative or court case, demand that the agency` or court not uphold any
unconstitutional applications of any` statutes.
Marbury supra has
been upheld nearly 400 times in the` ensuing nearly 20 decades and has never
been overruled or` reversed. It has been repeatedly upheld in the courts that:`
“All
laws which are repugnant to the` Constitution are null and void.”
— Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v Madison` 5 US (1 Cranch)
137, 174, 176. (1803).
“The duty of the court is to insure the Constitution` is
construed in favor of the citizen”
— Byars vs U.S., 273 US 28.
“The Court is to protect Constitutionally secured` rights”
— Boyd v U.S., 116 US 616.
The Constitution
was written in plain, simple language,` using words that everyone could
understand to insure that` the intent of the founding fathers would not be`
misinterpreted.
Each word was
carefully chosen and today we need only` understand the meaning of the words as
used in those days.
“The framers of the statute are presumed to know` and understand
the meaning of the words used,` and where the language used is clear and free`
from ambiguity, and not in conflict with other parts` of the same act, the
courts must assume the` legislative intent to be what the plain meaning of` the
words used import.”
— First National Bank v United States, 38 F (2nd)` 925 at 931
(March 3, 1930).
“A legislative act is to be interpreted according to` the
intention of the legislature, apparent upon its` face. Every technical rule, as
to the construction or` force of particular terms, must yield to the clear`
expression of the paramount will of the legislature.”
— 2 Pet. 662.
“The intention of the legislature, when discovered,` must prevail,
any rule of construction declared by` previous acts to the contrary
notwithstanding.”
— 4 Dall 144.
“The intention of the law maker constitutes the` law.”
— U.S. v Freeman, 3 HOW 565; U.S. v Babbit, 1` Black 61; Slater
v Cave, 3 Ohio St 80.
By definition of
the word “Code,” one can see that statutes` are regulatory law.
“A body of law established by the legislative` authority of the
state, and designed to regulate` completely, so far as a statue may, the
subject to` which it relates.”
— Bouvier's Law Dictionary (1914)`
Jury Rights & Who Judges the Law?
As sovereign
“state” Citizens, We the People have the` unalienable sovereign right to “take
the law into our own` hands.” We can obey a “good” law, challenge a “bad” law`
either by disobeying or ignoring it.
Of course, if we do
so then we must be responsible to defend` our rights and challenge the law.
We the People have
the unalienable sovereign right to a trial` with jury should the corporate State
choose to prosecute us` when we disobey or ignore a bad law. If enough people`
ignore a bad law, it will be as if it were null and void.
Prohibition ended
not by repeal, but by noncompliance with` the law. “A law is never overturned
until at least one` individual challenges it, and is never repealed until
enough` people ignore it.”
As a jurist, you
have the right to judge not only the facts but` the law, despite what judges
and attorneys tell you.
A man in the old
West was being tried for stealing a horse. It` so happened that the man was
accused of stealing a horse` from another man whom no one in the town liked.
The case was tried
and presented to the jury. The evidence` against the accused man was strong.
The Judge asked if they` had reached a verdict. They replied, “We find the
defendant` not guilty if he will return the horse.
After the Judge
silenced the laughter in the courtroom he` told the jury that he could not
accept that verdict, that they’d` have to deliberate and find another.
No member of the
jury had any liking for the man whose` horse had been stolen as he had at one
time or another` gotten the best of each of them.
About a hour later,
the jury reentered the courtroom and the` Judge asked if they had reached
another verdict.
The courtroom was
silent. The jury answered, “We find the` defendant not guilty and he can keep
the horse.
The moral of this
story is that the jury has not only the right` to judge the law and the facts,
but has the common sense` intelligence to do so. In a republic, justice is
determined` from the bottom up, not the top down. 5` Sovereign “state” Citizens have the right and the
judicial` capacity to challenge the constitutionality of a statute all the` way
to the supreme Court.
What we don’t have
is a judicial system that honors or` acknowledges the sovereignty of the
people, OR the` supremacy of the Common law.
The California
supreme Court Annual Review of Lower` Courts recently concluded that State
courts routinely violate` the constitutional and due process rights of
defendants,` including fully informing juries of their right to judge both` the
facts and the law.
You have the right
to vote your conscience. The jury has` more power than anyone else in the
courtroom. You need to` know that, exercise it and not get disqualified because
you` do.
“The jury is also
free to judge the merits of the law itself, its` use in the case at hand, the
motives of the accused person,` and anything else necessary for it to reach
what it feels is a` just verdict...Judges seem to have forgotten that they are`
supposed to serve merely as referees of courtroom disputes,` and as neutral
legal advisors to the jury.” 5` As a “U.S. citizen
(i.e., alien)” though, you have no right to` challenge the constitutionality of
a statute, although you can` vote your conscience on a jury. An “alien” has no
right to` raise the question whether a statute violates the Constitution`
because an “alien” is not a de jure Citizen.
“I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet` imagined by
man by which a government can be` held to the principles of its constitution.”
— Thomas Jefferson`
Today during jury
selection, jurors are routinely screened` assuring only U.S. citizens are
selected. This is a` fundamental violation against the sovereign rights of
“state” Citizens.
The statutory
“civil” right to a trial by jury (for U.S. citizens)` was not authorized by
Congress until the Civil Rights Act of` 1968. If every defendant insisted upon
his/her right to a jury` trial, the entire judicial system would collapse overnight.
This would insure
that the assembly line of “justice” for` revenue collection currently practiced
in the courts would` cease or slow down.
In practice, the
jurors are only allowed to hear what the` government allows them. The greatest
enemy of the large` law firms and corrupt de facto governments is the
impartial` judge and the educated, fully informed jury.
Before anyone can
be brought to trial for an infamous crime` by those acting on behalf of the
government, an indictment` must be obtained from people serving on an
independent` “grand jury.”
The grand jury is
based on Common law in which a jury is` called to determine whether sufficient
evidence exists to` warrant a trial of the person accused of a crime.
The grand jury,
state or federal, has powers to subpoena, to` take testimony from witnesses
and/or dismiss a case.
When Hoppy
Heidelberg sat on a federal grand jury` regarding the Oklahoma City bombing, he
acted` independently of the federal prosecutor and was rebuked` and discharged
for acting responsibility and fulfilling his` duties as a juror. This aint’ the
way it’s supposed to be.
“A grand jury’s purpose is to protect the` public from an
overzealous prosecutor.”
— Minneapolis Star and Tribune 6`
The principle was
established in our republican form of` government that ONLY the people should
have the power to` institute criminal prosecutions, not the professional`
prosecutors or the attorney generals.
This disallows
government prosecutors from maliciously` prosecuting Citizens for political
crimes, or bringing charges` without sufficient evidence to proceed to trial.
When you are acting
as a jury member, you have the power` with your “vote” to disregard the
instructions of any judge or` attorney in rendering your “Guilty” or “Not
Guilty.”
If only one juror
votes “Not Guilty” for any reason, there is` no conviction and no punishment at
the end of the trial.
Thus, those acting
on behalf of the government must come` before the common people sitting on
juries to get permission` to enforce a law. Do you understand the power in
this?
When Laura Kriho
sat on a jury and decided her conscience` couldn’t convict for the alleged
crime, she was indicted for` obstruction of justice by the judge. This ain’t
the way it’s` supposed to be.
Having juries bow to
the judges instructions to judge only` the facts, not the law, is an insult to
the intention of our` founding fathers and mothers, but it’s the way the
courts` operate today. Nobody is above the law, especially those` acting on
behalf of the government.
If the law is an
unjust one, then it must be judged null and` void by juries acting in consort.
The only real power a judge` has over the jury is their ignorance and fear of
retribution.
“It is not only his right, but his duty... to find the` verdict
according to his own best understanding,` judgment, and conscience, though in
direct` opposition to the direction of the court.
— John Adams`
Whose Flag is Flying in America Today?
In MARITIME law,
the “Law of the Flag” is flown to notice` all who enter into contracts with the
master that he intends` the laws of the flag to be the basis of all contracts.
A gold-fringe on a
flag was always used on merchant ships` when they entered a foreign port to
show that any dispute in` that port would be settled under International Law`
Merchant Codes of law in an Admiralty / Maritime` jurisdiction.
The gold-fringe is
called a “badge” which is a distinctive` border. It signifies an “ensign” in
the navy, and is also a` “Military flag.”
“The placing of a fringe on the national flag,` the dimensions
of the flag and the arrangements` of the stars in the Union are matters of
detail` not controlled by statute, but are with the discretion` of the
President as Commander in Chief of the` Army and Navy.”
— 34 Op Atty Gen 483 (1925)`
There is much
debate about whether or not the gold-fringe` signifies an Admiralty/Maritime OR
a Military/Martial law` jurisdiction. In a “statutory” courtroom having the
rules of` one blend with the rules of the other appears consistent with`
practice. We are under Military/Martial law because of the` perpetual
bankruptcy of the federal United States corporation` and thus courts are ruled
under emergency war powers` acts.
§1. Flag:
stripes and stars on`
The flag of the
United States shall be thirteen horizontal` stripes, alternative red and white;
and the Union of the flag` shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field.—
July 30,` 1947, ch.389, 61 Stat. 642`
Executive
Order No. 10798` Ex. Ord. No. 10798,
24 F.R. 79, which prescribed` proportions and sizes of flags until July 4,
1960, was revoked` by section 33 of Ex. Ord. No. 10834, set out as a note
under` this section.
Executive
Order No. 10834. Proportions and Sizes` of Flags and Position of Stars` Ex. Ord. No. 10834, Aug. 21, 1959, 24` F.R. 6865,
provided: WHEREAS the State of Hawai’i has` this day been admitted into the
Union; and WHEREAS` section 2 of title 4 of the USC provides as follows:` “On
the admission of a new State into the Union one star` shall be added to the
union of the flag; and such addition` shall take effect on the fourth day of
July then next` succeeding such admission.”
You may have
noticed that the State courts no longer fly the` familiar United States flag
that we symbolically raise on July` 4th, and flew
above most federal buildings. This flag signifies a` military flag, not a civil
flag of the United States.
All of the state
and Municipal courts openly display it with` the gold-fringe, or admiralty
banner. Federal courts have` always operated in a genuine Admiralty/Maritime`
jurisdiction.24`
There also is a civil flag of the
United States that hasn’t been` flown since the Civil War. We’ve been in a
perpetual state of` war since the federal United States declared itself to be`
supreme over the sovereign state republics.
Now the States are
treated as mere U.S. territories and` possessions. The U.S. government has
apparently decided` the sovereign states are its territories, so it asserts
its` military power over them under the “law of the flag.”
Instead of the
United States military or civil flag or the flag` of the sovereign state
republic, the gold-fringed Admiralty /` Maritime/Military/Martial law flag
flies in State courts,` federal courts and buildings, public schools, banks,
and even` inside the oval office of the President of the United States.
Today, the U.S.
military flag appears alongside, on top of, or` in place of the state flags in
nearly all locations within the` states. The UN flag has no business whatsoever
flying within` a sovereign state republic.
The people of the
United States actually have two national` flags, one signifying the military
government and the other` signifying the civil government. As the war against
the` American people is still going on, the U.S. government` hasn't flown the
civil flag since the Civil War, except in the` U.S. Coast Guard and Customs.
Peace has never
been declared, nor have hostilities against` the people ended. The government
is still operating under` quasi-military rule. We the People have been under a`
perpetual state of national emergency since the Civil War` with few
interruptions.
Prior to World War
II, the United States flag, neither` military nor civil, didn’t fly anywhere
within the sovereign` states except over explicitly federal areas. State flags
flew` high and proud. In a sovereign state republic it is proper for` the flag
of that state to fly above the United States flag.
We the People could
reinstate both the state and U.S. civil` flags, declare a state of peace and reclaim
the sovereignty of` the states. Imagine that!7`
Gold-Fringed
Flag Returned to Court` County
Commissioners in Ferry County, Washington` removed a gold-fringed flag from the
courtroom because` Commissioner Jim Hall said he was shown government` documents
proving that fringed flags are inappropriate.
Commissioner Hall,
who assured everyone that he doesn't` subscribe to constitutionalist views,
said the flag was` removed to appease “anti-government
constitutionalists,” according to an
article in Spokane's Spokesman Review.
After several
months of fruitless negotiation, presiding Superior` Court Judge, Larry
Kristianson, threatened legal action` against Hall, saying he could order the
flag replaced and` have Hall jailed if he got in the way. To avoid a
confrontation` that could have been “politically explosive” it was agreed` that
the judge would buy a new fringed replacement flag` with his own money if the
commissioners would promise to` leave it alone. “No person is authorized to
come into the` court and take accouterments of the court without the` court's
permission,” he said. 8`
Distinctions of American Law` The genuine distinctions of jurisprudence (COMMON LAW,` EQUITY,
ADMIRALTY/MARITIME), and the courts` practicing in various jurisdictions have
been merged into a` uniform, apparently seamless web of “federalized
courts” administering the law of
commercial contract.
Most of the
state/State courts have merged with the federal` mandates and relinquished
their independence under the` separation of powers doctrines.
Article III of the
Constitution specifies that all courts must` be under one of the following
three genuine jurisdictions:` 1. Common Law;` 2. Equity; or` 3.
Admiralty/Maritime.
> COMMON LAW— system of jurisprudence based on historical,` judicial precedent
(court decisions and case law)` rather than legislative enactment (public laws
& statutes); a` court of Common law is a tribunal with jurisdiction over
cases` in Law; includes the law merchant and mercantile law, a` body of commercial
law of the merchants of England from` which the negotiable instruments law
derived; law does not` compel performance; you are free to do anything
providing` you do not infringe on someone else’s life, liberty or property;`
there must be a damaged party; no victim— no crime;` courts of Common law have
merged with courts of equity in` most jurisdictions; Common law courts have
been created` by the people in a few jurisdictions in the absence of Common`
law remedies in the existing, “statutory” court system.
> EQUITY— system of jurisprudence based on providing an` exact remedy for
every injury, in cases where the common` law would give inadequate redress;
(e.g,. bankruptcy court);` compel performance on American or quasi-contracts;
it has` no criminal penalty; contempt of court is the only criminal` action in
an equity court.
> ADMIRALTY/MARITIME— body of law separate from` every other jurisprudence with
jurisdiction over all actions` and breeched international contracts at sea or
within the` jurisdiction of the legislative democracy of the federal` United
States courts; has civil, statutory jurisdiction with` criminal penalties; the
sovereign rights of the open sea` (where no nation has jurisdiction) has long
been legal home` to sovereign Power structures (e.g., international banking`
families); the law merchant and maritime are inseparable in` a country
dependent upon sea commerce (e.g., England).
> MILITARY/MARTIAL LAW— similar to Admiralty /` Maritime except that it’s under
the jurisdiction of the` military tribunal in a state of a national emergency;
our` courts mirror both under the gold-fringed flag.
“The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in` [Common] Law
and Equity, arising under this` Constitution, the [Common] Laws of the United`
States,` and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under` their authority...
to all Cases of admiralty and` maritime Jurisdiction...
to Controversies between two or` more States; between a State
and Citizens of` another State; between Citizens of different States;` ... and
between a State, or the Citizens thereof,` and foreign States, Citizens or
Subjects.”
— Constitution for the usA [3:2:1]`
In approaching an
officer of the court, either by appearance,` by special appearance to challenge
jurisdiction or by` affidavit, identify the jurisdiction of the court and get
it on` the record. The judges and officers of the court will hedge` when you
ask, as they do not like to be boxed into a answer.
They will offer
some story about it being “statutory,” which` is clearly not a constitutional
jurisdiction.
> STATUTORY LAW— legislative, private, corporate, and` administrative procedures
law of the municipal corporation` of the District of Columbia; no Common law
concepts of` unalienable rights; not a constitutional jurisdiction, not a`
signatory to the Constitution, subject to no law except it’s` own; subject to
“trust territory” treaty law placed under the` administration of a country,
renamed United States Inc., by` the United Nations and their foreign
principals/creditors.
“Where the people fear the government you have` tyranny; where
the government fears the people,` you have liberty.”
— Citizens Rule Book` Here’s some important rules of the game. You can be tried` only
once in each jurisdiction (no double jeopardy). There` are two types of action
that can be taken against an` individual: civil OR criminal.
Civil actions can
be brought by or against U.S. citizens,` including sovereign “state” Citizens,
a state republic OR a` federal, corporate State. If a state/State charges you
with a` civil offense, it must go to federal court. The Constitution` provides
for only Common Law and Admiralty/Maritime in` criminal actions.
The federal
government doesn’t have the constitutional` authority to bring criminal charges
against any Citizen in the` state republic. All criminal actions against any
Citizen must` be brought by the state itself.
Federal statutes
and criminal code only applies to federal` government employees and other “U.S.
citizens” in their exclusive` legislative jurisdiction. Most of the people
criminally` charged and convicted in federal prison were never in the` proper
or lawful jurisdiction of the democracy. Understanding` sovereignty and the
separation of powers is essential to` develop a winning strategy in the courts.
> CIVIL ACTION— to protect a private right or to compel a` civil remedy; no
criminal penalties attached; concerned with` the rights and duties of persons
with regard to contracts or` tort; has no fine; matters of form rather than
substantive` law; Equity courts and jurisdiction; you have the burden of` proof
in a civil matter; constitutional rights do not apply;` how much damage and
what remedies will compensate for` the damage done?
> CRIMINAL ACTION— done with malicious intent with` a disposition to injure persons
or property; traffic and tax` cases are defined as criminal cases (with fines);
only` Common law and Admiralty deal with criminal cases; a` person charged with
a crime is brought to trial and either` found not guilty or guilty and
sentenced; requires an` indictment from a grand jury; a criminal conviction
renders` a person legally incompetent; you are not a “criminal” unless`
convicted.
Due Process and the Bill of Rights` There is little “due process of law” left in the Article
1,` administrative and legislative tribunals, mostly the Uniform` Commercial
Code (UCC) rules and procedures apply, along` with the Administrative
Procedures Act and judicial review` providing you appear and agree to be
subjected to their` jurisdiction.
Very few legal
processes satisfy the minimum due process` requirements and can be argued on
that basis. Inadequate,` insufficient or unlawful process can be abated with a
“Non-` Statutory Abatement.”
The UCC has been
almost universally adopted by the` corporate States and many international
jurisdictions as` well, although many of the new changes have yet to be`
adopted.
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are` involved, there
can be no rule making or` legislation which would abrogate them.”
— Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p.491`
“Due process of
law” is more than simply knowing what your` rights are as read to you by a
government official when you` are under arrest (e.g., Miranda rights).
Due process embodies
the principle that government may` not deprive an individual of life, liberty
or property unless` certain rules and procedures required by “law” are
followed.
In my experience in
the courts, due process is violated` consistently at every level of the system,
but more so at the` lower end.
The questions are
what “law” is being applied, does it apply` to you, and whether or not the
particular “court” has` jurisdiction over either the “subject matter” or over
you.
The federal United
States government and the court system` at all levels, in any jurisdiction, are
operating under the` “presumption” that all Americans have accepted` government
benefits, therefore are “subject” to the federal` United States government.
Thus, follows the presumption,` every American is liable for the payment of
government` debts.
The U.S. citizen
“causes” a presumption of contract. Despite` the so-called “presumption of
innocence” rule, the` defendant in these administrative courts are prima facie`
guilty of being a “debtor” to the government. Contracting` with the government
at any level compels us to perform` according to the terms of the contract.9` Since the federal United States government has no general`
jurisdiction over sovereign “state” Citizens, they will attempt` to trick you
into “volunteering” into federal jurisdiction` along with their civil and
criminal code, and the Uniform` Commercial Code (UCC).
The unwritten law,
is of course, the Common law, (the Law` non scripta) which is that system of
law guaranteed to the` sovereign people by the due process clauses of the state
and` federal constitutions.
“The adoption of the 14th (or 15th) Amendment` completed the circle of protection
against violations` of the provisions of Magna Carta, which` guaranteed to the
sovereign people their life,` liberty, and property against interference except
by` the ‘Law of the Land,’ which phrase was coupled in` the petition of right
with due process of law.
The latter phrase was then used for the first time,` but the two
are generally treated as meaning the` same.
This security is provided as against the United` States by the
14th (or 15th) and 5th Amendments,` and against the States by the 14th (or 15th)` Amendment.”
— Davidson v New Orleans, 96 US 97.
As cited above, the
meaning of the due process clause is that` the common law shall be the
unalienable right of the` sovereign People, nor can it be removed from them by
mere` statutes.
No new systems of
law can be forced upon them. I have the` right to live under the protection of
the Constitution; it is` your birthright.
To restore due
process of law, you must learn to avoid many` jurisdictional traps. You cannot
win in the administrative` tribunals on constitutional grounds once you have`
“appeared” within their jurisdiction.
The Constitution
has no application within a federal zone, or` in a court of Admiralty/Maritime
codified as the Uniform` Commercial Code (UCC). The law of the land applies
only` under the Common law.
“The right of the people to be secure in their` persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against` unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not` be
violated, and no warrants shall issue, but` upon probable cause, supported by
oath or` affirmation, and particularly describing the` place to be searched,
and the persons or things` to be seized.”
— 4th Amendment, Constitution for the usA`
Most Americans do
not know what rights they have or how` to exercise them. Too often, We the
People have been` trampled or penalized in our best efforts to secure these`
rights by overzealous or power-hungry government officials` who often make
choices to enforce specific laws against` certain people for various reasons at
their own personal` discretion, not for the sake of justice or the true public`
interest.
The rules of the
game of “law” are changing so quickly, are` so complicated and inaccessible to
the common people, that` most people haven’t a clue as to what the rules are.
Only the
professional insiders (e.g. attorneys, judges,` prosecutors, public defenders,
clerks etc.) in the so-called` criminal justice system know how the system
actually works,` and even that is dubious assumption given their track` record.
These supposed
public servants are not giving the people` responsible notice, nor instructing
them about the rules of` the game. The law is often being used against the
people,` often to extort funds for servicing the public debt at every` level of
government (e.g., exorbitant traffic tickets or bails).
To have rights and
exercise due process, you must know` what they are, then be able to defend
those rights. Otherwise` you don’t have any! Once you know who you are, whether
a` sovereign “state” Citizen or a U.S. citizen, you’ll have a` clearer set of
options. In any court case, you have the right to` obtain a reasonable
postponement so you can prepare your` defense, or preferably your offense.
You have the right
to be informed of the charges against you.
You have the right
of pre-trial discovery. You have the right` to call or subpoena witnesses to
testify on your behalf.
Most Americans
still believe in the myth of “civil rights” and` that all people are treated
equally under the law in a` “democracy.” Nothing could be farther from the
truth.
Specific classes
and races of people are treated more harshly` under the hard glove of the law
(as they’ve always been),` prejudiced and subject to exorbitant bails as
preventive` detention, incarcerated without sufficient or probable cause,`
railroaded through the justice system like so many cattle.
Institutionalized
injustice and corruption of the criminal` justice system for the sake of the
revenue-collection by local,` State and federal government must stop!`
5th Amendment Rights` The
Fifth article of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution for` the united States provides:
“No person shall be deprived of` life, liberty, or property without due process
of law.”
A similar provision
exists in all the State constitutions; the` phrases “due course of law,” and
the "law of the land" are` sometimes used; but all three of these
phrases have the` same meaning and that implies conformity with the ancient`
and customary laws of the English people or laws indicated` by Parliament. 10` “No [real] person
shall be held to answer for a` capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless`
presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,...;` nor shall any person be subject
for the same` offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;` nor shall
be compelled in any criminal case to be` a witness against himself;` nor be
deprived of life, liberty, or property,` without due process of law;` nor shall
private property be taken for public` use, without just compensation.”
— 5th Amendment, Constitution for the usA`
For example, if the
IRS summons you to an audit, you have` the right not to show the IRS any of
your books or records.
Demand your 4th Amendment rights, and do not volunteer` information under
any form of intimidation.
Demand to see the
enacting clauses and enforcing` regulations that give them any authority to tax
your income.
If the IRS wants to
pursue your case (and they probably` don’t), let them do some extra legwork.
The Privacy` Protection Act provides for a $1,000 penalty for improper` search
and seizure.12`
“Only
the rare taxpayer would be likely to know that` he could refuse to produce his
records to IRS` agents.”
— U.S. vs. Dickerson, 413F2d 1111(CA7 1969)`
To prove tax
evasion, or “willful failure to file,” the` government must first prove
“willfulness.” The supreme Court ruled in 1992 that a taxpayer who sincerely
believed` that federal income tax laws did not apply to him or her` could not
be convicted of tax evasion, since tax laws required` “willful” conduct.
If you sincerely
believe the law doesn’t apply to you, then` you cannot be guilty of any criminal
“willfulness.”11
In 1977,` the IRS investigated 8391
cases, 3408 were recommended` for prosecution, 1636 were indicted by grand
juries and 247` were convicted, and less than half of them spent time in a`
federal prison.
You’re 400 times
more likely to be killed in an automobile` each year than going to jail for
willful failure to file a tax` return. 12` “The 5th Amendment is an old friend and a good` friend. It is one of the
greatest landmarks in man’s` struggle to be free of tyranny, to be decent and`
civilized.”
— supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas` Regarding your 5th Amendment
rights, you cannot make` blanket objections.
You must answer
each question individually, as they ask` them. Reply in your own words with, “I
respectfully decline` to answer that question on the grounds of the 5th`
Amendment.” You cannot be forced to testify against` yourself. As you don’t
know what evidence will be incriminating,` “taking the 5th” is a sound defensive strategy.13` “Waivers of
constitutional rights not only must` be voluntary, but must be knowingly
intelligent` acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant` circumstances
and consequences.”
— Brady vs. U.S., 397 U.S. 742 at 748 (1970) 14`
The 6th, 7th and 8th Amendments also preserve essential due` process rights.
Take them into heart and memory.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall` enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial, by an` impartial jury of the State and
district wherein` the crime shall have been committed...,` and to be informed
of the nature and cause of the` accusation; to be confronted with witnesses`
against him; to have compulsory process for` obtaining witnesses in his favor
and to have the` assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
— 6th Amendment, Constitutional for the usA`
“In suits at Common law, where the value in` controversy shall
exceed twenty dollars (i.e., real` money, gold and silver coin of the realm,
not` FRN’s), the right of trial by jury shall be` preserved, and no fact tried
by a jury shall be` otherwise re-examined in any Court of the` United States,
than according to the rules` of the Common law.
— 7th Amendment, Constitution for the usA` “Excessive bail shall
not be required,` nor excessive fines imposed,` nor cruel and unusual
punishment inflicted.”
— 8th Amendment, Constitution for the usA`
State & Federal Court Systems`
>SMALL
CLAIMS COURT— formerly the
Common law` court of Common Pleas or County court until that was` merged into
the Equity/Admiralty jurisdiction; attorneys are` not qualified to practice in
law actions; only the plaintiff and` the defendant appear before the judge.
> MUNICIPAL COURT— city court administers the law` within the various cities and has
exclusive jurisdiction over` criminal matters only; administers the Municipal
law of the` District of Columbia (State of New Columbia) under the` exclusive
authority of Congress; authority, duties and` procedures of the Municipal Court
are often vague and` confused in the State statutes; not a court of record
where a` transcript is kept; appeal to D.C. Court of Appeals.
>SPECIALTY COURTS— courts specializing in particular` offenses; traffic, divorce,
drugs, guns.
>COUNTY COURTS or “ONE” SUPREME COURTS— ` constitutional courts convened around the seat of “home`
rule” county government to provide recourse and remedy` under the Common law
(not available in the Article I,` legislative tribunals/units, U.C.C.
commercial courts); basic` building block of a republican form of government
duly` consummated; We the People retain full judicial powers` sworn under oath
to serve on juries and grand juries; these` constitutional courts weren’t
widely instituted under the` original Constitution, although the powers were
implied` under Article III.
>COURT OF KING’S BENCH — in English law, the` supreme court of Common law in the
kingdom or` queendom; merged in the Supreme Court by the Judicature` Act of
1873, §6.
>COURT OF COMMON PLEAS — most of these courts` have been abolished being
transferred to district, circuit or` superior courts; Pennsylvania still begins
all civil and` criminal actions in them.
>STATE DISTRICT COURT — lowest level of the` state/State court system; technically
has jurisdiction over` the Municipal courts of the District of Columbia (if the
states` weren’t bankrupt and the State courts hadn’t been` federalized);`
>STATE
CIRCUIT COURT— one of several
courts in a` given jurisdiction as part of a system of state/State courts`
extending over one or more counties or districts; techni-cally` has
jurisdiction over the state/State District courts.
>STATE SUPREME COURT— highest appellate court in` their respective
states/States; has jurisdiction over the` Circuit and District courts; this is
the one, Article III` supreme Court authorized by the state and federal` constitutions
as a separate judicial branch (although with` the States being bankrupt, the
State courts federalized, this` is an Article I court); all other courts in the
state/State are` inferior legislative tribunals/units.
>U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT — corporate,` administrative, federal trial court (Article 1
or Article IV` courts); territorial jurisdiction over a state/State or part of`
it; $10,000 minimum controversy to establish jurisdiction` (before the federal
bankruptcy of 1933); lowest level of the` Federal court system; U.S.
Magistrates administrate with` the authority of a park ranger.
>DISTRICT COURT OF THE U.S. — Common law,` Constitutional Article III capacity; district
court of the united` states has original jurisdiction exclusive of courts in
the` individual states over all offenses against the laws of the` united states
of America; a court of general jurisdiction for` suits between litigants of
different states with “diversity of` citizenship”; a court of original
jurisdiction over cases and` controversies between Citizens of the United
States, Citizens` of different states or between a Citizens of a state (“state”
Citizens)` and an “alien” (e.g., a U.S. citizen);`
>U.S. COURT
OF APPEALS — thirteen federal
judicial` circuits; in those states with courts of appeals, they are`
intermediate appellate review courts with the highest` appellate court being
the state Supreme Court; has` jurisdiction over the U.S. Federal District
courts.
>COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF` COLUMBIA — highest court of the corporate, federal` States from the
local courts of the D.C. municipal` corporations.
>U.S. SUPREME COURT — highest appellate court in` most jurisdictions although in
some states/States this is an` inferior court; in other states/States its the
only legitimate` court in the state.
>U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT— United States District` court with general jurisdiction
over bankruptcy matters (28` U.S.C.A. §§151, 1334); created specifically to
carry out the` Federal Bankruptcy Act; you can defeat the IRS in this Court` —
the burden of proof is on them!`
>U.S. TAX
COURT — an independent
federal` administrative agency that hears appeals by taxpayers from` adverse
administrative decisions by the IRS; suits may also` be considered in U.S.
Federal District courts or a U.S. Court` of Claims.
>U.S. CLAIMS COURT — established in 1855; abolished` and created a new Court
via the Federal Courts` Improvement Act of 1982; combined with the abolished
U.S. Customs & Patent Appeals Courts; for suits specifically` against the
U.S. government.
>U.S. CUSTOMS & PATENT APPEALS COURTS— ` reviews decisions of the customs court and reviews
decisions` of the customs collectors.
>U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE — U.S. Customs Court was established as Article III court in
1956,` superceded Court of International Trade in 1926;` jurisdiction over
civil action against the United States` arising from federal laws governing
import transactions.
>ADMIRALTY COURT — in rem proceedings from civil` law; Justice Act of 1970
established a new court as part of` the Queens Bench Division of the High
Court; governed by` Supreme Court Act, 1981, §§4,5.
“The supreme Court is the only court created` by the
Constitution itself;` All other courts are to be created` by legislative
(statutory) acts.”
— State ex rel Madden VS. Crawford, 207 Or 82`
Federal Law and United States Code` Federal law protects only its subjects (i.e., U.S.
Citizens) and` foreigners (i.e., aliens). Complaints or allegations filed in`
federal court are presumed true until trial. U.S. District` courts are for
federal U.S. citizens.
U.S. citizens are
“resident aliens” of the federal United` States. In the 48 sovereign state
republics, U.S. citizens are` foreigners. An “alien” is defined as one who is
not a citizen of` the country in which he lives.
The individual
states delegated specific powers to the federal` United States including the
authority to interface with other` sovereign nations on behalf of the sovereign
people, deliver` mail, raise and train a national army in times of need,`
maintain a navy, and coin money for profit.
“Poor people have access to the courts in the` same` sense that
Christians had access to the lions.”
— Judge Earl Johnson Jr.
Originally, there
were only 3 federal laws. Today, there are` over 3,000. The federal United
States government has far` exceeded its original authority.
“Congress passed
almost 2,500 new “laws” in 1992... There` were 67,715 pages of new regulations
written and published` in the Federal Register in 1992, and that suffices as
legal` public notice of the new laws and regulations... Each U.S. citizen is
considered responsible to know, understand, and` abide by these new laws and
regulations. Ignorance of the` [Common] law in America is no excuse.”
These reams of
“statutory” laws have become so complex` and oppressive that even teams of
top-notch professional` Attorneys cannot keep track of every statute, its`
applicability, and its consequences.
The U.S. Congress
primarily makes laws that pertain to the` federal “United States” and its subjects.
But it also makes` laws for the “united states of America” which have general`
applicability.
These are called
“positive” law. Positive law is actually and` specifically enacted or adopted
by proper authority for the` government of an organized “jural society” or
state.
There are 50 Titles
of United States Code (U.S.C.), some of` which have been enacted as “positive
law”— the irrefutable` law of the united states of America. This law has
survived` the test of time.
Positive Law` Many of the titles of the United States Code (U.S.C.) are`
“non-positive law” which are still pending enactment as` “positive law,” (e.g.,
Title 26, Internal Revenue Code). Only` positive law applies to sovereign
“state” Citizens of the` several states, while non-positive law does not. Only
21 of` the titles of the U.S.C. contain positive law and they are` indicated in
the Code. Positive law must also be published in` the Federal Register.
If a statute is not
published in the Federal Register it` indicates that the statute has limited
applicability. Nonpositive` laws are contracts, applicable only to those who`
have voluntarily entered into the jurisdiction or the contract` (e.g., U.S.
citizens, or signing a 1040 form).
Rules become law
when you agree to obey them. Nonpositive,` private corporate law is presumed
applicable unless` you challenge jurisdiction and venue as a sovereign
“state” Citizen. As a U.S. citizen of
the District of Columbia, you are` subject to the letter of all the laws and
statutes, including the` non-positive law.16` “...Provided, however that whenever titles of such` [United
States] Code shall have been enacted into` positive law` the text thereof shall
be legal evidence of the laws` therein contained, in all the courts of the
[federal]` United States,` the several states, and the territories and insular`
possessions` of the [federal] United States [within the 48 states].”
— 1 U.S.C., Section 204(a)`
Limits of Federal and Federal State` Jurisdiction`
Editor’s Note:
Dan Meador has argued this juris-dictional` argument on several occasions.
Herein lies some history` and what's possible once we bring this issue into the
light of` day. Sooner or later the government won't be able to` ignore the
obvious fraud they've been perpetuating on the` American people for
generations. Thank you Dan for your` incredible research.
"In the
American system, the people are sovereign. All` government operates on the
premise of delegated authority,` with the people retaining all the rights and
powers not` specifically delegated. In this system, only peers can charge` and
ultimately convict a fellow sovereign. Government does` not legitimately have
independent power and authority to` charge or prosecute the sovereign except
during times of war` and substantial emergency." This has been the case
since the` bankruptcy and emergency war powers acts of 1933.
A. Drew Edmondson,
Attorney General for Oklahoma` responded to Meador's Memorandum of Law by
arguing` lack of jurisdiction for the Oklahoma supreme Court, the` absence of
an actionable controversy, and presumption in` support of carte blanche
legislative authority.
The dual character
of the state; the de jure state republic and` the de facto federal State, and
the multiple characters of the` United States — particularly Congress' role as
government` for the state republics within the constitutional framework,` and
as government for the self-interested geographical United` States — was not
challenged or refuted.
The operational
link between the geographical United States` and the de facto federal State was
not disputed. And finally,` the unconstitutional character of Civil Law
facilitated by` State and United States code was not challenged.
The Attorney
General did not dispute that the Constitution` for the united states of America
mandates gold and silver` coin as legal tender for payment of debt.
Nor did he dispute
that the10th Amendment and the` “Separation of Powers Doctrine” prohibit the
state republics` from acquiescing to federal authority, thereby functioning as`
federal States, without constitutional amendment which` specifically delegates
authority to the United States which is` not already articulated in the
Constitution (New York v. United States, et all, 1992).
Title 31,
United States Code.
Federal agencies
are eligible for participation defined at 5` USC §§102 & 105. Legitimate
federal States can participate,` but the state republics are excluded. This
limits the legal` operating sphere for United States-chartered financial` institutions
to the District of Columbia and United States` territories, insular possessions
and federal enclaves such as` military bases. State republics participate in
the scam, but as` de facto (i.e., unlawful) federal States, not as state
republics` party to the Constitution for the united states of America.
Numerous blocks of
cooperative federalism was instituted` during the Roosevelt Administration,
including the Buck Act` (4 USC §§101 - 107) which authorizes federal States to
enter` into compacts and other joint enterprise.
Freemen/women and
sovereign “state” Citizens have` insisted on their right to protection under
Common law.
They have also
invoked 11th Amendment separation of` powers between the “state” (the sovereign
is the “state” in` fact) and federal jurisdiction and authority. These are
well` established principles in law.
Many people,
including the Freemen, have challenged the` authority of the federal government
or the FBI to operate` within any of the states of the Union (U.S. vs. Lopez,
63` U.S.L.W. 4343 (April 25, 1995); New York vs. Mihl, 36 U.S. (11 Pet.) 102
(1837); People vs. Godfrey, 17 Johns, 225 (N.Y. 1819).
The U.S. supreme
Court held that Congress could exercise` no police powers within the states.
This would apply to the` FBI also, as it is a creation of Congress (Keller vs.
United` States, 213 J.D. 138, 20 S. Cr. 470 (1909).
The FBI, in order
to deal with any issue in good faith would` have to present a delegation of
authority signed by the President` (California Bankers Association vs. Shultz,
416 U.S. 21).
Treasury Decision
95-A specifically states that any agency that purports to represent the United
States has to have such` a certified delegation of authority, or they don't
have it.
This would also be
relevant for IRS actions in the states, as` the IRS is not part of the federal
government as most people` believe, nor do they have any delegation of
authority.
Under the UCC and
most state statutes, all “persons,” including` government agencies, transacting
business in a` state, shall execute and file with the secretary of state, an
application` for registration of the assumed business name.
Failure to do so
bars that person from maintaining any suit` or action in any of the courts of
the state under that name.
Since the FBI
refused to present any such authority, why` would any Citizen, including the
Freemen, benefit from negotiating` with an agency that had no authority?
The law provides
important protections for people who are` pending extradition (e.g., the
Freemen). A grand jury is a` rare event in Montana; the state constitution
provides that` only a district judge can convene one.
28 USC §1359
dictates the fact that a district court shall NOT` have jurisdiction of a civil
action concerning foreign bills of` exchange. The federal court cannot gain
jurisdiction under` “diversity of citizenship.” 17` To
date, the Montana Freemen have not been properly or` lawfully “indicted,” nor
convicted, as they did not grant jurisdiction` to the federal government.
They remain
political prisoners in a system that no longer` honors or respects the law or
the separation of powers. How` do we make our government accountable to the
law?
Federal
Jurisdiction Limited By Supreme Court` Ruling`
Alphonso Lopez was
convicted in Texas for carrying a gun to` school in March, 1992. Prior to the
ABA’s monopoly over the` courts and the rise of federal power, defendants
charged in` criminal cases pursuant to federal law alleged to have` occurred
with the state were dismissed upon motion or` appeal. Chief Justice John
Marshall made clear the` Constitution prohibited the federal government from`
assuming any police power within a state.
On April 26, 1995,
Chief Justice Rehnquist writes the overall` opinion of the Court's findings:` “The Act [a federal
criminal statute intended to be` enforced within a state] exceeds Congress’`
Commerce clause authority.
To uphold the government's contention` [that it can bring
criminal charges for a crime` alleged to have been committed within a State]` would
require this Court to pile inference upon` inference in a manner that would bid
fair to` convert congressional Commerce authority` to a general police power of
the sort` held only by the States.”
— Supreme Court Reporter, 55 CCH S.Ct., Bull` This could be the precedent for the release of thousands
of` federal prisoners convicted under federal law in criminal` matters because
they were unconstitutionally convicted.18`
Defeating
Bogus Presumptions` STRATEGY:
Defeat the underlying presumptions described` as constructive trusts (operates
as a logical syllogism).
Major Premise`
All human beings are persons.
Minor Premise`
Dan is a human being.
Conclusion` If both A & B are true, then Dan is a person.
Bogus presumptions
include:`
1. The states are
federal States rather than independent` state republics party to the
Constitution.
2. Those subjected
to statutory Civil Law are citizens or` residents of the geographical United
States.
For example, the
presumption that Congress has` unrestricted legislative jurisdiction within
the` geographical United States. Rather than being state` republics party to
the Constitution, the states are` presumed to be federal States.
Therefore, Congress
presumes to have unrestricted` legislative authority throughout the American
empire,` inclusive of what should be independent state republics` subject only
to constitutionally delegated authorities.
3. A third
contributing element is the presumption that` the American people in general
are “citizens of the` United States” as prescribed in section 1 of the 14th`
Amendment. Until 1868, when Congress adopted this` amendment, which was never
properly ratified, there` was no such thing as a “citizen of the United
States.”
The de jure people
were Citizens of their respective` state republics as principals rather than
subjects.
4. “Person” has
become a poorly defined term, limited to` specific applications of the law.
For example, the
Oregon Revised Statutes has over 150` different definitions of the word
“person.” Are you a` “person” required? You better well know before` arguing
whether or not you're required to obey a` particular statute.19`
Sovereignty and Separation of Powers`
In the American
system, the people are sovereign. All` government operates on the premise of
delegated authority,` with the people retaining all rights and powers not`
specifically delegated. In this system, only a jury of peers can` charge,
indict and ultimately convict a fellow sovereign.
Government does not
legitimately have independent power` and authority to charge or prosecute the
sovereign except` during times of war and substantial emergency.
Federal and state
constitutions reaffirm the people are the` ultimate political power in the
united states of America.
Why? Because all
laws and governments were created from` the authority of the sovereign.
Look at the state
constitutions, and you’ll see that the people` are the ultimate political
power. In Oregon, the Bill of Rights` was the first Article.
“We declare that all men, when they form a social` compact are
equal in right: that all power is` inherent to the people, and all free
governments` are founded on their authority, and instituted for` their peace,
safety and happiness; and they have` at all times a right to alter, reform, or
abolish the` government in such a manner as they may think` proper.
— Article 1, Section 1, Oregon Constitution`
Every sovereign
American National OR “state” Citizen is` his/her own King/Queen, ruling not
over others, but over` him/herself. We the People retain our judicial powers
and` are in fact, and in law, justices of “Our One Supreme Court.”
> QUO WARRANTO — by whose authority?
The fourth branch
of “government” in this republic is We the` People with full judicial capacity
and sovereign powers. We` the People assembled under Common law right are the`
judge, the jury and the executioner if need be. I assert, the` court system was
never intended to be an institution` separate from the people, worse intended
to be a court` system used against the people.
Look at the state
constitutions, and you’ll see that the people` are the ultimate political
power. There is no superior power` to the sovereign.
"The people of this state do not yield their` Sovereignty
to the agencies which serve them.”
— California Government Code,` §54950, Declaration, Intent;
sovereignty`
By not waiving
Common law venue, not accepting a nom de` guerre (i.e., war name under
emergency and war powers` acts) or 14th Amendment
slave name, not admitting to being` a defendant, not accepting a
court-appointed attorney,` insisting on Common law and trial with jury, and
invoking` the “11th
Amendment” of the Constitution, the
separation of` powers between the state and the federal is mandated by the`
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).
The federal
government or federal State cannot bring a` criminal action against a Citizen —
only a grand jury of, by` and for the people can.
11th Amendment Precludes Jurisdiction of the` United
States Courts Within the States` FRCP, Rule 54 defines “Act of Congress” as being specifically`
applicable only to the District of Columbia and within other` United States
territorial jurisdiction.
Aside from
everything else, the 11th Amendment
precludes` jurisdiction of United States courts within the states. Within` the
framework of the “Foreign Sovereign Immuni-ties Act of` 1976,” the de jure
people, Citizens of the state republics, are` states in fact where the
geographical United States is` concerned.
“Citizens” Of
State Republics = “States” In Fact` The courts must offer due process, and protect` constitutional
rights under the “7th Amendment.” We the` People have a choice of venues (i.e.,
Common law or` corporate).
“The Judicial power of the [federal] United States` shall not be
construed to extend to any suite in law` or equity, commenced or prosecuted
against one` of the United States by citizens of another state,` or by citizens
or subjects of any foreign state.
— 11th Amendment 20`
We the People have
the choice of applicable territorial law.
Law in the law
books is presumed correct. Do not waive your` Common law venue! Acceptance of
an attorney to` “represent” you vs. “presenting” yourself is a lienable event`
and must be avoided at all costs. To execute this requires` scripting and
coaching by someone experienced in these` matters. It’s easy to get tripped up
and stumble into their` jurisdiction.
§1-105 Territorial
Application of the Act; Parties Power to` Choose Applicable Law (1) Except as
provided hereafter in` this section, when a transaction bears a reasonable
relation` to this state and also to another state or nation the parties` may
agree that the law either of this state or of such other` state or nation shall
govern their rights and duties. Failing` such agreement this Act applies to transactions
bearing an` appropriate relation to this state.
Venue and Jurisdiction` Always and clearly “Reserve all your Rights” under the` Common law
pursuant to UCC 1-207 in your “Refusal for` Cause, Without Dishonor.”
Unalienable sovereign rights are` guaranteed by both the state and federal
constitutions, the` organic law of the land, although these courts are
reluctant` to admit it.
If the court
proceeds in a cause of action against you under` the Common law without proper
and lawful jurisdiction,` then the judge has lost his/her official immunity,
and can be` personally sued for violations of your rights under color of` law.
You have the right
to know the nature and cause of the` action. You can challenge the jurisdiction
of the court. One` way to illustrate a simple challenge of jurisdiction is
through` a “Special or Limited Appearance.”
Here’s a sample
jurisdictional argument as it relates to a` Municipal court. Let’s pretend for
a moment, that there isn’t` any monkey business going on in the courts, and
it’s` operating as it should. That’s a stretch of the imagination,` but here
goes the monologue.
Sample
Jurisdictional Argument: Municipal Court` “The 6th Amendment of the Constitution requires a court` and its
employees to inform me of the “nature” and “cause” of any action against me so that I can
properly defend` myself. Since the Municipal court only has criminal`
jurisdiction, and has no subject matter jurisdiction to hear` civil matters, I
must presume this is a criminal action.”
“There are two distinct
criminal jurisdictions authorized by` the Constitution: (a) criminal action
under a Common law` jurisdiction; (b) a contract violation under the criminal`
aspects of an Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction.
As the court must
well know there are distinctly different` defenses for a criminal action under
a Common law` jurisdiction or an Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction. I must` know
what jurisdiction and venue the court is operating` under to properly defend
yourself.”
“Where jurisdiction is challenged, it must be` proven.”
— Hagans vs. Lavine 415 US 528 at 533` “No sanction can be
imposed absent proof of` jurisdiction.”
— Standard vs. Olson 74 S.Ct 768` “If any tribunal [court] finds
absence of proof of` jurisdiction over person and subject matter, the` case must
be dismissed.”
— Louisville RR vs. Motley, 211 US 149, 29 S.Ct.42`
>
JURISDICTION— the authority
by which courts and` judicial officers take cognizance of and decide cases;
the` legal right by which judges exercise their authority;` GENERAL, ORIGINAL,
SPECIAL; inherent power to decide` a case.
> VENUE— the neighborhood, place or county in which an` injury is declared
to have been done; place where an action` is brought to trial. (e.g., The
Internal Re-VENUE Service` must, by law, bring you into their VENUE, their
place to` impose an assessment and collect a tax.)` So let the judge or officer
of the court answer your questions.
They’ll give you
some goobledygook and assert that the court` is under “statutory” jurisdiction.
In some cases, the judge` has actually admitted being under Admiralty or
Military` jurisdiction and pointed out the gold-fringed flag to prove it.
They are getting
bolder with the truth. Point out, there is no` such jurisdiction as a
“statutory” jurisdiction authorized by` any state or federal constitution.
If they are
practicing law in a “statutory” jurisdiction,` challenge the court to produce
the book containing the Rules` of Criminal Procedure for a statutory
jurisdiction.
If they cannot,
then conclude that they are conducting a` criminal action under a secret
jurisdiction known only to` licensed attorneys. Challenge the court to produce
any evidence` which would give them the authority to proceed in` either
criminal jurisdiction authorized by the Constitution.
Admiralty /
Maritime Or Statutory Or Military /` Martial Law???
If the judge admits
to a COMMON LAW jurisdiction, which` is doubtful since the federal United
States has been` perpetually bankrupt since 1933, then they must, as would`
say, “produce an injured or damaged party as evidence` (corpus delecti).”
If they cannot
produce an injured or damaged party, then` this case must be dismissed for lack
of jurisdiction, since` without an injured or damaged party there can be no
cause` of action under the Common law.
If the judge admits
an EQUITY jurisdiction, demand to have` the plaintiff produce the American or
domestic contract or` quasi-contract that, as you would say, “compels
performance` with my signature and authorization on it.”
If they cannot
produce any such contract, then this case` must be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction, since there can be` no cause of action without a private contract
in force.
If the judge admits
an ADMIRALTY/MARITIME jurisdiction,` as the gold-fringed flag in the court
indicates, have the` plaintiff, as you would say, “produce the original, valid,
international` contract in dispute with my signature on it.”
If such a contract
exists, the validity of the international` contract must be settled before the
trial on issues may begin.
If they cannot produce
such a contract, then this case must` be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
There is no in
personam (personal) jurisdiction in any` Admiralty/Maritime proceeding, only in
rem (property).
Here’s your final
statement.
Statement
Challenging Jurisdiction` “I
have demonstrated with a preponderance of the evidence` regarding the
jurisdictional issues, whether argued in` personam, in subject matter, Common
law or Admiralty,` that the court has never had any jurisdiction over the`
defendant, nor can any ever exist with regards to a` sovereign, ‘state’
Citizen.
The “guilty by
default” on the original citation is void ab` initio, because of the lack of
both in personam jurisdiction,` and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It
follows, therefore,` that the contempt of court charge is also void ab initio.
This case should be
dismissed and the previous convictions` stricken from the records. All future
actions against the` defendant are estoppeled.
You are hereby
instructed to enter this “Limited or Special` Appearance” in the official court
records. I rest my` jurisdictional arguments.”
FRCP Rule 12(b)
Defenses and Objections (b)“...the` following defenses may at the option of the
pleader be made` by motion:` 1. lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter`
2. lack of jurisdiction over the person ...A motion` making any of these
defenses shall be made before` pleading... (h)(3) Whenever it appears by
suggestion` of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks` jurisdiction of
the subject matter, the court shall` dismiss the action.”
“The law requires
proof of jurisdiction to appear` on the record of the administrative agency`
and all administrative proceedings.”
— Hagans vs. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533` “Therefore, it is necessary that
the record present` the fact establishing the jurisdiction of the tribunal.”
— Lowe vs. Alexander 15C 296; People vs. Board` of Delegates of
S.F. Fire Dept. 14 C 479`
Common Law`
The united states
of America is a COMMON LAW country,` despite the fact that very few lawyers or
attorneys study the` Common law of England, which is the basis for the state`
constitutions of thirty-eight (38) states, including California,` Washington,
and Oregon, and most of the Commonwealth` countries England or France had
colonized.
Common law was not
embodied in a specific text or defined` code (except in the California Codes of
1872). Rather, it` evolved case after case in court decisions which applied
the` doctrine of precedent or stare decisis.
Other features of
the Common law include due process of` law, juries and the rule of law.
Louisiana is an exception` having based it’s state constitution on the Common
law of` France, not England.
The other great
system of law in the Western world, besides` the “Canon law,” was the “Civil
law” which was derived from` the laws of the Roman Empire. Civil law is the
basis for the` EQUITY courts in which the judge rules.
Attorneys make
their living practicing the expedient and` highly profitable “statutory,” or
commercial law, even` though they practice law in jurisdictions where the
Common` law is still the basis of state law.
Before the
undeclared federal bankruptcies (1930, 1933,` 1938, 1944, 1968, 1993)
eventually dismantled the` substantive Common law, and replaced it with “colorable,”
commercial,
Negotiable Instruments law, their international` Law Merchant, and the Uniform
Commercial Code (UCC),` We the People had access to effective, low-cost
remedies and` conflict resolution in the Courts of Common Pleas, and the`
Article III, constitutional Common law courts. We must` restore these Common
law courts to provide recourse and` remedy these days.21` “Common Law...was
adopted as part of organic` law of Oregon when state was admitted into` Union.”
— U.S.F. & G. Co. vs. Bramwell, 108 Or. 261, 217` P. 332, 32
A.L.R. 829`
> COURT OF
(COMMON) LAW— tribunal with`
jurisdiction over cases in law which are no longer` distinguished from the
courts of equity or admiralty; law` does not compel performance.
In theory, the Small
Claims court is still a Common law` court and will not allow an attorney to
present him/herself` before it. According to the Common law, it’s you against`
your claimant, and the judge will make a decision based on` the facts, not on
the performance of a professional orator.
In theory, the
clerk of the County Recorder’s office is still the` seat of the constitutional
Common law court that prevailed` in this country for many years before the
judges were` removed and replaced with the administrative tribunals that` now
operate under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).
“The Constitution is to be interpreted` according to Common law
rules.”
— Schick vs. U.S., 195 US 65, 24 Sup Ct. 826, 49L.Ed. 99`
Very few people
realize that they have a fundamental choice.
We the People can
live our lives, conduct our business, and` resolve disputes under the Common
law, or we can submit` to “colorable,” commercial law.
There is no crime
or cause for action under the Common law` unless there is a loss of life,
liberty, or property. So long as` the Constitution is still the law of the
land, so is the` Common law. Disrespect for the Common law indicates`
disrespect for the Constitution and the laws preceding it.
The Constitution is
a Common law contract between the` sovereign states and its federal government
and must be` interpreted as such.
“...a statute will not be construed so as to overrule` a
principle of established Common law, unless it` is made plain by the act that
such a change in` the established law is intended.”
— Starkey Construction Inc., vs. Elcon, Inc., 248` Ark 958,
978A, 457 SW2d 509, 7U.C.C.RS 923` “A statute should be construed in harmony
with` the Common law unless there is a clear legislative` intent to abrogate
the Common law.”
— United Bank vs. Mesa Nelson Co., 121 Ariz 438,` 590 P2d 1384,
25 U.C.C.RS 1113` “The Constitution is to be construed with respect` to the law
existing at the time of its adoption and` as securing to the individual citizen
the rights` inherited by him under English law, and` not with reference to new
guarantees.”
— Mattox vs. U.S., 156 U.S .237, 15 Sup Ct. 337,` 39 L. Ed. 409`
“It [U.S .Constitution] must be interpreted in the` light of
Common law, the principles and history` of which were familiarly known to the
framers of` the Constitution.
The language of the Constitution could not be` understood
without reference to the Common law.”
— U.S . vs.Wong Kim, Ark.,` 169 US 649, 18 S. Ct. 456`
Invoking Common Law Venue`
The Common law is
the highest law of the land. It has never` been abolished and is in effect
today. An Article III, Section I` (Constitution for the united states of
America)` Constitutional court is a superior court over all statutory,`
legislatively created Article I courts.
An Article III
court is a Common law court, also referred to` as “Our One Supreme Court,” is
preserved under the 7th` Amendment and FRCP 38(a). Judicial authority for the`
supreme Court is authorized under national supreme Court` rules “other
jurisdiction” in 28 USC, Rule 17.1.
The supreme Court
can co-exist in the District Court of the` United States. The common law court
movement in the` united states of America is a lawful and constitutional`
extension of the supreme Court system to every county and` locale in the usA.
The judicial branch
of government is vested in the sovereign` American people, not in the
administrative courts` administering a U.S. bankruptcy.
Instead
administrative tribunals are attempting to run their` secret “star chambers,”
routinely denying due process to` defendants and plaintiffs in an effort to
cover up the truth` about the bankruptcy of the United States corporation.
Additional proof of
the validity of these claims are evident in` current (1995) revisions to Title
28. There are significant` revisions to Title 28 of the USC (1995 edition)
which` indicate major strides toward the return of power to the` people.
In Title 28, the
statement (1989 edition) that the supreme` Court “sits at the pleasure of the
President [as approved by` Congress], now reads that the supreme Court “sits at
the` pleasure of the people.” Title 28 now provides a fund of $1` million to
pay the salaries of Common law justices, and for` the means to replenish that
fund. 22` On July 17th, 1996, the first “King's Bench” to be seated
in` the U.S. federal court since President Lincoln declared` martial law in
1861 was convened in the case of the Freemen` of Justus Township.
The King’s bench is
the supreme court of Common law in` England. Schweitzer and the freemen have
not waived their` Common law venue, thus the federal court was procedurally`
required to provide one. 23` See the transcripts
from the federal court proceeding in` Billings, Montana on July 17th, 1996,
where federal Judge` James M. Burns recognized Chief Justice Leroy Michael,`
which is Schweitzer's Christian name, in a Common law` extradition preceding.
Schweitzer was not
only recognized as a sovereign, but` leading the extradition proceeding–leading
the purported` "defendants" from the corporate, statutory side (i.e.
U.S. District Court) of the court to the Common law side (district` court of
the united states) of the federal court.
How can We the
People, the courts, the judges, the` attorneys, the politicians continue to
deny the truth?
This is not just an
opinion, not a belief, not a conspiracy` theory, but a basis in irrefutable law
that the people of` America are indeed sovereign.
Chief Justice Leroy
Michael (i.e., Schweitzer) is moving to` quash the indictments acting with the
authority of the chief` Justice of the supreme Court, known at the Court of`
International Trade in the USC.
Judicial
Authority:` Article III
judicial power, national constitution supreme` Court rules “other jurisdiction”
in 28 USC,
§§17.1, 17.6, 17.7,19.2,` 19.3, 20.1, 20.2, 20.3, 20.6, 22.1, 22.2, 22.3, 22.5,
22.6, 23.1, 23.2,` 23.3, 23.4, 26.7, 29.2, 29.5, 36.1, 36.2, 36.3, 36.4, 37.1,
37.3, 38.1, 39.2,` 39.3, 39.4, 39.5, 39.7, 41, 47.
Related United
States Code Title 28:`
Chapter 97 - Where applicable;
Chapter 95 - Exclusive` jurisdiction;
Chapter 15 Quoad hoc committee;
Chapter 23` “Early Implementation District Courts;” Section 503 -
Attorney` General, civil action §2284; Section 2284 Congressional` Mandate -
three justice panel; Section 604 [a][2][3][6][24][d]` [3][c]; Section 604
[c][f] - publish in Federal Register; Section` 1784 - [a][b][c][d] - $100,000
contempt;`
Supplemental
United States Codes:` 18
USC §§§§§5, 7,11,112, 3505, 3506; 28 USC §136 [a][3][A] Seven year term, §138
-` No formal terms, §137 Division of business, §141 - Special` sessions,
places, §144 -Bias;
Chapter 11 -Court of` International Trade §255;
Chapter 13 - Other Courts §291- in` the public interest; §§293,
294 [a] voluntary service; §331 -` Original, exclusive jurisdiction in the
several States; 28 USC` §49 - Creates our division of the courts; §286
Appointments` are Common law, not statutory; §332 - Public notice by our`
judicial council; §333 - Court of quarter sessions - Common` law; §335 -
Consular Courts - exclusive jurisdiction; §372` Bias of corporation
commissioners; §373 [c][9][A] -` Subpoena power, quo warranto; §374 - Venue at
Common` law;`
Chapter 21 - General Provisions Courts:` §452 - Our Courts - always open; §453 Common law oath;`
§455 - See Federal Form 61, Dual Oath; §462 - Our Courts in` Common law venue;
§519 Independent prosecutors; §528 -` Conflict of interest - U.S. Attorney
Generals; §593 Duties of` division of the Court; §594 - Special investigation -
foreign` country; §604 - Duties of Chief Justice; §612 - Special Fund -`
Treasury fees taxed as costs.
Chapter 42 -Recognition of our division of the` Courts;
Chapter 43 -Common law special` appointments` §671 - Supreme Court clerk & Reporter, paid by fees
taxed as` costs;
Chapter 49 - Common law appointments; §1251- Original Exclusive jurisdiction;
§1253 – Direct appeals to King’s` Bench, full bench; §1254 - “Certified
question,” constitutional` question; §1257 Common law review; §§§1330,1331,1332
-` Division diversity; §1406 - Cure of Venue - division of Courts;` §1631 -
Transfer to Common law venue; §1691 - Our One` supreme court seal; §1738 - Full
faith and credit clause; §1740 -` Country of Montana Consular Courts docket;
§1743 Demand on` Postmaster, GAO; §1746 Two separate jurisdictions;`
Chapter 117 - Letter Rogatory - full faith and credit;`
Chapter 121 - Jurymen of peers, venue;
Chapter 123,
Chapter` 40 Magna Charta;
Chapter 125 - Common law warrant of` attachment;
Chapter 129 Special deposit Rule 67.1 - peace bond` special
supreme Court rules, oral testimony; §2243 - Three day` return on a habeas
corpus.24`
The Great Writs` A
“Writ” is a written judicial order to perform a specified act` or giving
authority to have it done, as in a “Writ of` Mandamus,” ‘Writ of Certioriari,”
or as in an original writ` for instituting an action at Common law.
A “Writ” is a
written court order or judicial process directing` that a sheriff or other
judicial officer do what is commanded` to do. The “All Writs Act” permitted
federal appellate courts` to issue all writs necessary or appropriate in the
aid of their` respective jurisdictions.25`
> WRIT OF
CERTIORARI - An order by the
appellate` court which is used by that court when it has discretion on` whether
or not to hear an appeal from a lower court. If the` writ is denied the court
refuses to hear the appeal, and in` effect, the judgment below stands
unchanged.
> WRIT OF ERROR - A writ issued from a court of` appellate jurisdiction, directed to
the judge(s), requiring` them to remit to the appellate court the record of an
action` before them in which a final judgment has been entered, in` order that
examination may be made of certain errors` alleged to have been committed.
> WRIT OF MANDAMUS - A writ issued from a court of` superior jurisdiction,
directed to a private or municipal` corporation, or to an executive,
administrative or judicial` officer, or to an inferior court, commanding the
performance` of a specific act belonging to his, her or their public, official`
or ministerial duties, or directing the restoration of the` complainant to rights
or privileges of which he/she has been` illegally deprived.26`
> QUO
WARRANTO - A writ of right for
the King or` Queen, against him who claimed or usurped any office,` franchise,
or liberty, to inquire by what authority he` supported his/her claim, in order
to determine the right. It` is a Common law writ designed to test whether a
person` exercising power is legally entitled to do so. 27` “The supreme authority
in the united states of` America is the individual sovereign Citizen.”
— Michael Louis Minns 27`
Underground Lawyers`
One of the best all
around law-related books I’ve read is` Underground Lawyer by Michael Louis
Minns, Attorney.
Here’s an honest
lawyer who has not compromised his` principles after 25 years of law practice.
This book is full of
practical wisdom for the do-it-yourselfer,` pro se litigant, concerned citizen,
legal assistant or` underground lawyer.
He’s one of the
first mainstream attorneys that I’ve seen` acknowledge the American Citizen as
a sovereign, while` revealing how the legal system actually works, for better
or` for worse.
There are good and
bad judges, good lawyers and bad` lawyers, and you never know the true
landscape of a case` until you show up in court.
“An attorney straight out of law school will do` $500 worth of
work for $5. An attorney after a` lifetime of practice does $5 worth of work
for $500.
There is some merit to this claim.”
— Michael Louis Minns, Attorney 28`
He suggests that
Americans must challenge the government,` and reclaim our own authority under the
laws of the united` states of America .
Members of a jury
can stand up to the judges and other` jurors who refuse to allow you to
exercise your` constitutional rights to judge both the facts and the law.
Patriotic citizens,
like our tax protesting forefathers,` opposing federal income taxes should be
supported not` branded as criminals.
He also comments
on: how the Internal Revenue Service` (IRS) operates like the American Gestapo,
how divorce` lawyers practice disorganized crime, how the American Bar` Association
persecutes laypersons for the “unauthorized` practice of law,” what the role of
legal assistants in a law` office should be, the difference between criminal
and civil` cases, judicial and election reform, the American jury` system, the
insurance con game, and the banking scam.
He suggests that
Americans should campaign for stronger` privacy protections, study and simplify
the law, and break` up legal monopolies. He makes several references to the`
Citizen as the sovereign. Coming from an attorney this is` music to our ears.
Another excellent
and well-known lawyer/attorney is Gerry` Spence, noted trial lawyer. He has
never lost a criminal trial` and his most notable cases include Karen Silkwood
and` Randy Weaver, number in the hundreds. Here’s an excerpt` from his recent
book.
The Laws of
Arguing` \
1. Everyone is
capable of making the winning argument.
2. Winning is
getting what you want, which also means` helping “others” get what they want.
3. Learn that words
are a weapon, and can be used` hostilely in combat.
4. Know that there
is always a “biological advantage” of` delivering the TRUTH.
5. Assault is not
argument.
6. Use fear as an
ally in public speaking or in argument.
Learn to convert
its energy.
7. Let emotions
show and don’t discourage passion.
8. Don’t be blinded
by brilliance.
9. Learn to speak
with the body. The body sometimes` speaks more powerfully than words.
10. Know that the
enemy is not the person with whom we` are engaged in a failing argument, but
the vision within` ourselves.29`
Constitutional Common Law Courts` Ediitor’s Note: Creating a network of Common law
courts` in every county and state is a necessary component of` restoring a
constitutional republic in the united states of` America and around the world.
Would you rather put your` destiny in the hands of a jury of your peers, or a
corrupt,` corporate government?
We the People must
organize and convene “constitutional` Common law courts” in every county of every
sovereign` “state” republic as the foundation for the restoration of our`
sovereignty. Therein We the People can reinstate remedy` and recourse under
Article III of the Constitution, and` reclaim our judicial power independent of
corporate` government.
Our sovereign
rights have been trampled. Judges and` attorneys are foreigners having accepted
Titles of Nobility` and special compensations, our petitions have been
ignored,` the writ of Habeas Corpus and the Constitution suspended` through
perpetual states of national emergency under the` War Powers Acts.
We the People have
been charged with victimless crimes,` imprisoned after conviction with no
indictment by a grand` jury, and denied the rights to a fully-informed jury
trial that` judges both the facts and the law. We are compelled into`
contracts, forced by law to obtain insurance, licenses, and` converted into
criminals for exercising our unalienable and` constitutionally protected
rights. The constitutional` Common law courts duly organized as lawful process
are` remedy and recourse against de facto government.
Constitutional
Common law courts have their own seal,` notaries, bailiff, marshals and a
Bureau of Records &` Conveyances. Petitions are voluntarily brought before
the` Common law court, then writs and judgments issued to the` inferior State
and federal Article 1 courts.
Constitutional
Common law courts are courts of original` jurisdiction and the highest courts
in the land. You can bring` your entire case before the Common law court if
you’ve been` damaged or a crime committed against you. 31` Forty-two states are presently reconstituting Common law`
courts at the county and/or state level. Twenty-six were` represented in
Oklahoma recently at a conference (ironically` it occurred simultaneously with
a BATF convention next` door in the same facility).
There is one
state-level supreme Court presently convening` in Oklahoma and the Tenth &
Ninth Circuit Courts of` Appeal have tacitly recognized several of these
Article III` courts by remanding cases back to them.
The first business
of the Article III supreme Court of` Oklahoma was to reinstate the organic
Constitution for the` united states of America including the original 13th` Amendment as ratified in 1819.
Since the Article
I, legislative tribunals created by the U.S. Congress have not provided
remedies or redress under the` Common law, the American National OR sovereign
“state” Citizen has the unalienable
right to create remedy and` provide for the redress of grievances.
This is the reason
for these Common law courts being reconsummated.
A republican form
of government is built` from the bottom-up.
Twelve to
twenty-four sovereign individuals can` consummate a Common law court, appoint a
jury, judges,` constable, bailiff, clerk, notary, and issue writs and render`
judgment on cases voluntarily presented before it. Initially,` these courts
have been issuing “Quiet Title” to property and` asseverating status by
repatriating American Nationals OR` sovereign “state” Citizens.
This is
supplemental to a formal declaration by affidavit` with constructive legal
notice given to the government of` your asseveration of status.
Some of the writs
of these courts are being enforced through` the lien process and some of the
unorganized militias have` voluntarily aligned themselves with these
constitutional` Common law courts. The media has, as expected, framed up`
Americans engaged in lawful process as “paper terrorists.”
The Article III, Common
law courts must move quickly in` conjunction with their respective provisional
governments` and Constitutional Conventions to adopt amendments to` their rules
and procedures that permit the full participation` of women and minorities so
as to open sovereignty to all` responsible Americans of legal age (21).
All men and women
are indeed created equal and must all` enjoy full, unalienable rights. There
must never again be a` second class Citizenship in the united states of
America,` although some qualifications and responsibilities will apply.
Whether black or
white, male or female, a property owner or` not, or an Indian, American
Citizenship must be open to all` willing to claim it. The choice is then ours
where our` allegiance will stand.
“Common law Courts
are established under the rules of the` Common law and can either be ‘Courts of
Record’ or ‘Courts` not of Record.’ A Court of Record is a Superior Court that`
has the ability, through a Common law jury to hold in` contempt, to judge, and
the judgments are of such supreme` eminence their truth cannot be held in
question...
A Court of Record is established by Constitution or` legislation
and can be a Superior Court, Court of` Common Pleas, a Court of Chancery, an
Equity or` Admiralty Court.
— Jerry Henson 32`
Many of the Common
law courts have re-consummated` their rules and procedures based on the old
territorial rules` which is a good starting point for laying the foundation
and` restoring the organic law.
But some of these
old rules leave us exposed to the` accusation of being white supremacist,
racist or sexist for` not enjoining participation by other than white,
Christian` males. This is a matter of strategic importance. Either we're` all
going to be sovereigns, or we're all going to be slaves in` the next
millennium. The time is now! 33`
Common law
Supreme Court Judgments`
1. Johnny Johnston
case (commercial lien), Jerry L. Wilkins, Plaintiff; Republic of Texas, Our One
Supreme` Court, Dallas county (July 23, 1995); Case No. JW-95-006; Affirmed by
Order of Dismissal` (September 19, 1995) by 14th Judicial District, Case No.
9507735, Judge McLellon Marshall, Presiding.
2. Ensminger case
(allodial title); Republic of Oklahoma,` Our One Supreme Court; Affirmed by
United States` Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit (April 10, 1995), Case` Nos.
94-6415, 946417, Stephen H. Anderson, Circuit` Judge Presiding.
3. Broderick case
(commercial and common law liens),` Barbara Susan; Eastman, Petitioner; Our One
Supreme` Court in San Diego county (April 6, 1996), Case No PHD 4696, Order for
Declaratory Relief.
4. Moore case
(common law lien); The Common Law` Supreme Court for Oregon, Marion county
(December` 8, 1995), Case No.CLJCG-120895-041), Petition of` Summary Judgment. 34` “People have not yet
discovered they have been` disenfranchised.Even lawyers can't stand to admit
it.
In any nation in which people's rights have been` subordinated
to the rights of the few, in any` totalitarian nation, the first institution to
be` dismantled is the jury.
I was, I am, afraid.”
— Gerry Spence 35`
Notes and Sources`
AMERICAN LAW`
1. Sourced from the
book by George Orwell, 1984.
2. Source from The
Spirit of the Laws by an unknown` author (referred by Stephen Newcomb).
3. “Natural rights”
sourced from the Citizens Rule Book,` edited by Webster Adams, Whitten
Printers, Phoenix,` Arizona.
4. Blacks Law
Dictionary is the best reference for the` legal definition of terms; See also
Noah Webster's` 1828 American Dictionary and Bouvier's 1856` American Law
Dictionary.
5. Sourced from
Jury Power Information Kit, Fully` Informed Jury Association (FIJA).
6. Minneapolis Star
& Tribune, 3/27/87; Sourced from` the Citizens Rule Book, edited by Webster
Adams,` Whitten Printers, Phoenix, Arizona, p.4.
7. Admiralty/military
flag sourced from Behold` Newsletter; Sourced from an article The Gold Fringe`
on the American Flag by the late Howard Freeman` (5/23/91) in Government's
Liberty... Brings Death To` Freedom p. 84; Sourced from Jeff Ganaposki,
Patriot` Primer #2, Living Word; See also Which Flag Is` Which? by Richard
McDonald, Perceptions,` May/June 1995, p.20.
1. Sourced from
American’s Bulletin, March ‘96`
2. Quote sourced
from Law Against the People by Robert` Lefcourt, Random House, New York, p. 31.
3. Sourced from
Davidson v New Orleans ,96 US 97, 25` L.Ed. 616.]`
1. Sourced from
LaMarr Hardy, Research Foundation.
2. Sourced from
Goodbye April 15th, by Boston T. Party,` Javelin Press, Austin, Texas, 1992, p.
23/12; Sourced` from The World Almanac & Book of Facts, Phanos` Books,
1992, p.67 (must be willful to be prosecuted for` criminal tax evasion).
3. ”Your Rights of
Due Process” reprinted and edited` from Goodbye April 15th, by Boston T. Party,
(Javelin` Press, Austin, Texas, 1992, p. 25/2).
4. See also
Guardian T & D Co. v. Fisher 26 S Ct. 186 at` 188 (1906) (contracts must be
voluntary); Sourced` from Free At Last, by N.A. Scott, Ph.D., D.D., p.1-8.
5. Don McAlvany;
Quote sourced from the Preparedness` Journal, May 1993.
6. 44 USC, Section
1505; Sourced from Goodbye April` 15th, by Boston T. Party, (Javelin Press,
Austin, Texas,` 1992); Richard McDonald; See also Cook v. Tait, 265` U.S. 47
(1924).
7. Sourced from
Excerpted from Dan Meador’s famous` Exhibit Package: Federal and federal
States` Jurisdictional Limits, Complaint & Narrative;` Additional comments
by Johnny Liberty.;
See also` Burkes v. Laskar, 441 US 471 (on jurisdiction);` Sourced from Free At
Last, by N.A. Scott, Ph.D., D.D.,` p.2.18. See also New York vs. Mihl, 36 U.S.
(11 Pet.)` 102 (1837) and People vs. Godfrey, 17 Johns. 225` (N.Y., 1819).
1. Sourced from
patriot researcher Leslie Rohde, Just` Who or What is A Person?
2. Sourced from the
11th Amendment, Constitution for` the usA.
3. Courts of Common
Pleas still exist in many parts of` the usA (e.g., North Carolina); See also
Erie Railroad` v. Thompkins (1938); See also Federal Rules of Civil` Procedure;
See also Negotiable Instruments Act,` Rules of Civil Procedure, Social Security
Act of 1938.
1. Sourced from
Title 28, USC.
2. See also NANS,
Summer ‘96 FEATURES: Freemen,` Liens & Reflections, p.54 - 61; NANS, Fall
‘96` SPECIAL REPORTS: Sovereignty & the Separation of` Powers, p.54 - 61.
3. Sourced from a
brief from the Chief Justice Leroy` Schweitzer.
4. Sourced from
Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1608 - 1611.
5. Ibid., p. 961.
6. Ibid., p.1256.
7. Sourced from
Michael Louis Minns, Underground` Lawyer, (Gopher Publications, Katy, Texas,
p.117).
8. Sourced from
Gerry Spence Attorney At-Law, How to` Argue & Win Everytime (St. Martin’s
Press, New York,` 1995 -back cover). See also Training Warriors of the` Law
with Gerry Spense, Attorney At-Law, The` Register-Guard (molding a new breed of
trial lawyer).
9. Sourced from
audio series by Eric Madsen, Team Law.
10. Sourced from a
confidential essay of the Capital Parish` of the Oversoul, p.27.
11. Sourced from
Jerry Henson, The Common Law of the` united states of America, (Lighthouse
Color Press,` 1995, p.13-14). Now, here’s a great man, presently` incarcerated
for daring to setup a Common law court` system in this country — prayers for
this man.
12. Sourced from
Michael Louis Minns, Underground` Lawyer, (Gopher Publications, Katy, Texas,
p.117).
13. Sourced from
NANS, Fall ‘96, p. 63.
14. Sourced from
the INTERNET, Gerry Spence Attorney` At-Law.