What is A School of Law?

---

What is presented here is straight from the Constitutions, the law, court decisions, Acts of Congress, the Bible and other credible sources acceptable in all courts of competent jurisdiction. Just by learning what is presented here in a very small amount of text, diagrams, videos, court case evidence and examples of properly composed court filings, you will be much more knowledgeable than nearly anyone else you will talk to on law and rights.

A School of Law is a place where you learn the law from its source, how to find it and how to apply it and why you should be doing it. God and government are the two most talked about subjects, how much do you think you know about them?

It is a blog to talk about the People, their rights defined in Law, and the governments they’ve created under the Gods they owe their existence to (Public Law 97-280).

There are 7 total pages of reading, a couple are lengthy but, for all there is to cover on these topics, they are relatively short. If you’re like me you’ll have to read it a few times to get it all. If you think there are points which have been missed or should otherwise be included here, please say so in a message to Admin provided at the end of this site.

Learning how to learn the law, from its source, the right way and how to apply the law, the right way, so that we may be able to control the law and the Government, together, as it was intended. This happens through the operation of Foundational Law.

Here is a great read on American History – https://teamlaw.net/history.htm

Only through the vast majority of the People knowing the law and how to enforce it can we hope to keep those in Government from controlling everything in a fascist, socialist, oligarchical regime type fashion…like most other Nations of the World have been accustomed to and suffering under for centuries.

All of this information will be covered in the “topics of discussion”. A picture of the systems of governance is also provided in the “Two Governments” link to help you form the proper perspective from the information you are about to receive here. The newly added “Oaths of Office” page is a reminder to us of the reasons we allow others to represent our best interests, here and abroad.

People want to be free with their liberty intact to conduct their families lives and private business as they see fit, not how others or their systems of governance dictate.

“He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.” Proverbs 28:9 

The Bible, Magna Charta, Declaration of Independence, Preamble and the Constitutions are all well known historical documents that preserve the rights of man. Unfortunately, governments and the courts don’t always have good intentions for fellow men and women. Many forgotten rights and freedoms are listed here for your defense of your liberty when it comes under attack and, it will if you live at all. 

The following is a list of quotes taken from the Law, court rulings, etc.; we hope you find them useful. 

1. It is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutionally secured rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. (Boyd vs United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886)

2. A state cannot, by invoking the power to regulate the professional conduct of attorneys, infringe in any way the right of individuals and the public to be fairly represented in lawsuits authorized by Congress to effectuate a basic public interest. Laymen cannot be expected to know how to protect their rights when dealing with practiced and carefully trained adversaries, cf. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, and for them to associate together to help one another to preserve and enforce rights granted them under federal laws cannot be condemned as a threat to legal ethics. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1, 7.

3. Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them. Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491

4. The Bill of Rights was provided as a barrier, to protect the individual against arbitrary exactions of... legislatures, (and) courts... it is the primary distinction between democratic and totalitarian way. Re Stroller, Supreme Court of Florida, en banc, 36 So. 2nd 443, 445 (1948)

5. History is clear that the first ten amendments to the Constitution were adopted to secure certain common law rights of the people, against invasion by the Federal Government. Bell v. Hood, 71 F. Supp., 813 (1947) U.S.D.C. — So. Dist. CA

6. Bill of rights are, in their origin, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Hamilton, Federalist Papers, No. 84

7. The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Article IX, U.S. Constitution.

8.     his right to be heard through his own counsel is unqualified. Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3.

9. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right... to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Article VI, U.S. Constitution.

10. Yet while he was informing the prospective defendant of his Right to Counsel, he was simultaneously requesting that the Defendant's Counsel leave the interrogation. In effect, the investigator informed Tarlowski that he might have his attorney present, but not his accountant. 

Ruling in favor of Tarlowski's motion to suppress, the Court said: 

• For a government official to mouth in a ritualistic way part of the warning about the right to counsel, while excluding the person relied upon as counsel is, in effect, to reverse the meaning of the words used.

• When a federal official's interference with the right of free association, takes the form of limiting the ability of a criminal suspect to consult with and be accompanied by a person upon whom he relies for advise and protection, he gravely transgresses.  For these reasons, the Motion to suppress must be granted. U.S. v Tarlowski, (69 -2 U.S.T.C. & D.C. EA. Dist. N.Y.) 305 F. Supp. 112 (1969)

11. It was held that a State may not pass statutes prohibiting the unauthorized practice of law or to interfere with the Right to freedom of speech, secured in the First Amendment. (See lawyer, counsel, equal protection,) United Mine Workers v Illinois Bar Association, 389 U.S. 217, and NAACP v Button, 371 U.S. 415, and also in Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1 (1964).

12. The due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment guarantee to each citizen the equal protection of the laws and prohibits a denial thereof by any Federal official. (See Rights) Bolling v. Sharpe, 327 U.S. 497.

13. The cooperation and help of laymen, as well as of lawyers, is necessary if the right of reasonable access to the courts is to be available to the indigent among us.  Reasonable access to the courts is a right (secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United States), being guaranteed as  against state action by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. Justice Douglas in Johnson v. Avery, Commissioner of Correction, et al., 393 U.S. 483, 498.

14. "…so as practically to make unjust and illegal discrimination between persons in similar circumstances material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution." Yick Wo v Hopkins,118 US 356, 369 (1886). 

15. The legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means within which the law permits, cannot be doubted. Gregory vs Helvering, 293 US 465.

16. It is well settled that a State has no power to fetter the right to carry on interstate commerce within its borders by the imposition of conditions or regulations which are unnecessary and pass beyond the bounds of what is reasonable and suitable for the proper exercise of its powers in the field that belongs to it. Sioux Remedy Co. v. Cope, 235 U.S. 197, 201; Michigan Commission v. Duke, 266 U.S. 570, 577.

17. The streets belong to the public and are primarily for the use of the public in the ordinary way. Their use for the purposes of gain is special and extraordinary and, generally at least, may be prohibited or conditioned as the legislature deems proper, Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 144.

18. Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by government sufferance or permission (license or permit). In the latter case the power to exclude altogether generally includes the lesser power to condition and may justify a degree of regulation not admissible in the former. Davis v. Massachusetts, 167 U.S. 43; Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 145.

19. The legislature may not, under the guise of protecting the public interests, arbitrarily interfere with private business, or impose unusual and unnecessary restrictions upon lawful occupations. Its determination as to what is a proper exercise of its police powers is not final or conclusive but, is subject to the supervision of the courts. Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133.

20. Definitions of the police power must, however, be taken, subject to the condition that the State cannot, in its exercise, for any purpose whatever, encroach upon the powers of the general government, or rights granted or secured by the supreme law of the land (Constitutions, State and Federal), New Orleans Gas Co. v. Louisiana Light Co., 115 U.S. 650, 651.

21. Rights and privileges arising from contracts with a State are subject to regulation for the protection of the public health, the public morals, and the public safety, in the same sense, and to the same extent, as are all contracts and all property, whether owned by natural persons or corporations.... A State can no more impair the obligation of a contract by her organic law than by legislative enactment. New Orleans Gas Co. v. Louisiana Light Co., 115 U.S. 650, 672

22. An act of the legislature which has for its object the preservation of the public interests against illegal depravations of private individuals ought to be sustained, unless it is plainly violative of the Constitution, or subversive of private rights. Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133, 140.

23. The State cannot diminish rights of the people. Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516.

24. "...the assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; See also Love v. Griffith, 266 U.S. 32; Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359; Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1; Staub v. City of Baxley, 355 U.S. 313; N.A.A.C.P. v. ALabama, 357 U.S. 449; Wright v. Georgia, 373 U.S. 284, 289.

25. Those who already walk submissively will say there is no need for alarm. But submissiveness is not our heritage. The First Amendment was designed to allow rebellion to remain as our heritage. The Constitution was designed to keep government off the backs of the people. The Bill of Rights was added to keep the precincts of belief and expression, of the press, of political and social activities free from surveillance. The Bill of Rights was designed to keep agents of government and official eavesdroppers away from assemblies of people. The aim was to allow men to be free and independent and to assert their rights against government. ...the America once extolled as the voice of liberty heard around the world no longer is cast in the image which Jefferson and Madison designed, but more in the Russian image,... Laird v. Tatum, 408 U.S. 1, 28-9, Douglas J., Dissenting.

26. The courts are not bound by mere forms, nor are they to be isled by mere pretenses. They are at liberty— indeed, are under a solemn duty—to look at the substance of things, whenever they enter upon the inquiry whether the legislature has transcended the limits of its authority. If therefore, a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals, or the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects, or is a palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to the Constitution. Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 661.

27. But whatever springs the State may set for those who are endeavoring to assert rights that the State confers the assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice. Davis v. Wechsler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; See also Love v. Griffith, 266 U.S. 32; Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359; Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1; Staub v. City of Baxley, 355 U.S. 313; N.A.A.C.P. v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449; Wright v. Georgia, 373 U.S. 284, 289.

28. Constitutional provisions for the security of persons and property should be liberally construed. It is the duty of the courts to be watchful of constitutionally secured rights against any stealthy encroachments thereon. Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 635.

29. There should be no arbitrary deprivation of life or liberty, or arbitrary spoliation of property.  (Rights) Barber v. Connolly, 113 US 27, 31; Yick Yo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356.

30. It is settled that a distinction obtains, and equitable jurisdiction exists to restrain criminal prosecutions under constitutional enactments, when the prevention of such prosecutions is essential to the safeguarding of rights of property. Traux v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 37-38; Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 143.

31. We find it intolerable that one constitutionally secured right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another.  Simmons v. U.S. 390, U.S. 389 (1968).

32. To be that statutes which would deprive a citizen of the rights of person or property without a regular trial, according to the course and usage of common law, would not be the law of the land. Hoke vs Henderson, 15, N.C. 15, 25 AM Dec 677.

33. The phrase as used in the constitution does not mean a statute passed for the purpose of working the wrong.  That construction would render the restriction absolutely nugatory.  The people would be made to say to the houses, ‘You shall be vested with the legislative power of the state, but no one shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges of a citizen, unless you shall not do the wrong unless you choose to do it.’ Per Bronson, J., In Taylor v Porter, 4 Hill (N.Y.) 140, 40 AM, Dec 274.

34. “In Brown v. Levee Commissioners, 50 Miss. 479, it is said that these constitutional provisions do not mean the general body of [pg.950] the law as it was at the time the constitution took effect; but they refer to certain fundamental rights which that system of jurisprudence of which ours is derivative has always recognized; if any of these are disregarded in the proceedings by which a person is condemned to the loss of property, etc., then the deprivation has not been by due process of law.  And it has been held that the state cannot deprive a person of his property without due process of law through the medium of a constitutional convention any more than it can through an act of the legislature;  Clark v. Mitchell, 69 Mo. 627.” Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Concise Encyclopedia, Volume 1, by: John Bouvier, Francis Rawle; § “Due Process of Law” pgs. 949-950.

35. In determining whether such rights were denied, we are governed by the substance and not by mere forms; ID., Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Schmidt, 177 U.S. 230.

36. The claim and exercise of a constitutionally secured right cannot be converted into a crime. Miller v. U.S., 230 F 486 at 489.

37. Right to trial by jury!  Dairy Queen vs Wood, 369 U.S. 469.

38. Jury trial is a right! Hill vs Philpott, 445 F 2 D 144; Juliard vs Greenmen, 110 U.S. 421; Kansan vs Colorado, 206 U.S. 46, (1907); Reisman vs Caplan, 375, U.S. 440, (1964); U.S> vs Murdock, 290 U.S. 389 (1933); U.S> vs Tarlowski, 305 F. Supp 112 (1969).

39. Civil Rights…."Civil action for deprivation of rights, 28 U.S.C. 1983, gives U.S. District Courts original jurisdiction."

40.Who would believe the ironic truth that the cooperative taxpayer (a Social Security Administration created, numbered entity) fares much worse than the individual (man or woman) who relies upon his constitutionally secured rights. United States v. Dickerson, 413 F 2D 1111.

41.The Commonwealth certainly has broad powers and choices of methods to tax Mesta, a corporation created by it and domiciled and operating within its borders”, U.S. vs. Alleghany County 322 U.S. 174 (1944).

42. All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those over which it does not extend, are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation (the People and all non collateralized property). This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident.  The sovereignty of a state extends to everything which exists by its own authority or is introduced by its permission, McCulloch v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al,17 U.S. 159 4 Wheat.

43.We are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the state.  The individual may stand upon his constitutionally secured rights as a citizen.  He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way.  His power to contract is unlimited.  He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him.  He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property.  His rights are such as existed by the law of the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state and, can only be taken from him by due process of law and, in accordance with the constitution.  Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law.  He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights...An individual may lawfully refuse to answer incriminating questions unless protected by an immunity statute... Hale vs Henkel, 201 US 43, 74.

44. The subpoena power is a power capable of oppressive use, especially when it may be indiscriminately delegated and, the subpoena is not returnable before a judicial order of enforcement. But the subpoena is in the form of an official command, and even though improvidently issued it has some coercive tendency, either because of ignorance of their rights on the part of those whom it purports to command, or because of their reluctance to test the subpoena's validity but litigation. 

The points that should be remembered: 

• Subpoena power in the hands of an administrative officer can be very oppressive.

• Neither the IRS nor any other administrative officer can compel obedience to an administrative summons, only courts can enforce it.

• Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance.

The use of administrative summons is very effective in obtaining information which could not otherwise be obtained, because it appears to be official and legal in form, and as a consequence, citizens are reluctant to test its demand for information. United States v. Minker, 350 US 179, 187.

45. The United States Supreme Court stated further that all rights and safeguards contained in the first eight amendments to the federal constitution are equally applicable in every state criminal action, "because denial of them would be a denial of due process of law". Wm Malloy v. Patrick J. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1.

46. If there is any truth to the old proverb that "one who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client," the Court, by its opinion today, now bestows a constitutional right on one to make a fool of himself. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), Blackmun dissenting.

47. There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutionally secured rights. Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 946.

48. The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, not the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be retained only by sustained combat. It cannot be claimed by an attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in person. United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538.

49. Constitutionally secured rights may not be denied because of hostility to their assertion and exercise: Vindication of conceded constitutional rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them. Watson v. Memphis, 375 U.S. 526.

50. "Accustomed to trample on the rights of others, you have lost the genius of your own independence and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises among you." Abraham Lincoln, Sept. 11, 1858.

51. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self- appointed, or elective, may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Federalist Paper No. 47 -- James Madison.

52. "A living Bill of Rights----John Locke made articulate a long-standing view that legislative power needs to be curbed: 'Their power in the utmost bounds of it is limited to the public good of the society. It is a power that hath no other end but preservation and therefore can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly impoverish the subjects.'" Treatise of Civil Government, 1690. Justice William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court quoting John Locke.

53. Our Bill of Rights curbs all three branches of government. It subjects all departments of government to a rule of law and sets boundaries beyond which no official may go. It emphasizes that in this country man walks with dignity and without fear, that he need not grovel before an all powerful government. Justice William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court.

54. Constitutions are not primarily designed to protect majorities, who are usually able to protect themselves, but rather to preserve and protect the rights of individuals and minorities against arbitrary actions of those in authority. Houstin County v. Martin, 232 A 1 511; 169 So. 13.

53. Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state or territory, subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. 42 U.S.C. 1983.

55. An appeal is not always a satisfactory remedy.  The court itself has recognized that a citizen's rights may be seriously violated even if he is not ultimately convicted.  Dombrowiski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (1965).  A plaintiff need not pursue his state remedies before instituting a 1983 action.  Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), which would seem to recognize that appeal ability simply is not sufficient protection.

56.Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US, 370 (1886), the Supreme Court wrote: Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.

57.  DRED SCOTT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JOHN F.A. SANDFORD, 60 U.S. 393 (more) 19 How. 393 The words "People of the United States" and "Citizens" are synonymous terms and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the "sovereign people," and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty. 

58. A federal court cannot "pronounce any statute, either of a State or of the United States, void, because irreconcilable with the Constitution, except as it is called upon to adjudge the legal rights of litigants in actual controversies." Liverpool Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of Emigration, 113 U. S. 33, 39.

59. A citizen's right to a vote free of arbitrary impairment by state action has been judicially recognized as a right secured by the Constitution, when such impairment resulted from dilution by a false tally, cf. United States v. Classic, 313 U. S. 299; or by a refusal to count votes from arbitrarily selected precincts, cf. United States v. Mosley, 238 U. S. 383, or by a stuffing of the ballot box, cf. Ex parte Siebold, 100 U. S. 371; United States v. Saylor, 322 U. S. 385.

60. Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549,   squarely held that voters who allege facts showing disadvantage to themselves as individuals have standing to sue.[27] A number 207*207 of cases decided after Colegrove recognized the standing of the voters there involved to bring those actions.[28]

61. They are asserting "a plain, direct and adequate interest in maintaining the effectiveness of their votes," Coleman v. Miller, 307 U. S., at 438, not merely a claim of "the right, possessed by every citizen, to require that the Government be administered according to law . . . ." Fairchild v. Hughes, 258 U. S. 126, 129; compare Leser v. Garnett, 258 U. S. 130. They are entitled to a hearing and to the District Court's decision on their claims. "The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws, whenever he receives an injury." Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 163.

62. All statutory regulations are assumed to be written in conformance with and operating under the pre existing Foundational Law, commonly referred to as Common Law, see US v. Texas, 507 US 529 (1993).

63. Those in public positions must be able to pass upon the Constitutionality of a statute, see Osborn vs. Bank of US, 22 U.S. 738 (1824) 9 Wheat. 73.

64. The Land Patent is the only form of perfect title to land available in the United States. Wilcox v. Jackson, 13 PET (U.S.) 498 10 L.Ed. 264. 

65. The “Warranty Deed” is merely a “color of title”. Color of Title means: “That which is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law.” Howth v. Farrar, C.C.A Tex., 94 F.2d 654, 658~ McCoy v. Lowrie, 42 Wash.2d 24, Black’s Law Sixth Ed. 

66. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent. “A grant of land (Land Patent) is a public law standing on the statue books of the State, and is notice to every subsequent purchaser under any conflicting sale made afterward.” Wineman v. Gastrell, 54 FED 819,2 IS Ap. 581. 

67. The Land Patent is permanent and cannot be changed by the government after its issuance. “Where the United States has parted with title by a patent legally issued and upon surveys made by itself and approved by the proper department, the title so granted cannot be impaired by any subsequent survey made by the government for its own purposes.” Cage v. Danks, 13 LA.ANN 128. 

68. The Land Patent is permanent and cannot be changed by the government after its issuance. “Where the United States has parted with title by a patent legally issued and upon surveys made by itself and approved by the proper department, the title so granted cannot be impaired by any subsequent survey made by the government for its own purposes.” Cage v. Danks, 13 LA.ANN 128. 

69. The Land Patent is the Title to land (and initially to the property appurtenant to the land).  By definition a Land Patent is the only form of proof of absolute title to land in the United States of America.  “A patent is the highest evidence of title and is conclusive as against the government and all claiming under junior patents or titles, U.S. v. Stone 2 US 525. 

70. Congress has the sole power to declare the dignity and effect of titles emanating from the United States; and the whole legislation of the Federal Government, in reference to the public lands, declares the patent the superior and conclusive evidence of legal title;” Langdon v. Sherwood, 124 U.S. 74, 84. 

71. After exclusive jurisdiction over lands within a State have been ceded to the United States, private property located thereon is not subject to taxation by the State, nor can state statutes enacted subsequent to the transfer have any operation therein.’ Surplus Trading Company v. Cook, 281 U.S. 647; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Chiles, 214 U.S. 274; Arlington Hotel v. Fant, 278 U.S. 439; Pacific Coast Dairy v. Department of Agriculture, 318 U.S. 285. 

72. Summa Corp. v California, 466 US 198, is one of the best cases describing how land patents work. In that 1980’s case the court noted that they had ruled and ruled and ruled and they were not going to rule again, the Land Patent is supreme title to land. The case was one where California was granted the tidewater lands in the California Republic Constitution and therefore California went after a family’s land, which land was secured under patent on an old Spanish Land Grant. Interestingly, the case doesn’t talk much about land patents; it talks about the Guadeloupe Hidalgo Treaty. Imagine that, a land patent case that speaks mostly about the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which clause states that Treaties are supreme law even over a State's foundational Constitution.

In the history of this county no Land Patent has ever lost an appellate review in the courts. As a matter of fact in Suma Corp. v California the Supreme Court ruled forever that the Land Patent would always win over any other form of title. In that case the land in question was tidewater land and California’s claim was based on California’s constitutional right to all tidewater lands. The patent stood supreme even against California’s Constitution.

Land cannot be taken for debt or taxes, but property (real estate) can be.

Here are just a few snippets from Supreme Court rulings, setting precedent in U.S. Law.

1. Congress does not have the power to pass laws that override the Constitution. U.S. Supreme Court : Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137.

2. It is unconstitutional to require a precondition on the exercising of a right. U.S. Supreme Court :(Guinn v. US 1915; Lane v. Wilson 1939).

3. It is unconstitutional to require a license, i.e., government permission, to exercise a right, U.S. Supreme Court : (Murdock v. PA 1943; Lowell v. City of Griffin 1939; Freedman v. MD 1965, Near v. MN 1931; Miranda v. AZ 1966)

4. If the State tries to convert a right into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right with impunity. U.S. Supreme Court : (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, AL 373 U.S. 262).

5. It is unconstitutional to delay the exercising of a right. U.S. Supreme Court, Austin v. Keefe 1971.

6. It is unconstitutional to charge a fee for the exercising of a right. U.S. Supreme Court : (Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections 1966).

7. It is unconstitutional to register, i.e., record in a government database, the exercising of a right. U.S. Supreme Court : (Thomas v. Collins 1945; Lamont v. Postmaster General 1965; Haynes v. US 1968).

8. “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them.” –Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

This system of governance is merely a corporation formed by the Republic Government to conduct its business affairs through. It adopted the Republic Constitution as it’s charter, minus the original 13th Amendment of 1818 (the Titles of Nobility Amendment):

“If any citizen of the United States of America shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatsoever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.” December 7th, 1818.

National Archives’ 13th Amendment proof of non ratification:

On May 1st, 1810, Congress proposed the Thirteenth Amendment when there were 17 States in the Union. Ratification by 3/4 of the States was completed before December 7th, 1818. The 13 States needed for ratification were as follows:

Maryland – Dec. 25th, 1810;

Kentucky, Jan. 31st, 1811;

Ohio, Jan. 31, 1811;

Delaware, Feb.2, 1811;

Penn., Feb. 6th, 1811;

New Jersey, Feb 13th, 1811;

Vermont, Oct. 24th, 1811;

Tenn., Nov. 21st, 1811;

Georgia, Dec. 13th, 1811;

N. Carolina, Dec. 23rd, 1811;

Massachusetts, Feb. 27th, 1812;

New Hampshire, Dec. 10, 1812;

Virginia before Dec. 17th, 1818.

Esquire, your honor, knighthood, your excellency, your majesty, your highness, etc. are examples of titles of nobility. They serve to elevate that person above everyone else in that society. Arrogant, selfish and intolerable actions of tyrants only. There are around 20 separate publishing's of Constitutions, State and Federal documents, etc. that include this original Amendment for around 53 years. The official word today is that those publishing's were the result of a mistake.

The United States of America Republic has no bank. https://teamlaw.net/cases/PrsJcksnsVetoMssgReBnkUS18320710.pdf

This corporate system of governance has the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Banking Act of 1933, the Social Security Act of 1935 (along with Untied States Codes, Codes of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register) and the Bretton Woods Agreement Act of 1944, Title 22, section 286 USC.  All of which would be unconstitutional for the Republic to be involved in.

The Revelations of John The Divine speaks of a red dragon with seven heads and ten horns. All ten world banks are in China. China is the enemy of this nation by their own actions. China is the red dragon.

Seven heads:

Rockefeller – United States

Rothschild – Paris & London

Kuhn Loeb & Lehman's – New York

Goldman Sachs

Warburg’s – Hamburg

Lazard's – Paris

Israel Moses Seits – Rome

After the Civil War came the period of adjusting the 11 southern States, that were incorrectly referred to as “rebels”, to the new property laws of the Union. Rebels are those who don’t follow the Law. President Lincoln and the North were the ones who weren’t following the Law. Carpet baggers and troops would go down to these southern States, after the war, to destroy their plantations, courthouses and historical facts, burn their Land Records, rape their women, kill or steal their children and just about anything else of value from the People, who just wanted President Lincoln to obey the Law in regards to taxation. Taxes must be equally apportioned among the States.

Ceding from the Union as the Southern 11 States had done is an act of war by definition. Because the Land belongs to the Nation by Treaties and the People own the Nation. Those People that are educated in the Foundational Laws of this Nation and how to use the courts to enforce it. Perhaps there was a better way. They were trespassing on the land.

Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant who couldn’t forgive himself for his own deeds. General Orders no. 100 et seq. is a testament to this.

Contrary to popular belief, the onset of the Civil War had absolutely nothing to do with slavery. That became the focal point after the middle of the war when the North was losing and promised land to the negroes if they escaped to the North. The negroes who did make it to the North were given guns and put on the front lines. They were given 40 acres of land each for their service either on the plantation or elsewhere. 50 acres were required to vote. All of the slaves are gone now and no one today is affected by that slavery.

Slaves are those taken and forced into servitude without their consent. Indentured Servants are those sold into or volunteering for servitude by their own consent via contracts. Nearly every slave in America was purchased from the tribal Chief or volunteered. They had a much better life as a slave in America than the Africans did in Africa. Most States, North and South, had contracts in place for their so called “slaves”. State and Federal Governments have no authority to impair those contracts, which was another of the North’s violations of the Laws against the South.

The negroes were offered free passage back to Africa after the Civil War, which they unanimously refused. Chief Supreme Justice, John Marshall, took 500 negro families to Liberia, Africa, and established a Constitutional Republic for the Africans before the nineteen hundreds which they totally destroyed in it’s infancy. 

We agree that no one should be a “slave” of another. The Israelites (Caucasians) were enslaved to the Egyptians for around 460 years, nearly twice as long. They built Egypt (read the KJV). We also believe Government, actual or corporate, should be kept in it’s place, which is servitude to the People. The educated People. Nowhere in the Constitutions does government have any authority to govern the People, who are sovereign, only the entities it creates.

The wrong side definitely won the Civil War, the bloodiest in our Nation’s history. Some 800,000 men, women and children murdered in Lincolns’ war. All because the southern State’s preferred to buy their cotton gins from England, who made a much better product at a cheaper price than in the factories of Connecticut, which angered the North, who in turn raised the import taxes, for the South, to nearly 50% (not all at once), while the North only paid 3%. Taxes must be apportioned equally among the States.

80% of England’s cotton came from the U.S. at this time (1863). Two years later the war was over.

The DOCO Act of 1871 formed a private corporation for the Government to conduct it’s business affairs through. This Act was totally abolished in 1874. The 1878 Act reinvented the 1871 Act with no "body corporate for municipal purposes" language. 

The 1973 Home Rule Act of 1973 (D.C. Code § 1-102) puts that language back in:

“The District is created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia ("United States Government" by blending of courts, cops, addresses and statutes), by which name it is constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes. It may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States".

The only reason to form a corporation is that the business conducted is likely to draw a lot of litigation. Corporations typically have their own on staff litigating attorney’s. Now the Elected, in the seats of the Republic, and their personal property would be safe from lawsuits because, the corporation could sue and be sued instead of the Trustees (Government Elect) who actually caused the Civil War and all the destruction before, during and afterwards.

In the Republic Government, only landowners can vote, all others are merely tenants on their land. Landowners are the only ones who have any stake in the Nation. The requirement was 50 acres or more.

A Land Patent is the only perfect title to land in the United State’s, see Wilcox v. Jackson , 13 PET (U.S.) 498 10 L.Ed. 264, Howth v. Farrar, Suma Corp vs. California,” Wineman v. Gastrell, 54 FED 819,2 IS Ap. 581 and a ton of , others. This issue has been determined Stare Decitis, Res Judicata by the SCOTUS.

 A Landowner is a man or woman who has control of Land Patent protected land. Land Patents do not protect a property owner from jeopardizing ownership through property taxing contracts governed by statutes as some patriot myths proclaim. A Land Patent is absolute title to the domain, like a king has. All the land is owned by the People except for what is allowed to the governments per the Constitutions, State and Federal.

After the second World War, the President, FDR, by and through the “authority” of the “Articles of Agreement of the International Bank for reconstruction and Development“, dated July 22, 1944, entered the United States (corporation) into the United Nations. 55 Nations participated which began the United Nations, a communist organization with no Government. Previous to that it was the League of Nations, a globalist organization that sought to control the World through one system of governance, one instrument for financial transactions and one court system. The Senate discovered this and the cult disbanded, after one year in existence (1942), only to rename itself the “United Nations” in 1944.

That plan of one world government would be great…if it was styled after the American Constitutional Republic Government.

The President of the United States of America would have no authority to participate in such a contract which undermines the sovereignty of this Nation. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was not the President of the United States of America. He was the President of the United States Government/aka District of Columbia, a corporation, formed by the actual Government. This is the only possible case when the law is followed through.

It’s not unlawful for the corporation to have this affair. But, it doesn’t deserve to exist. Exactly like the Bank of the United States didn't.  

https://teamlaw.net/cases/PrsJcksnsVetoMssgReBnkUS18320710.pdf

By and through the “authority” of this “Agreement”, FD Roosevelt authorized full access to the Treasury of the United States Government, the corporation, to the International Monetary Fund, a foreign, private corporation, to settle the debts of the war and aid and pay for the reconstruction of all the nations affected by the world war. Basically, a debit card. A Quit Claim Deed, if you will. Furthermore, he was granted the privilege to choose the Governor of this new World Bank which, is now the Secretary of the Treasury. That is, the corporate Secretary of the corporate United States Treasury (1920).

Corp U.S. closed the Treasury of the United States of America in 1920 and opened this Treasury in it’s place. The President of the U.S. is the chief Administrator of the I.M.F. , the United States Government (a corporation) is the property of the United States of America Government (a Republic) which, is the property of the People. The People, with a capital P, are those Citizens who were born of parents who were Citizens, at the time of the child’s birth which, is called a “Natural Born Citizen”, see Shanks vs. Dupont; 28 US 242 (1830), Dred Scott vs. Sandford; 60 US 393 (1857),Cohens v. Virginia (1821), 6 Wheat. 264, 399.,

The founders referred to and relied on THE LAW OF NATIONS OR PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF NATURE, by Emmerich de Vattel (Joseph Chitty ed., Philadelphia, T. & J.W. Johnson & Co. 1867 (1758) as the “Law of Nations”; so much so that they directly referenced it in the Constitution, at Article 1, § 8, clause 10, when they granted Congress the authority: “To define and punish…Offences against the Law of Nations.”

Chapter 19, so clearly defined the elements necessary to “a natural born Citizen” as: “

Its natives are those who are born in the country of parents who are citizens. I repeat that in order to belong to a country one must be born there of a father who is a citizen; for if one is born of foreign parents, that land will only be the place of one’s birth, and not one’s country.

There are four classes of citizen in the United States today and only the Natural Born Citizen is eligible to the office of President. The native born (parents weren’t born here), naturalized (immigrants) and the US citizen (taxpayer trusts/cardholders) are not eligible to be President of the United States of America. Barrack Obama was not and will never be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America. He is/was a Natural Born Citizen of Kenya, Africa which, is a protectorate of Great Britain.

See, the British Nationality Act of 1948, at Part II, § 5, states: “Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.”

Wherefore, the unqualified Presidential candidate, Barrack Hussein Obama, was born a citizen of Great Britain. Because Kenya, the birth and death place of his father, is a protectorate of Great Britain. He is merely a “resident” here. The term has meant the same thing for thousands of years. If your parents were Americans when you were born then, you are a Natural born Citizen as per Article 2, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution(s). 

Kamala Harris also is not a Natural Born Citizen as her parents were not citizens. Do these cardholders not understand the term in Article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution(s)?

In Corp U.S., the Secretary of the Treasury gives the I.R.S., (a Puerto Rican based corporation), the authority to come here and collect Corp U.S. taxes from its “taxpayers” (cardholders). Neither has any authority over People without SSN's, only over the entities they create, see McCulloch v. State of Maryland, 17 US 159 4 Wheat,- U.S. v. Alleghany County, PA., 322 US 174 (1944), – Downes v. Bidwell, 182 US 244 (1901), et seq., and the 16th Amendment (the right of Corp US to tax and regulate the entities it creates). Unless, of course the people choose to invoke the number everywhere in their personal and business affairs. Today's society invokes the number in every aspect of their lives.

Some patriot organizations refer to the “taxpayers” as “strawmen”. The definition of strawmen indicates they don’t exist, they are fictional. Taxpayers exist. They are agency businesses of Corp U.S., created and owned (Form 3000) by the Social Security Administration, an agency of Corp US, to “raise revenue and for other purposes” (the “purposes” aren’t defined but, demonstrated as controls of the People), see the Social Security Act of 1935, Form 3000 and section 1104, the F.I.C.A and, the Laws of Agency.

After the bankruptcy of Corp U.S. on March 9, 1933, which came about from the non payment of the rent on the Federal Reserve Notes for twenty years, see Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and for the Bankruptcy of March 9, 1933 see, Roosevelt executive orders #’s 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260, Title 28 U.S.C. 3002 § 15, and 48 Stat 1, Public Law #1 and 12 U.S.C.A. 95a & 95b, it was broke and without the means to conduct the business of the actual Government which, is the entire reason for which it was formed.

This was the Great Depression. Great Britain introduced Congress to the Social Security system of raising revenue by giving it to them word for word, see the “National Archives“/ Congressional Records. The U.S. Congress did not draft this legislation. Great Britain has always felt the United States is their property. Great Britain was never the government or any controlling factor here. American history is perverted to the British point of view.

Before the Bretton Woods Agreement Act of 1944 (Title 22 USC, §286), the Elected sat in two seats, one in the Republic Government and one in the Corp US corporation. After the “BWAA of 1944” they could no longer sit in the seats of the Government because of the foreign affiliations of Corp U.S. and the foreign controls over it. It is not lawful (it’s a trespass) for foreigners to sit in our Government, see Title 18 U.S.C., section 219 and Trespassing, and Deuteronomy 17;15.

Any foreign agent in the United States must have a Green Card on file at the U.S. Attorney General’s office. This includes all officers of Corp U.S. and the sub Corp States. Violation of USC Title 22, section 616, which is a felony under USC Title 18 section 219, carries heavy penalties and even death.

Corp US is a private, foreign corporation by its own doing and corruption. It is NOT a government. It DOES govern within its limited jurisdiction (SSA cardholders benefits and IRS collections for employment of cardholders).

The corporate United States Government controls the private, foreign corporation called the IMF in accord with Title 22 USC, section 286.

Of course, what do you expect when all the funds are in one “General Trust Fund”? All the seats of government will be filled with liars and thieves. Those who go in with nothing come out multi millionaires. They’re stealing it. Those who go in already rich and don’t even take any pay are true patriots and pure Americans. If their intentions are good (Constitutionally motivated). These are very rare in “government”.

Donald Trump is the current President of the bankrupt corporation called, the United States Government/ District of Columbia (of 1871, 1874, 1878 and 1973). And, so far, he is accomplishing more in the short time he has been in office (11 months) than any other (2018).

This system of corporate governance claims to be a democracy, which is the vilest form of government known to man. A democracy is defined by its characteristics of which, there are two:

1. It recognizes the sovereignty of the People, collectively not individually, as the source of all authority in Government.

2. It then appoints that sovereignty to the governing body which then rules over the People through Mob Rule…meaning 51% of the People outvote the other 49%, leaving them constantly divided.

California and New York would decide every Presidential election if America were truly a democracy.

The avenues for rampant cheating and scandal in elections become over trodden pathways to the White House and Congress. Adjudications of cast ballots during tabulation with no records of the adjudication make it impossible for the People to prove the deception and theft. The people then become divided to dangerous levels. Democracy is the vilest form of government known to man, see the Federalist Papers.

A divided House shall not stand. Mathew 12;25

Most People have no idea of what a democracy or a Republic are, by definition. Most have no idea what the law is on any given subject, how to apply it in a court to get the remedy they deserve or what the Governments authority is or, how to look any of it up. 

Americans have forgotten history and therefor, are destined to repeat it. This happens over and over in the Bible for thousands of years. Today’s democrats and other globalists are constantly seeking to erase, destroy and rewrite history in the USA to suit their narratives and complete an agenda, which was revealed in the Reece Committee Investigation by the Senate in 1938, led by Norman Dodd. 

There isn’t a Nation in history that has a perfect history but, that doesn’t give some portion of citizens the right to remove that history from everyone else regardless of their wealth and stature in the world.

If you were to truly define this corporate “democracy”, the only truth you would come to is that it is a corporation, not a Government, and if it were a Government the only way it could be defined is as a fascist, oligarchical regime, which is one that controls the “law” through militaristic styled police enforcement, which is controlled by a handful of actors. The very definition of tyranny. By their own acts, the democrat party and most of Corp US/District of Columbia are terrorist organizations. A perversion from the Foundational Laws.

All of its “laws” are directed at entities which it creates through its corporate legislature(s) and its Social Security Administration. These entities, created by operation of statute laws, are called ‘taxpayers/cardholders”. The SSA, the US Code, the Code of Federal regulations and the Federal Register all came along as we know them in 1935. The Cardholder is taxed and regulated by hundreds of thousands of statutes that normally wouldn't apply to men and women in their private capacities, see #40 in Topic #1.  Using the number outside of SSA benefits, employment or IRS filings is allowing the system into all of your life's affairs. The law was never extended to allow a national identifier of the people in any other of their affairs than SSA benefits or IRS taxable employment with an SSN.

Let us not pretend that there is a worse system of governance known to man than Corp US and democracy. 

We first learned of this topic from Team Law at teamlaw.net, in their open forum, at “State of X Incorporation Acts” by Tyler Durden. Here is a link, https://teamlawforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=138&p=5095#p434.

In this topic, the People at Team Law find and list their States’ Legislative reorganization Acts or their States’ Constitutional Amendments which were used by the State to create the corporation under which the State’s business affairs are conducted through the use of Federal Reserve Notes, in lieu of lawful money as mentioned in Article 1, section 10 of the national Constitution.

These corporations are referred to as a “State of ‘X’ “. ‘X’ being the name of the State in question, i.e. the STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, a corporation formed by the Government of Pennsylvania, and registered voters, through Act II of 1967 and , the Constitution of Pennsylvania, 1968. It has 51 extra pages reorganizing the branches of government to create this 5th and last Constitution of Pennsylvania. It serves as the charter of the Corp State PA. Not as the Constitution of the Pennsylvania Republic government. The 1874 Constitution is the Pennsylvania Republic.

In Montana, referendum No. 68 of 1972 wherein, a constitutional convention was called to draft a new constitution in which all three branches of government were reorganized to conduct the business of the actual Montana State Government through Federal Reserve Notes. Instead of real money, gold and silver coin, Constitution Article 1, section 10.

The corporate STATE OF MONTANA constitution/charter (charter), in it’s “adoption schedule”, purports to render the Montana Republic Constitution (1889) null and void. This charter for Corp State MT can have absolutely no effect on the original jurisdiction Constitution of Montana, October 1st, 1889. It appears to blend only a small portion of the original Constitution into this corporate, legislative language of the 14th Amendment, attempted takeover of the Montana Republic. We are planning to get a redress of this grievance with the Corp State MT very soon.

  STATE OF NEW YORK Incorporation Act Research, by Zane » Friday November 21st, 2025 6:49 pm MST on teamlaw.net

The failed 1967 Constitutional Convention as the flashpoint, followed by Chapter 359 of the Laws of 1968 as the quiet coup. This wasn't a splashy "incorporation" decree like Pennsylvania's Act 2 or Montana's Referendum 68; New York's was sneakier—a legislative sleight to restructure the executive branch and grease the FRN gears without a voter revolt.  

How does the created rule over the creator? Through an ignorant constituency.

All of the States of this Union are Republics, by nature, and guarantee a Republican form of Government to their Citizens, see your State’s original jurisdiction Constitution. It was critical that the State’s form these corporations so that they were no longer in violation of the law at Article 1, section 10 of the National Constitution(s), which states that “no State shall make anything a tender in payment of debt but, gold or silver coin”. Money is that which is used as currency and has intrinsic, physical value to everyone. It is considered precious. Federal Reserve Notes have only the faith that the People have in them. That faith is dwindling to all time lows while real money is soaring to all time highs. Debt can only be extinguished with lawful money. The debt surrounding Fed Notes can never lawfully be extinguished.  There are no interest notes printed.

It was during the Governors Conference of 1962, that the State’s Governors were informed that they must do this or it may be leaked to the People who would then hold them accountable for the trespass over Article one, section 10. All of the State’s were given a deadline to complete this and they all did between 1968 and 1972.

If you want to do something great, find your State’s reorganization Acts around that time, which created it’s corporation, and add them to Team Law’s site, posted above, under that topic, for everyone else to learn from. I think there were already 17 listed last time I checked.

It is within these Corp States that “taxpayers” reside and have driver licenses, marriage licenses, business licenses, programs of social insurance, voter registration, school registration, jobs, taxes, and anything else that comes with a social security number from Corp U.S., the mother corporation of all the State of X sub-corporations.

Licenses are issued for permission to do that which is otherwise illegal. It is illegal for the incompetent to drive a car or get married or have a business, etc. These things are not illegal for the People to do. Taking a license to do the things you already have the authority to do subjects you to all of the regulation which follows.  No State in this Union has ever issued a license of any kind to any man or woman, only to these SSA created trusts. Even the United States Code(revised in 1934) and Code of Federal Regulations (1935) and Federal Register (1935) came along the same time as the Social Security Act (1935) and the “taxpayer”. Codes and regulations which regulate the entities they create through the SSA and possibly some people through their ignorance..

States have no authority to tax or govern the People outside of contracts with them, UNITED STATES ET AL. v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY. 322 U.S. 174 (1944)No. 417. , 17 U.S. 159 4 Wheat. 159 Mc CULLOCH v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al., Sovereigns create the State through Enabling Acts, which create the Constitution of the State, which law controls and limits the State in its function of governing the State government. The sovereign People are self governed, which is self evident by their sovereign nature.

Simply put, all authority in Government comes from the People. If the People do not possess the authority to tell others what to do then they cannot give such authority to the Government. Government has no authority to govern the People. All the authority given in the Constitution to the State is to govern the Government to ensure that the Government follows the Law. The purpose of a Constitution is to create a Government to protect the rights of man and give it authority to conduct the few things it is created for and to control the Government, not the People or the Law. The Republic doesn’t control the law. It is controlled by law. At least by the Constitution that creates it.

One group of persons cannot tell another group what to do, unless they all consent to it, like through voter registration. This isn’t a democracy like the politicians and bureaucrats seem to pretend where 51% of the population overrules the other 49%. Democrats thrive on perverting our Republic governments into a “mob rule” socialist democracy.

Winston Churchill: “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and, the gospel of envy“.

This Nation and every State in it is a Republic wherein all People are recognized individually and collectively as the source of all authority in Government. No one man is more sovereign than another outside or inside of his individual contractual relations with others. One can only expand his or her sovereignty through land patented land ownership, see Topics of Discussion 1 (#64-72) & 2.

There are no official documents that establish a democracy or democrats in America. Most of the Republicans in Government also preach “democracy”. It only exists in the minds of the ignorant and their lip service to it. They are destined to repeat history because of their failure to acknowledge it or attempts to erase or rewrite it. The Bible (King James version) is a great testament to this.

It seems that the one’s who admonish socialistic ideals in leadership are the one’s who contribute to it the least while benefitting from it the most.

Democracy is vile and corrupt and those who preach it are a disease to this Nation. All you have to do is look around a little to see that. The People of the Republic had freedom, liberty, wealth from their industry and trade, and happiness through control of the law and the educational system, then came the division in Congress’ and the lack of education of the general public.

It’s at this point where Churchills statement rings in.

Most of the violators are not Natural Born Citizens and Article 2, section 1, clause 5 is really starting to make sense.

Like Jerome Cavanagh as Mayor of Detroit in 1961 who brought 10’s of thousands of poor blacks into the communities of those who built Detroit into the Motor City to feed off their wealth through various taxing schemes which turned that once great city into the shambles it is today or Nelson Rockefeller as Governor of New York for fifteen years and the second appointed Vice President or FDR and all of the legislative and executive usurpations of liberty and freedom through his various executive orders and foreign contracts that were illegal for the Republic government to conduct and, let’s not even torture ourselves with the criminal presidency of the one who wasn’t/ isn’t even a Natural Born Citizen, Barrack Obama, who added more debt (over double) to the already huge national debt by pumping 17 trillion dollars into the failed Corp US businesses during the 2008 recession which, depleted the value of the dollar (Fed Note) along with the world’s faith in it to all time lows. This was his attempt to finish off America’s independence and world economic leadership. Nice try Barry. There are many, many examples. It’s in the nature of a “democrat” and the “establishment Republicans” are no different. Many of them are just democrats sitting in a seat meant for a true Republican. I am a Republican because the Nation and all the States have a Constitutional Republic form of government that myself and my family have been grateful for since the beginning. I feel, as an American, it is a duty of every Citizen to ensure before anything else that the Constitutions are inviolate. This is how you keep others from changing your Nation for their own purposes.

Politicians are not Statesmen. Not one. 50% of the Corp US Senate are lawyers.

Nelson Rockefeller, a democrat, is responsible for gun laws, state police, affirmative action, World Trade Center, welfare, special rights, restructure of the Executive branch under Nixon and Ford, the Attica prison riot, state lottery, minimum wage, seat belt law, 8 tax increases, U.S. involvement in the United Nations and many more overbearing, intrusive usurpations of liberty and freedom of choice by corporate “Government”. Thank God all this intrusion is only in Corp U.S. and the Corp States. Especially Corp State New York where it always seems to start. These are regulations against taxpayer created, controlled and owned by the SSA. Not People who know who they are and who their Government is.

Dredd Scott v. Sanford 60 US 393,  The words "people of the United States" and "citizens" are synonymous terms and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the "sovereign people," and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty. 

Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US, 370 (1886), the Supreme Court wrote: “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts”.

States are not now nor have they ever been sovereign because they cannot own land. The only perfect title to land in this Nation is the Land Patent, see Wilcox v. Jackson 498 (US) 294, Howth v. Farrar CCA Texas 94F 2d 654, Wineman v. Gastrell, 54 FED 819 2 IS Ap. 581 and, many more. It takes a special Act of Congress, like for the railroads, for non human entities to own land in this Nation.

Sovereignty consists of 3 elements; Dominion, agency and possession and, if any are lacking there is no sovereignty. Dominion is synonymous with land. Land and domain are one in the same, see Peter Butt Land Law, 9 (2nd Ed), Black’s Law Dictionary 7th Ed. States cannot own land, therefore, they are not sovereign. Nor do they have agency or possession. They belong to the People.

Upon the acceptance of the Constitution of the United States of America, December 15, 1790, the States had to give up all unappropriated lands to the disposition of the President of the United States of America to be granted to the People as they made their claims and returned their surveys. The original 13 colonies granted their open lands through their Governors and kept their own “Great Books”, the indigenous People of Hawaii already owned all that land, Texas did not cede it’s open lands to the Republic. In total there are 33 Presidential Land Grant States.

The People’s Land Grants made Patent are Treaties. According to the Supremacy Clause government must uphold them. Trespassing on Land Patent protected land carries as much as 1,000,000 in fines and 30 years in prison, each offense, in some cases.

Each of the States original jurisdiction Republic Governments are still alive and well within their Constitutions, they are just vacant due to a lack of education, then participation, of the People. Gubernatorial elections are taking place every year to fill those vacancies at TeamLaw, since 1993, at their Governors Corner page on their website at, https://teamlaw.net/Government/usmap.htm

Check today to see if your State needs a Governor in it’s original jurisdiction seat. Maybe you should fill it.

The Oath of Office is as follows;

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God”.

Those who formed the Republic had experienced all systems of governance and came up with this Constitutional Republic to protect the rights of man. It is important to demand that the Oath be taken seriously to preserve and conserve all the elements of the Constitution. Anything can be improved but, those who attempt to take any parts of it away or limit it in any way should be held strictly accountable.

Socialism never has and never will be a system of governance that is sustainable by any culture. It is a failure of judgment wherein, the people advocating for it are raised in a society that has already been built by those before them who gave their lives, blood and fortunes to build a nation for their posterity. The government doesn’t have anything to “give” until they take it from others who actually work and try to provide for themselves and their families while being self-governed. People being entitled to things from others’ work is prone to abuse and destined for failure due to the nature of mankind.

Winston Churchill: “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and, the gospel of envy“.

The lack of American history taught in the Corp U.S. curriculum schools is the major factor contributing to America’s youth being indoctrinated into believing that there is a better system of governance available to them than the Republic of America and, that it is a nation founded on slavery since 1619 and the first slaves. America started hundreds of years before that. What we are experiencing today in government is not the Republic, it’s merely a corporation created by the Republic Congress during Lincolns Presidency. I think it could use a couple tweaks to prevent future abuse by those in government, Federal or corporate.

The penalties for violations of the Oath should be made severe enough to deter anyone from deviating from it. The prosecution of violators should be automatic and without reservation.

I personally feel that Article 2, section 1, clause 5 should apply to all positions of government, State and Federal. Not just to the Office of the President. Foreign influence that seeks to pervert our Republic is just too great.