« John F. Kennedy assassination | Heavy insider buying in LTV stock by LBJ insiders DH Byrd and James Ling in Nov. 1963 weeks before JFK assassination. Major defense contract awarded LTV January, 1964, paid for out of nonexisting 1965 budget | Main | Warren Commission Lawyer, David Slawson, Now Claims CIA Cover-Up In JFK Assassination - While Pointing In Wrong Directions As To Perps »

Undoing 14th Amendment Citizenship

MH: Thank you for your clear and concise answer: "UCC is simply federal municipal 

law." The fog begins to lift.

Is it fair to say that the default presumption of all courts in America is that
the defendant in a case brought by any branch of government is a federal (14th
Amendment) citizen and thus subject to federal municipal law?

I have an early edition of "The Federal Zone." Do your later editions shed any more light
on extricating oneself from the Federal Zone?

___

PM: Yes.

> Is it fair to say that the default presumption of all courts in America is that
> the defendant in a case brought by any branch of government is a federal (14th
> Amendment) citizen and thus subject to federal municipal law?

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chapter9.htm

      Federal courts now appear to be proceeding on the basis of the presumption that we are all "citizens of the United States**" because the courts have shifted onto defendants the burden of proving that they are not "citizens of the United States**".  Despite the obvious logical problem that arises from trying to prove a negative, the United States District Court in Delaware ruled as follows when it granted an IRS petition to enforce a summons:

 

      Defendant's protestations to effect that he derived no benefit from United States government had no bearing on his legal obligation to pay income taxes;  unless he could establish that he was not a citizen of the United States, IRS possessed authority to attempt to determine his federal tax liability.  U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 1, Sec. 8, Cl. 1;  Amend. 16;  26 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1.  [!!]

 

[United States v. Slater, 545 F.Supp. 179 (1982)]

[emphasis added]

 

>  Do your later editions shed any more light
on extricating oneself from the Federal Zone?

The electronic 11th Edition is now frozen:

http://supremelaw.org/fedzone11/

e.g. see Expatriation Statute, discussed here:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/lyon/tdocws.htm

http://supremelaw.org/stat/15/15stat223.gif
http://supremelaw.org/stat/15/15stat224.gif

          CHAP. CCXLIX. -- An Act concerning the Rights
             of American Citizens in foreign States

          Whereas the  right of  expatriation is  a  natural  and
     inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment
     of  the   rights  of  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of
     happiness;  and whereas in the recognition of this principle
     this government  has  freely  received  emigrants  from  all
     nations, and  invested them  with the rights of citizenship;
     and whereas  it is claimed that such American citizens, with
     their descendants,  are subjects  of foreign  states,  owing
     allegiance to  the governments  thereof;   and whereas it is
     necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim
     of  foreign   allegiance  should  be  promptly  and  finally
     disavowed:  Therefore,

          Be  it   enacted  by   the  Senate  and  the  House  of
     Representatives of  the United States of America in Congress
     assembled,  That   any  declaration,  instruction,  opinion,
     order, or  decision of any officers of this government which
     denies,  restricts,  impairs,  or  questions  the  right  of
     expatriation,  is  hereby  declared  inconsistent  with  the
     fundamental principles of this government.
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chapter3.htm

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/877

26 U.S. Code § 877 - Expatriation to avoid tax

___ 
 
 
___
 
PM: This was a winning brief by Mr. and Mrs. John Knox:

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/append-a.htm

___

PM: cf. "jus soli" and "jus sanguinis"

There is really no good reason to "expatriate" from federal citizenship
if one has not actually opted to be a federal citizen knowingly,
intentionally and voluntarily.

If one is born a State Citizen and never rescinded that status,
then expatriation is NOT needed or required.

What IS needed, and probably required, is an affirmative statement
of one's lawful status as a Citizen of [X] State.

Strictly speaking, a few of the States are Commonwealths
e.g. Massachusetts, Virginia, Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

___

SS: The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.
 
The Expatriation Act of 1868 was codified at 25 Rev. Stat. § 1999, and then by 1940 had been re-enacted at 8 U.S.C. § 800.[3][4] It is now the last note to 8 U.S.C. § 1481
 
I had always been told that the expedient passage of the Expatriation Act shortly before ratification of the 14th that created a second class of citizenship had a hidden diabolical purpose behind it.
 
Can you speak to, if any, validity there is to this?

___

I don't believe it is accurate to describe its purpose as
"hidden" or "diabolical":

http://supremelaw.org/stat/15/15stat223.gif
http://supremelaw.org/stat/15/15stat224.gif

It is arguably fair to describe that Expatriation Statute
as deliberately deceptive;  so, what else is new?

For purposes of federal municipal law aka Private International Law,
the several States of the Union are legally FOREIGN with respect
to each other and with respect to the District of Columbia:

 
It might be helpful to you and others to consider the
mindset of the Radical Republicans who pushed
the 1866 Civil Rights Act thru Congress and then
tried in vain to elevate that "existing law" to the status
of a constitutional amendment:

 
Up to that point in time, the Federal Government really did
NOT have "citizens of its own".  Thus, by creating federal citizenship
as a federal municipal franchise, Congress could treat these new
federal citizens as "subjects" of Congress, in a manner similar to the
way that the British are "subjects" of the Crown:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/freeman/freeman4.htm

It is not hard to prove that the Crown never really relinquished
its claims to the 13 American Colonies, notwithstanding the
British surrender at Yorktown.
 
My theory is that some conscientious legal experts pointed out
that Congress could not FORCE federal citizenship upon
Americans who were born into the status of State Citizens.

"We do not make law by force or by fraud,"  Glass v. The Sloop Betsey
 
As you know or should know by now, the status of
Citizen of ONE OF the States united has been recognized
in the organic U.S. Constitution ever since June 21, 1788,
and to this very day the Clauses recognizing that status
have never been amended:

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/quals.htm
 
Thus, a plan was hatched to enact a "back door" or safety value
(if you will) for those Americans who did not wish to become "subjects"
of federal municipal jurisdiction.

Author L.C. Lyon does a very good job of summarizing the
most probable motivations:

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/lyon/

However, you may need to know that she was convicted
of murdering a police officer, and then executed along
with her husband.  The story I received was that she
tried to assist her husband who was being arrested
at gun point by that police officer, and gun fire erupted
resulting in the death of the police officer.

http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/death/US/block775.htm


Somewhere in my distant past, I did receive some correspondence
from Lynda before she died.  The story she told me was very different
from what you may read about her on the Internet.

A dual tragedy, to be sure, because her common law husband
was also executed for the same incident.

I strongly suggest that you pray for the souls of both,
because the Most High lives eternally outside our linear time frame,
and the Most High can and does answer prayers before they are
actually prayed:  I am an eyewitness to this phenomenon of prayer's
proven efficacy.
 
cf. "faith-rest mechanics" by Pastor Joe Griffin:

http://www.joegriffin.org/Pages/default.aspx

He has a Google Group to which I am a subscriber.
 
___
 
SS: I agree with all you have said, and now ask how a state citizen of Indiana would go about the lawful declaration process you mentioned below?
 
___
 
PM: 
MY RECOMMENDATION:

Just write to the Secretary of State for Indiana
with a DECLARATION of your status as a Citizen of Indiana,
and copy the U.S. Secretary of State in Washington, D.C.
 
Use Certified U.S. Mail and keep a record of the tracking number,
because it will serve as a unique "case number".
 
>  how a state citizen of Indiana would go about the lawful declaration process
 
But, remember to capitalize the "C" in "Citizen of Indiana":
 
http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/quals.htm
 
___
 
SS: Okay Great,
Should I be expecting any type of Odd-Ball response from them or are they probably getting used to it by now?
 
___
 
PM: To answer that question, I would need to know what's inside their heads,
and I don't know what's inside their heads.

Just be prepared to teach them the Law, because
they probably do NOT already know the Law of citizenship
... er ... Citizenship.
 

February 4, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink