The United States Constitution is a agreement between Government of the United States and the US Citizen enforceable by the legal system.
Find the US Constitution here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The Constitution is an Enforceable Contractable1appeal
The US Constitution is a contract between the governement and the US Citizen enforceable by a court of law.
See the Constitution here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The United States Constitution is a agreement between Government of the United States and the US Citizen enforceable by the legal system.
Find the US Constitution here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The Constitution is an Enforceable Contractable1appeal
The US Constitution is a contract between the governement and the US Citizen enforceable by a court of law.
See the Constitution here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
There are a great many people today who do a great many things that are of incalculable value and offer lots of valid insights about the troubled world we live in today. Many even have some good ideas for what we can do to help stem the flood tide of evil encompassing us.
But very few, prior to Pastor Rick Tyler of Heritage Christian Church and the Reformed Church of Israel have offered up a comprehensive plan of action that hits on all eight cylinders so to speak for how the remnant can take a truly meaningful stand and wade into this battle of our time to WIN. Not merely persevere through it.
There are no silver bullets, but there are many real, tangible things that can be done with minimal resources that can produce real, tangible results.
The question is whether like-minded people can, as our forefathers once did, resolve to mutually pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in pursuance of that end and give sacrificially to the cause of truth and liberty and defending the Kingdom of Christ on earth.
There are a great many people today who do a great many things that are of incalculable value and offer lots of valid insights about the troubled world we live in today. Many even have some good ideas for what we can do to help stem the flood tide of evil encompassing us.
But very few, prior to Pastor Rick Tyler of Heritage Christian Church and the Reformed Church of Israel have offered up a comprehensive plan of action that hits on all eight cylinders so to speak for how the remnant can take a truly meaningful stand and wade into this battle of our time to WIN. Not merely persevere through it.
There are no silver bullets, but there are many real, tangible things that can be done with minimal resources that can produce real, tangible results.
The question is whether like-minded people can, as our forefathers once did, resolve to mutually pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in pursuance of that end and give sacrificially to the cause of truth and liberty and defending the Kingdom of Christ on earth.
The US Constitution is a written contract between Government of the US and the citizen enforceable by the court system.
See the Constitution of the United States here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The Constitution of the United States is a agreement between the governement and the US Citizen enforceable by a court of law.
See the Constitution of the United States here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The US Constitution is a written contract between US Government and the citizen enforceable by the court system.
See the United States Constitution here: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
ACC560 Week 3 Homework:
Chapter 4: Activity-Based Costing
Constitutional Law
National Power and Federalism
~ Sixth Edition
~ Christopher N. May and Allan Ides
Judicial Review
§I. I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
In the constitutional law course, we study the United States Constitution as it
has been interpreted and explained by the federal courts for more than 2 0 0
years. The Constitution itself is an amazingly short document. Stripped of its
amendments, the Constitution occupies fewer than a dozen pages in your
casebook. Even with its amendments, the document is barely 20 pages long.
Yet while the Constitution itself is extremely brief, the interpretation of it
can be exceedingly complex. The bulk of your constitutional law textbook
consists of cases in which a court-usually the U.S. Supreme Court-has
been asked to decide whether certain government decisions or practices
are invalid because they violate the requirements of the Constitution . This
process by which courts rule on the constitutionality of actions taken by
federal and state officials is known as judicial review.
Judicial review is the fountain of constitutional law. This is true for
several reasons. First, the process of judicial review has created the body
of reported decisions that we think of as the law of the Constitution. When we
wish to know whether or not the Constitution allows a particular govern-
mental practice, we usually look first to previous court decisions that have
interpreted the constitutional provisions in question. Without this steadily
accumulating body of case law, we would have little definitive guidance as
to the meaning of the Constitution.
Second, it is the process of judicial review that renders the Constitu tion
binding and enforceable as law. In the absence of judicial review, the Con-
stitution would be little more than a statement of normative principles and
I . judicial Review
ideals-similar to the Golden Rule or to the Universal Declaration of 2
Rights . Public officials w ould fmd it much easier to ignore the Cons ·
and statutes that were contrary to the Constitution might still be en:
Judicial review serves as a mechanism by which public officials m ay be -
pelled to perform their duties in accordance with the Constitution.
This chapter examines the doctrine of judicial review as it was r ~
oped by the Supreme Court in the early nineteenth century. In revie,•i.:::: -3
debate surrounding the legitimacy of this doctrine, we will see that:!l __ .
in the Constitution's text specifically authorizes the federal courts to ?"
the validity of actions taken by the other branches of the federal goye....~
or by the states. Yet the historical backdrop against which judicial ~e-.-,::
emerged makes clear that the doctrine is fully consistent with th e Fmc::
conception of a balanced democracy in which abuses of p ow er ·-·-
branch may be checked or prevented by actions of the coordinate bra.:::.
Constitutional Law National Power and Federalism ~ Sixth.docxmaxinesmith73660
Constitutional Law
National Power and Federalism
~ Sixth Edition
~ Christopher N. May and Allan Ides
Judicial Review
§I. I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
In the constitutional law course, we study the United States Constitution as it
has been interpreted and explained by the federal courts for more than 2 0 0
years. The Constitution itself is an amazingly short document. Stripped of its
amendments, the Constitution occupies fewer than a dozen pages in your
casebook. Even with its amendments, the document is barely 20 pages long.
Yet while the Constitution itself is extremely brief, the interpretation of it
can be exceedingly complex. The bulk of your constitutional law textbook
consists of cases in which a court-usually the U.S. Supreme Court-has
been asked to decide whether certain government decisions or practices
are invalid because they violate the requirements of the Constitution . This
process by which courts rule on the constitutionality of actions taken by
federal and state officials is known as judicial review.
Judicial review is the fountain of constitutional law. This is true for
several reasons. First, the process of judicial review has created the body
of reported decisions that we think of as the law of the Constitution. When we
wish to know whether or not the Constitution allows a particular govern-
mental practice, we usually look first to previous court decisions that have
interpreted the constitutional provisions in question. Without this steadily
accumulating body of case law, we would have little definitive guidance as
to the meaning of the Constitution.
Second, it is the process of judicial review that renders the Constitu tion
binding and enforceable as law. In the absence of judicial review, the Con-
stitution would be little more than a statement of normative principles and
I . judicial Review
ideals-similar to the Golden Rule or to the Universal Declaration of 2
Rights . Public officials w ould fmd it much easier to ignore the Cons ·
and statutes that were contrary to the Constitution might still be en:
Judicial review serves as a mechanism by which public officials m ay be -
pelled to perform their duties in accordance with the Constitution.
This chapter examines the doctrine of judicial review as it was r ~
oped by the Supreme Court in the early nineteenth century. In revie,•i.:::: -3
debate surrounding the legitimacy of this doctrine, we will see that:!l __ .
in the Constitution's text specifically authorizes the federal courts to ?"
the validity of actions taken by the other branches of the federal goye....~
or by the states. Yet the historical backdrop against which judicial ~e-.-,::
emerged makes clear that the doctrine is fully consistent with th e Fmc::
conception of a balanced democracy in which abuses of p ow er ·-·-
branch may be checked or prevented by actions of the coordinate bra.:::
In this chapter we will also explore the question of what sources a:J.,...
BackgroundThroughout the more than two centuries since the r.docxwilcockiris
Background
Throughout the more than two centuries since the ratification of the US Constitution, there have been “schools” of thinking about how it should be interpreted. In other words, groups of political thinkers and judges have tried to think of principles that should guide judges as they exercise this great power to interpret, or say whether a law conforms with, the US Constitution. More conservative judges tend to argue that the text of the Constitution and the previous legal decisions of the Court, or precedents, are the only things that should guide decisions. More liberal judges argue that one can not literally apply the text of the Constitution to modern cases. There is so much happening now that the Framers did not discuss or could have possibly anticipated. Thus, one must take into account broader issues when interpreting. The Constitution must be allowed to evolve with the times, and the Court must consider the public good in their interpretations.
One court case in particular highlighted the debate of original and evolving meaning in the interpretation of the Constitution --
Griswold v. Connecticut
(1965). The state of Connecticut had a law from 1879 that prohibited couples, even married couples, from using contraceptives and physicians from prescribing them. Estelle Griswold opened a Planned Parenthood clinic in Connecticut which offered contraceptive devices to women. It was promptly shut down. She appealed to the US Supreme Court and won the right to distribute contraceptives.
The majority of judges, 7-2, argued in their opinions that the women who received the contraceptives had a “right to marital privacy.” While the word “privacy” does not appear in the Constitution, the majority argued that the penumbra, the shadow cast or the implied meanings, in the 9th
Amendment, as well as other parts of the Constitution, protected people in their persons (and in their marital intimacy) from state intrusion, something Connecticut had done with this law. The minority judges responded that the majority was simply making up law. The opinions of the justices in
Griswold
demonstrate the constant debate of original and evolving meaning in the US Constitution.
Source
Source 1: Justice William O. Douglas, Majority Opinion
“The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance…. Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment is one, as we have seen. The Third Amendment, in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers “in any house” in time of peace without the consent of the owner, is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Fifth Amendment, in its Self-Incrimination Clause, enabl.
Anti Federalist Papers No. 46 – "WHERE THEN IS THE RESTRAINT?" http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com Visit us for more American history. Liberty Education Series
Evolution of judicial review in united states of americaArushi Shrivastava
the presentation focuses on the establishment of judicial review in USA . it describes the supporting pillars of judicial review in USA viz the federalist, the separation of power, the supremacy clause and Marbury v. Madison . it also present the limits of judicial review
When the United States Inc violates your GOD GIVEN RIGHTS - RELIEF IS MANDATORYSueBozgoz
Americans understand your GOD GIVEN NATURAL RIGHTS AND WHAT Subject Matter Jurisdiction is. SMJ is everything and the UNITED STATE INC's game is - NOT TO ESTABLISH SMJ. Bottom line: They are filling jails as everything in America is about BUSINESS.
Default brief filed in court on February 19th, 2019. This legal brief calls for the arrest and conviction of Circuit Court Judge Jeffery W Shaw for a multitude of counts of fraud. Copy shows court stamps.
Book digitized by Google. Understanding exactly what the Federal Government of the United States has a right to tax by looking at a history of taxation. This book will open your eyes.
Homeland Security Building RecommendationsChuck Thompson
http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com This is the building security recommendations for schools from Homeland Security. 317 pages up to date and complete. Is your school safe?
http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com The Battle of Gettysburg. Civil war history for those who would like to learn more about the past of the United States. Free downloads to Slideshare members. Enjoy.
Les Miserables, five volumes, complete by victor hugoChuck Thompson
http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com A true classic reading experience. Free to download. Its a long read but well worth the effort if you can find the time. Enjoy.
http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com The art of making whiskey is a very old book from 1819 and shows an excellent history on the craft of distilling spirits also known back then as living waters. Great information on how whiskey as well as gin used to be made. Free downloads.
http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com Some really good history on distilling alcohol and how it was done in the good old days. The art and science of it. 1809 eBook. Free to download.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...Finlaw Consultancy Pvt Ltd
Introduction-
The process of register multi-state cooperative society in India is governed by the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. This process requires the office bearers to undertake several crucial responsibilities to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. The key office bearers typically include the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, along with other elected members of the managing committee. Their responsibilities encompass administrative, legal, and financial duties essential for the successful registration and operation of the society.
In 2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs established a committee led by Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh, former Vice Chancellor of National Law University (NLU), Delhi. This committee was tasked with reviewing the three codes of criminal law. The primary objective of the committee was to propose comprehensive reforms to the country’s criminal laws in a manner that is both principled and effective.
The committee’s focus was on ensuring the safety and security of individuals, communities, and the nation as a whole. Throughout its deliberations, the committee aimed to uphold constitutional values such as justice, dignity, and the intrinsic value of each individual. Their goal was to recommend amendments to the criminal laws that align with these values and priorities.
Subsequently, in February, the committee successfully submitted its recommendations regarding amendments to the criminal law. These recommendations are intended to serve as a foundation for enhancing the current legal framework, promoting safety and security, and upholding the constitutional principles of justice, dignity, and the inherent worth of every individual.
Military Commissions details LtCol Thomas Jasper as Detailed Defense CounselThomas (Tom) Jasper
Military Commissions Trial Judiciary, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Notice of the Chief Defense Counsel's detailing of LtCol Thomas F. Jasper, Jr. USMC, as Detailed Defense Counsel for Abd Al Hadi Al-Iraqi on 6 August 2014 in the case of United States v. Hadi al Iraqi (10026)
PRECEDENT AS A SOURCE OF LAW (SAIF JAVED).pptxOmGod1
Precedent, or stare decisis, is a cornerstone of common law systems where past judicial decisions guide future cases, ensuring consistency and predictability in the legal system. Binding precedents from higher courts must be followed by lower courts, while persuasive precedents may influence but are not obligatory. This principle promotes fairness and efficiency, allowing for the evolution of the law as higher courts can overrule outdated decisions. Despite criticisms of rigidity and complexity, precedent ensures similar cases are treated alike, balancing stability with flexibility in judicial decision-making.
WINDING UP of COMPANY, Modes of DissolutionKHURRAMWALI
Winding up, also known as liquidation, refers to the legal and financial process of dissolving a company. It involves ceasing operations, selling assets, settling debts, and ultimately removing the company from the official business registry.
Here's a breakdown of the key aspects of winding up:
Reasons for Winding Up:
Insolvency: This is the most common reason, where the company cannot pay its debts. Creditors may initiate a compulsory winding up to recover their dues.
Voluntary Closure: The owners may decide to close the company due to reasons like reaching business goals, facing losses, or merging with another company.
Deadlock: If shareholders or directors cannot agree on how to run the company, a court may order a winding up.
Types of Winding Up:
Voluntary Winding Up: This is initiated by the company's shareholders through a resolution passed by a majority vote. There are two main types:
Members' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is solvent (has enough assets to pay off its debts) and shareholders will receive any remaining assets after debts are settled.
Creditors' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is insolvent and creditors will be prioritized in receiving payment from the sale of assets.
Compulsory Winding Up: This is initiated by a court order, typically at the request of creditors, government agencies, or even by the company itself if it's insolvent.
Process of Winding Up:
Appointment of Liquidator: A qualified professional is appointed to oversee the winding-up process. They are responsible for selling assets, paying off debts, and distributing any remaining funds.
Cease Trading: The company stops its regular business operations.
Notification of Creditors: Creditors are informed about the winding up and invited to submit their claims.
Sale of Assets: The company's assets are sold to generate cash to pay off creditors.
Payment of Debts: Creditors are paid according to a set order of priority, with secured creditors receiving payment before unsecured creditors.
Distribution to Shareholders: If there are any remaining funds after all debts are settled, they are distributed to shareholders according to their ownership stake.
Dissolution: Once all claims are settled and distributions made, the company is officially dissolved and removed from the business register.
Impact of Winding Up:
Employees: Employees will likely lose their jobs during the winding-up process.
Creditors: Creditors may not recover their debts in full, especially if the company is insolvent.
Shareholders: Shareholders may not receive any payout if the company's debts exceed its assets.
Winding up is a complex legal and financial process that can have significant consequences for all parties involved. It's important to seek professional legal and financial advice when considering winding up a company.
NATURE, ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.pptxanvithaav
These slides helps the student of international law to understand what is the nature of international law? and how international law was originated and developed?.
The slides was well structured along with the highlighted points for better understanding .
ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v/s Union of India.pptxshweeta209
transfer of the P.I.L filed by lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in Delhi High Court to Supreme Court.
on the issue of UNIFORM MARRIAGE AGE of men and women.
DNA Testing in Civil and Criminal Matters.pptxpatrons legal
Get insights into DNA testing and its application in civil and criminal matters. Find out how it contributes to fair and accurate legal proceedings. For more information: https://www.patronslegal.com/criminal-litigation.html
RIGHTS OF VICTIM EDITED PRESENTATION(SAIF JAVED).pptxOmGod1
Victims of crime have a range of rights designed to ensure their protection, support, and participation in the justice system. These rights include the right to be treated with dignity and respect, the right to be informed about the progress of their case, and the right to be heard during legal proceedings. Victims are entitled to protection from intimidation and harm, access to support services such as counseling and medical care, and the right to restitution from the offender. Additionally, many jurisdictions provide victims with the right to participate in parole hearings and the right to privacy to protect their personal information from public disclosure. These rights aim to acknowledge the impact of crime on victims and to provide them with the necessary resources and involvement in the judicial process.
How to Obtain Permanent Residency in the NetherlandsBridgeWest.eu
You can rely on our assistance if you are ready to apply for permanent residency. Find out more at: https://immigration-netherlands.com/obtain-a-permanent-residence-permit-in-the-netherlands/.
1. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 1 OF 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
• 4 4 5 B r o a d w a y , A l b a n y , N Y . 1 2 2 0 7 - 2 9 3 6 •
United States Grand Jury1
(Status: sovereign2
) JURISDICTION: Court of Record3
Tribunal, the People Law Case No. 1776-1789-1791-2019
Depository Case No. 1:16-CV-1490
- against - Administrator Grand Jury Foreman
United States Supreme Court, Federal Judiciary, U.S.
Senate, and U.S. House of Representatives
(Status: clipped sovereignty)
DECISION & ORDER
OBEY THE
LAW OF THE LAND
Defendants Copied: President Trump & AG William Barr
5
FAKE LAW & FAKE COURTS
According to the Federal Judicial Center,4
“A Government Agency,” stated that on September 16,
1938 under the “Rules Enabling Act of 1934,” “the Supreme Court enacted uniform rules of procedure
for the federal courts. [Pursuant to its fictional authority5
] under the new rules, suits in equity and suits10
at common law were grouped together under the term “civil action,6
” claiming that “rigid application
of common-law-rules [a/k/a God’s self-evident truths, maxims] brought about injustice.” This was
1
The UUSCLGJ is comprised of fifty Grand Juries each unified amongst the counties within their respective States. All
fifty States have unified nationally as an assembly of Thousands of People in the name of We the People to suppress,
through our Courts of Justice, subverters both foreign and domestic acting under color of law within our governments.
States were unified by re-constituting all 3,133 United States counties.
2
“‘Sovereignty’ means that the decree of sovereign makes law, and foreign courts cannot condemn influences persuading
sovereign to make the decree.” Moscow Fire Ins. Co. of Moscow, Russia v. Bank of New York & Trust Co., 294 N.Y.S.
648, 662, 161 Misc. 903. The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights
which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am. Dec. 89 10C
Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228; 37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 167; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
3
“A Court of Record is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the
magistrate designated generally to hold it, and proceeding according to the course of common law, its acts and proceedings
being enrolled for a perpetual memorial.” Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc.
Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689.
4
The Federal Judicial Center is the research and education agency of the judicial branch of the United States
Government. The Center supports the efficient, effective administration of justice and judicial independence. Its status as a
separate agency within the judicial branch, its specific missions, and its specialized expertise enable it to pursue and
encourage critical and careful examination of ways to improve judicial administration. The Center has no policy-making or
enforcement authority; its role is to provide accurate, objective information and education and to encourage thorough and
candid analysis of policies, practices, and procedures. https://www.fjc.gov/history/timeline/federal-rules-civil-procedure-
merge-equity-and-common-law
5
FICTION OF LAW: “Something known to be false is assumed to be true.” Ryan v. Motor Credit Co., 130 N.J.Eq. 531,
23 A.2d 607, 621. “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. “A rule of law which assumes as true, and will not allow to be disproved, something which is false, but not
impossible.” Best, Ev. 419.
6
Fake law
2. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 2 OF 6
propaganda, an act of Treason whereas the Supreme Court and Congress under the teachings and
guidance of the treacherous subversive American Bar Association, in an Act of Conspiracy and
Treason, a silent coup, they claimed the abrogation of Common Law with its Unalienable Rights that15
was endowed upon us by our Creator. By covert means, under Rule 2 obscurely stating: “There is one
form of Action – the civil action,” written and interpreted by the ABA and taught as fact to BAR minions.
Laws are inflexible, and carry stiff penalties including imprisonment, and in some cases, death. Rules
cannot impeach Law. Rules are set by organizations and individuals and are nothing more than
prescribed conduct in a particular area. Natural Law Constitutions can never be changed by legislation20
and certainly cannot be abrogated by arbitrary rules of tyrants.
NATURAL LAW
There is Natural Law, aka common law; there is civil & criminal law, a/k/a roman law, municipal law,
or Justinian code; and there is positive law, a/k/a equity. We the People via the Constitution vested the
judiciary with Law and equity under Article III Section 1: “The Judicial Power of the United States,25
shall be vested in one Supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to
time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices
during good behavior,” and Article III Section 2: “The judicial power SHALL EXTEND to all cases, in
LAW AND EQUITY, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or
which shall be made, under their authority;--…” As We the People ordained in said Article III Section30
1&2 the United States Supreme Court and the Federal Judiciary’s judicial powers extended to Law and
equity. We did not give Congress or the Judiciary power to legislate or enforce civil and criminal
statutes which are disguised as law and were written by tyrants to conceal the Common Law and
oppress the people. They have been deluded into believing we are their subjects.
All judges are bound by their oath to the Supreme Law of the Land a/k/a the US Constitution under35
Article VI Clause 2; “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby,
anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” “Any judge who
does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution40
and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of
treason.” – Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958)
The only Laws that apply to We the People are the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God of which we
are entitled. We the People have declared in our founding document that, “We hold these truths to be
self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain45
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…. That to secure
these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed.”7
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or
7
Declaration of Independence.
3. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 3 OF 6
legislation which would abrogate them.”8
The Rules Enabling Act of 1934 passed by Congress in 1934
gave the Supreme Court the power to make rules of procedure and evidence for federal courts “in50
equity” as long as they did not “abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right.” The Supreme Court
needs to be reminded that rules are not law. They are just rules with no authority to group together
suits in equity and suits at common law under the term civil law, a/k/a Babylon law. Congress doesn’t
even possess such authority.
COMMON LAW – EQUITY – CIVIL/CRIMINAL LAW55
“COMMON LAW” ELUDES DEFINITION because it is not a list of laws; it is not built upon precedents or a
collection of equity court rulings. Common Law is written into our hearts and minds being naturally
common onto all men.9
For even the godless having not the law, do by nature the things contained in
the law, showing the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness.10
Common Law is the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God that proceed upon two self-evident truths,60
called maxims: (1) for every injury there must be a remedy and in order (2) for there to be a crime
there must be an injured party, without which no court may proceed. Maxims are brief statements of
self-evident truth that control our Common Law courts. They provided discernment in the writing of
our founding documents. It is an adviser to our legislatures, and every consideration of mankind that
seeks what’s fair and best for all.65
COURTS THAT DO NOT HONOR OR CONSIDER THESE MAXIMS ARE NOT “JUST.” Indeed, whether and to
what extent these common law maxims are honored by public leaders is how we test the way they
administer the law to govern us. Our courts were established to enforce these principles of common
law, the word Justice is synonymous with virtue, and virtue is a biblical principle that emanates from
Jesus Christ alone.11
Maxims are the laws that never changes. These statements set essential limits on70
truth and are essential to the fair and efficient administration of justice according to the common law of
mankind. No right-thinking person can disagree with a maxim. Every court is bound by the common
law rules of equity established by the never-changing maxims. Maxims test those who judge and put
an absolute limit on those who rule.
“EQUITY” (POSITIVE LAW) is a body of jurisprudence,12
or field of jurisdiction, differing in its origin,75
theory, and methods from the common law.13
“Equity14
is called positive law, which is actually and
8
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.
9
Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their
hearts, and in their minds will I write them.
10
Rom 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having
not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also
bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.
11
Luke 6:17-19 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great
multitude of people out of all Judaea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and
to be healed of their diseases; And they that were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed. And the whole
multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him, and healed them all.
12
JURISPRUDENCE: The philosophy of law, or the science which treats of the principles of positive law and legal
relations.
4. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 4 OF 6
specifically enacted or adopted by proper authority, [We the People] for the government of an
organized jural society. A ‘law’ in the sense in which that term is employed in [American]
jurisprudence, is enforced by a sovereign political authority [Congress empowered and governed by
Article I Section 8]. It is thus distinguished not only from all rules which, like the principles of morality80
and the so-called laws of honor and of fashion [construction of law] from all rules enforced by a
determinate authority [Constitution] which is politically subordinate [to the People]. In order to
emphasize the fact that ‘laws,’ in the strict sense of the term, are thus authoritatively imposed, they are
described as positive laws.”15
“CIVIL LAW,” “ROMAN LAW” AND “ROMAN CIVIL LAW” “are convertible phrases, meaning the same85
system of jurisprudence. That rule of action which every particular nation, commonwealth, or city has
established peculiarly for itself; more properly called ‘municipal’ law [tyrannical rule] to distinguish it
from the “law of nature.”16
Civil law finds its beginnings in Babylon, placing the accused under the
will of an earthly king who believes he had a divine right to rule over the people of his kingdom.
Usually the king’s court is ruthlessly presided over by a priest or a judge who will execute the will of90
the king over his subjects without mercy. Sounds familiar! Babylonian (civil/criminal) courts were
inquisitorial where the judge is both prosecutor and jury. Babylonian law morphed into the Roman
Empire’s law and Roman Empire’s law morphed into the Code of Justinian used by the Roman
Pontiffs to ruthlessly rule the Western world for 1260 years through the Roman Catholic Church.
Roman civil law waged war against the Common Law of England until King John was chained down95
by the Magna Carta in 1215. Today the Common Law of England is all but lost. In America civil law
has been nibbling away at the Common Law of the United States since 1789 and was all but lost to the
tyrannical judiciary by the American Bar Association via the “Rules Enabling Act of 1934.” But today,
the American People are waking up to the evils of the New World order and its Deep State and are
rediscovering their Heritage and their Natural Law Courts that were stolen and concealed by the100
United States Supreme Court in the mid-20th
Century, enabled by the US Congress and Senate.
“FAKE COURTS” are those whose jurisdiction is limited and special and whose proceedings are not
according to the course of the common law.”17
Criminal courts proceed according to statutory law.
Jurisdiction and procedure is defined by statute. Likewise, civil courts and admiralty courts proceed
according to statutory law. Any court proceeding according to statutory law is not a court of record105
(which only proceeds according to common law); it is an inferior court. “The only inherent difference
ordinarily recognized between superior and inferior courts is that there is a presumption in favor of the
validity of the judgments of the former, none in favor of those of the latter, and that a superior court
13
Laird v. Union Traction Co., .2 08 Pa. 574, 57 A. 987.
14
EQUITY JURISPRUDENCE: That portion of remedial justice which is exclusively administered by courts of equity as
distinguished from courts of common law. Jackson v. Nimmo, 3 Lea (Tenn.) 609. More generally speaking, the science
which treats of the rules, principles, and maxims which govern the decisions of a court of equity, the cases and
controversies which are considered proper subjects for its cognizance, and the nature and form of the remedies which it
grants.
15
Holl.Jur. 37.
16
See Bowyer, Mod. Civil Law, 19; Sevier v. Riley, 189. Cal. 170, 244 P. 323, 325.
17
Ex Parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212; Smith v. Andrews, 6 Cal. 652.
5. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 5 OF 6
may be shown not to have had power to render a particular judgment by reference to its record.18
“But
when a court acts by virtue of a special statute conferring jurisdiction in a certain class of cases, it is a110
court of inferior or limited jurisdiction for the time being, no matter what its ordinary status may be.”19
The decisions of a superior court may only be challenged in a court of appeal. The decisions of an
inferior court are subject to collateral attack. In other words, in a superior court one may sue an inferior
court directly, rather than resort to appeal to an appellate court. Decisions of a court of record may not
be appealed. It is binding on ALL other courts. However, no statutory or constitutional court (whether115
it be an appellate or supreme court) can second guess the judgment of a court of record. “The judgment
of a court of record whose jurisdiction is final, is as conclusive on all the world as the judgment of the
United States Supreme Court would be. It is as conclusive on this court as it is on other courts. It puts
an end to inquiry concerning the fact, by deciding it.”20
HIGH TREASON21
120
The United States Supreme Court and the Federal Judiciary are creatures of the law and have no
authority to legislate from the bench or by rules.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s
God and thereby abrogate our Declaration of Independence.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating the Blessings of Liberty and thereby125
abrogate our Constitution for the United States of America.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our unalienable right of Habeas Corpus,
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 1st
Amendment’s unalienable right
of free speech, religion, press or to petition the government for redress of grievances.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 2nd
Amendment’s unalienable right130
to defend our self from you when you come for our guns.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 4th
Amendment’s unalienable right
to be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 5th
Amendment’s unalienable right
of due process and protection from judicial tyranny via an untainted Grand Jury.135
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 6th
Amendment’s unalienable right
of a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury and assistance of counsel.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 7th
Amendment’s unalienable right
of trial by untainted jury of our peers under the rules of the common law.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 8th
Amendment’s unalienable right140
against excessive bail, excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishments.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 9th
Amendment’s unalienable right
of many more rights retained and not enumerated.
18
Ex parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212. Note, however, that in California ‘superior court’ is the name of a particular court.
19
Heydenfeldt v. Superior Court, 117 Cal. 348, 49 Pac. 210; Cohen v. Barrett, 5 Cal. 195” 7 Cal. Jur. 579.
20
Ex parte Watkins, 3 Pet., at 202-203. [cited by SCHNECKLOTH v. BUSTAMONTE, 412 U.S. 218, 255 (1973)]
21
High Treason: Treason against the king or sovereign. 4 Bl.Comm. 74, 75; 4 Steph. Comm. 183, 184, note.
6. DECISION & ORDER SUBVERSION BY RULE PAGE 6 OF 6
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without abrogating our 10th
Amendment’s unalienable right
of Free and independent States.145
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without warring against God.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without warring against the Constitution.
• You cannot abrogate the Common Law without warring against We the People.
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IS TO ACT OR
STAND GUILTY OF MISPRISION OF TREASON150
18 USC § 2382 - Misprision of treason - Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having
knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be,
disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the
governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.155
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IS TO ACT OR
STAND GUILTY OF FRAUD UPON THE COURT
In Bulloch v. United States, the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the
judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements
or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or160
where the judge has not performed his judicial function, thus where the impartial functions of the court
have been directly corrupted.”
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IS TO SPEAK OR
STAND GUILTY OF FRAUD
“Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak, or where an165
inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.”22
DECIDED, the United States Supreme Court is commanded to act, speak, open our Courts of Justice
and Obey the Supreme Law of the Land, while we still bring an olive branch. The court’s obscure
writing and ABA interpretation of Rule 2 is repugnant to the United States Constitution Article III
Section 2 clause 1 and Article VI clause 2. It was and IS Treason and is hereby nullified. We intend on170
“Making our Courts Just Again,” we will never surrender!
IT IS SO ORDERED September 16, 2019
Albany, New York
175
Jury Foreman
Natural Law Tribunal
22
U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299. See also U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021, 1032; Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932