| Supporting Document Guide |
|
28 U.S.C. 1251
title28-1251.txt
|
When your State is the plaintiff, this is the rule they are using to bring you into a federal court. They are claiming that you fit under (b)(3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens.
They are claiming that you are not a Citizen of the State. They are claiming that you are a citizen of another State or an alien.
|
|
Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393
Scott_v_Sandford
|
The opinion of the court is important. It goes a long way toward explaining jurisdiction.
Here's a few quotes:
"This point was decided in the case of Bingham v. Cabot, in 3 Dall. 382, and ever since adhered to by the court. And in Jackson v. Ashton, 8 Pet. 148, it was held that the objection to which it was open could not be waived by the opposite party, because consent of parties could not give jurisdiction."
"The principle of law is too well settled to be disputed that a court can give no judgment for either party where it has no jurisdiction;"
"And certainly an error in passing a judgment upon the merits in favor of either party, in a case which it was not authorized to try, and over which it had no jurisdiction, is as grave an error as a court can commit."
|
|
Slaughterhouse Cases 83 U.S. 36
Slaughterhouse Cases
|
This case tells you that there are now 2 different kinds of citizenship in this country.
1) There are the Citizens of States, Sovereign Citizens, Kings.
2)There are freed slaves which are now called subjects of the United States or citizen of the United States.
You are either one or the other. King or subject. You can't be both.
Citizens of a State claim their rights from the Declaration of independence and the Constitution below Amendment 13, where they have always been.
The few rights of the freed slaves, subjects of the United States, citizens of the United States are spelled out for them.
|
|
Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890)
hans_v_louisiana
|
Watch the lawyer for Hans and the court argue about whether someone with the character of Hans, the character of a freed slave, citizen of the United States, could actually sue the property managers of the Kings?
Hans thought he was a Citizen of the State of Louisiana, then he would have had the character of a Sovereign Citizen, a king. The Court and his lawyer knew differently.
All Hans needed to be a Citizen of the State of Louisiana, a King, was a desire and a bona fide residence in the State. He claimed to be one, he must have had the desire. He wasn't poor, he had a residence. Where is the problem?
Notice how the term "Citizen of the State" is so carefully avoided.
|
|
"The Dubious Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment" Tulane Law Review Vol. 28, 1953
dubious-origins-14.jpg
|
What can I say? The lawyers confess.
This is a copy of the confession printed in the Tulane Law Review.
They know that a small group of Congressmen took control of the Congress and stole our right to be born a king and our right to become a King. By force of Arms. At the point of a bayonet.
The lawyers know that they are the Esquires of the new king and doing their job of controlling the freed slaves, subjects of the United States, citizens of the United States.
In the process of trying to blackmail the United States Supreme Court into letting segregation stand they also spilled the beans on some other illegal activities they kept quiet about.
|
|
"The 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the threat that it poses to our Democratic Government." South Carolina Law Quarterly Vol.11 [1959]
The threat of the
14th Amendment (jpg)
|
What can I say? The lawyers confess, AGAIN.
This is a copy of the confession printed in the South Carolina Law Quarterly.
Lawyers know that a small group of Congressmen took control of the Congress, overthrew our government and stole our unalienable Rights and everything this country claims to stand for. They "reconstructed" us into sub-human Negroes. By force of Arms. At the point of a bayonet.
If you won't believe them, will you believe Andrew Johnson? (President after Lincoln) There is a quote from him about how illegal the overthrow of Congress and the invasion of the Southern "rebel" States was.
This version also gives a scenario for the rise of the emperor of the United States.
I know it's hard to believe but face it, The lawyers have sold us out. Every day lawyers go to work to control the conquered Negroes and perpetuate the overthrow of the United States. Is it any wonder why you were not taught law in school? Or, for that matter, history. Our whole legal system is based on the ignorance of We, the People, conquered Negroes of the United States.
|
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE I. DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
Louisiana Constitution Article I
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE I. DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
|
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE IV. EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Louisiana Constitution Article IV
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE IV. EXECUTIVE BRANCH
|
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE V. JUDICIAL BRANCH
Louisiana Constitution Article V
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE V. JUDICIAL BRANCH
|
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE VII. REVENUE AND FINANCE
Louisiana Constitution Article VII
|
LOUISIANA STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE VII. REVENUE AND FINANCE
|
|
LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 9.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS
ch_9_Dept_O_Public_Safety
|
LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 9.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS
A body corporate with the power to sue and be sued and through its offices and officers, shall have authority generally for the security and physical safety of the citizens and property of Louisiana
|
|
New Orleans Times Picayune Article April 4, 2007
4407timespic.jpg
|
"Citing federal case law, Lemon found that police in Jefferson Parish did not violate the plaintiffs' right to travel within the State, as no such right exists in federal jurisprudence."
The right to travel in a State is not for subjects only Kings.
|
|
License Requirements to use the master's vehicle
driver-lic-app-f.jpg
driver-lic-app-b.jpg
|
Some of the requirements of the owner of the vehicle.
"Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent the owner of real property used by the public for purposes of vehicular travel by permission of the owner, and not as a matter of right, from prohibiting such use, or from requiring other or different or additional conditions than those specified in this Chapter, or otherwise regulating such use as may seem best to such owner." La R.S. 32:25[emphasis added]
Obviously a King who owns his own vehicle can travel as a matter of right.
|
