Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Dear Big Al;
I like the indentation. Would you briefly explain how we can do that please?
The simple way to defeat subject matter jurisdiction is to abate without the court or appear Restricted (Rule E(8)) upon the lack of an enacting clause on the statute.
Charles Weisman wrote a good treatise on this called The Authority of Law.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
David Merrill,
"The Authority of Law" is a great referance. Thank you for helping to bring it to the use of others. Under this referance, Subject-matter jurisdiction is quite simply put as Joiner v State. An enacting clause gives a law jurisdictional identity and constitutional authenticity
It is the referance to all common private persons to ensure that the laws enacted are apportioned by Congress for use within the Fifty States of the Union (u)nited States. It also will referance as to who may be held accountable for the said law if defecient.
The enacting clause must also appear on the face of the law within all law books for common referance of any private person. A private citizen (and also a private Citizen) is not required or expected to search through endless volumes and tomes of law to ensure that the law is properly enacted.
An enacting clause must appear on the face of the law and should appear after the statute or law number and before the body text of the law.
Look for the wording "Be it enacted by the legislature of the State of Alaska..." [This is the referance relevant to myself but should be near for other States.]
Enacting clauses are not origionated by our forefathers, it is a system used by governments through-out time immemorial. It is even used by the Great I AM with his Holy Ten Laws.
If there is not an enacting clause on the face of the law, it is not a law at all. And no court may assert any other form of jurisdiction when the Subject-matter jurisdiction is in the want.