For the sake of Ed Rivera's arguments I have included the September 23 salary requirements.
http://www.suijuris.net/forum/court/...disbarred.html
The intent of the judiciary being for federal government has always been obvious because of the 'saving to suitors' clause on Page 77 (Page 6 off my scanner) - formation of Districts and that the courts of the people were retained for all time. That is why I have not scanned the entire Act until now. The federal judiciary simply recognizes that courts of the people prevail.
However it was reference to September 23, 1789 (salary requirements) that made me think I should copy and scan the entire Act - give it another reading too. But while I was copying off the microfiche in the federal repository the dates lodged into place. The Judiciary Act was the next day - September 24; so I looked just before it for what happened on September 23!
It is the salary requirements not conforming to Constitutional requirements that Ed Rivera is using for the "tell" that the "judiciary" system in place today is not judicial at all.
I still prefer the 'saving to suitors' clause but then again, Ed is a lawyer - or at least used to be and therefore is subject to conditioning that I have never been subject to.
Regards,
David Merrill.
