14th Amendment Ramifications

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

In a nutshell, the answer is this. My opinion about whether the 14th Amendment (or any other Amendment) was properly ratified does not matter. Nor does yours. Since it's deemed a political question, the courts won't touch it, either. If you think there's a problem with the 14th Amendment, you need to contact the President (since the Secretary of State is part of the executive branch) and your representatives in Congress and ask them to look into it.

But it's pointless to argue this in court. That's an argument you can file under L for loser.

Awesome case, I agree in part with the court, and I believe that the question of whether or not it was ratified is political, rather than "in law"

However, the issue is that it was imposed through the Reconstruction acts, rather than ratified.

If the reconstruction acts were constitutionally repugnant martial law powers, and if such powers IMPOSED (rather than ratified) the 14th; and if such alleged "amendment" affects ones substantive rights - is that a matter of politics, without even a scintilla of it being a matter of law?

How is it a political question if ones substantive rights are affected by consitutionally repugnant martial law measures which IMPOSED the 14th?

[joseph sugarman]

There are terrible facts which I think none of you has recognized in this discussion, and which preclude there ever being logically theorized answers.

There will never be a legal answer or solution to these or any other questions because no corrupt judge/s, justice/justices at the district, appellate or supreme level will ever legally rule on the questions; deferring to the legislative side of government to provide the people answers or solutions.

There will never be a political answer or solution to these or any other questions because no corrupt representative/s or senator/s will ever politically rule on the questions; deferring to the judicial side of government to provide the people answers or solutions.

There is, however, an answer and a solution; it rests in the power of the people. The people shall form federal and state, citizen grand juries with the purpose of indictment of all corrupt government persons for treason. The people shall form citizen, common-law courts to hear the true bills for treason brought by the grand juries. When the corrupt representative, senators, judges, justices, presidents, vice presidents, and all other corrupt government persons have been found guilty of treason; each and every one of them shall be stood in front of a wall and shot by a citizen militia firing squad.

When we have rid ourselves of all the vermin we can address all the legal and political problems in a reasonable and just fashion.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by joseph sugarman

There is, however, an answer and a solution; it rests in the power of the people. The people shall form federal and state, citizen grand juries with the purpose of indictment of all corrupt government persons for treason. The people shall form citizen, common-law courts to hear the true bills for treason brought by the grand juries. When the corrupt representative, senators, judges, justices, presidents, vice presidents, and all other corrupt government persons have been found guilty of treason; each and every one of them shall be stood in front of a wall and shot by a citizen militia firing squad.

When we have rid ourselves of all the vermin we can address all the legal and political problems in a reasonable and just fashion.

And that's an excellent idea...if you want to be arrested, tried, and imprisoned for simulating judicial process, making terroristic threats, and possibly other crimes as well.

[weishaupt1776]

Okay, so whether the 14th was "ratified" or not is a political question

Now, if the 14th implemented an insurgent body politic and system based on an entirely new "citizenship" status, in which one is coerced to recognize a defacto system; is that a political question,also ?

P.S.
I chanced the title of this thread to "14th amndmt ramifications"

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

And that's an excellent idea...if you want to be arrested, tried, and imprisoned for simulating judicial process, making terroristic threats, and possibly other crimes as well.

You seem to be representing as agency to illicit activity associated with the rump corporate fascist national so******t foreign nation/state United Nation of District of Columbia's occupation through coup d' etat, accomplished via economic sanction, class warfare, overt and covert acts of armed violence, mind control ingrained into children through forced incarceration in "state" indoctrination centers, etc., and by imposed junta, largely effected by armed force of corporate municipal mercenary troops, upon the conquered domestic population of the organic United States of America, propped up by, and as agency for a private organized criminal racketeering syndicate of a cartel of international/transnational/multinational conglomerates of
war financiers/investors/profiteers, and their foreign "legal" re-pre-sent-at-ion, the private monopoly trade guild BAR Association bastard attorneys plying their odious trade of entrapment along the sides of, and in the corners of a republican institution where affairs are administered.

bas·tard
Pronunciation:
\ˈbas-tərd\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French, probably of Germanic origin; akin to OldFrisian bost marriage, Old English bindan to bind
Date:
14th century

something that is spurious, irregular, inferior, or of questionable origin

That to secure these rights [to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness], Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, - That, whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

In Federalist #39 Madison wrote that "a majority of every national society" is "competent at all times....to alter or abolish its established government." Alexander Hamilton repeated the principle in Federalist #78, referring to

"that fundamental principle of republican government which admits the right of the people to alter or abolish the established Constitution whenever they find it inconsistent with their happiness."

Comparable language obviously derived from the Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America may be found in many state constitutions side by side with Amendment Clauses.

What is the relation between an express Amendment Clause and an express right to alter or abolish government?

Most state constitutions put the right to alter or abolish government, in an enforceable Bill of Rights along with rights to free expression, freedom from unreasonable searches, and so on.

Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That is organically enumerated and guaranteed right for one to "lawyer."

A republican form of government means a republic.

In a republic the administration of affairs is open to all CITIZENS©.

A court is a republican institution where affairs are administered.

You must administer your affairs of court yourself or waive this right.

When you invoke a court you must assert your jurisdiction to hold it and cannot let the judge usurp your judicial power.

This means you do not pay an attorney fee to him to conduct your court, you do not submit documents to him for his approval, you do not motion him to move your court, you deny everything he has tried to file and you strike anything that he has attempted to enter of record.

He will not like you.

You are not trying to make friends with him.

Without the judge you can eject attorneys and enter your own orders including a declaratory judgment if no other party appears for court in person.

If a few of us do this we can be hunted down and exterminated.

If thousands of us do this it may succeed.

I'm telling you how to fight but not promising victory.

[Lawdog]

Not being a psychiatrist (M.D.) or psychologist (Ph.D.), I don't know how to respond to your paranoid gibberish. But I hope that you get the help that you need.

On the other hand, I can give you an example of what a real court thinks about forming make-believe courts with your buddies down at the pool hall. Pay close attention to footnote one of the court's opinion.

328 So. Car. 76, 492 S.E.2d 75

Earl NASH, Petitioner, v. Jack F. McINTOSH, County Attorney Linda DeShields, Clerk of Court, and Carl E. Anderson, Respondents.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

October 10, 1997.


ORDER
Petitioner has filed a petition with this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the clerk of the circuit court to accept a document for filing. This document, which was issued by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, allows a "judgment" issued by "Our One Supreme Court, Common Law Venue, Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction" in Franklin, North Carolina, to be filed as a foreign judgment in the District of Columbia, and indicates that the judgment of "Our One Supreme Court" is entitled to the same force and effect as a judgment issued in the District of Columbia. Petitioner argues that this State must accept this document for filing under the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. U.S. CONST. art. IV, § 1.

On October 6, 1997, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia issued an order vacating the filing of the judgment of "Our One Supreme Court" nunc pro tunc to the date of its filing with that court. The Superior Court found that the judgment of "Our One Supreme Court" is not entitled to full faith and credit under either the Constitution of the United States or the law of the District of Columbia.(fn1) This renders petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus moot and the petition is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED


/s/ Ernest A. Finney, Jr., C.J.

/s/ Jean H. Toal, J.

/s/ James E. Moore, J.

/s/ John H. Waller, Jr., J.

/s/ E.C. Burnett, III, J.
_____________________
Footnotes:

1. "Our One Supreme Court" is a body established by persons who are apparently dissatisfied with the legitimate judicial systems in this country. These persons believe that they have the authority to create their own courts.

This view is, of course, preposterous since a court can only be created by the sovereign power of a state or the federal government. 21 C.J.S. Courts § 93 (1990). Accordingly, the actions and judgments of "Our One Supreme Court" and other similar bodies are a complete and utter nullity, and have no force or effect. In light of this, this Court has previously directed the clerks of court in this State not to accept any judgments or other documents which have been issued by "Our One Supreme Court." We take this opportunity to reemphasize this point.

And these folks merely lost a civil case. Some folks who tried this sort of nonsense went to prison, like J.V. Wells, one of the Montana Freemen. For the decision upholding all but one of the charges for which he was convicted, see 163 F.3d 889 (4th Cir. 1998).

[ss_stealth]

Originally Posted by mrg

You seem to be representing as agency to illicit activity associated with the rump corporate fascist national so******t foreign nation/state United Nation of District of Columbia's occupation through coup d' etat, accomplished via economic sanction, class warfare, overt and covert acts of armed violence, mind control ingrained into children through forced incarceration in "state" indoctrination centers, etc., and by imposed junta, largely effected by armed force of corporate municipal mercenary troops, upon the conquered domestic population of the organic United States of America, propped up by, and as agency for a private organized criminal racketeering syndicate of a cartel of international/transnational/multinational conglomerates of
war financiers/investors/profiteers, and their foreign "legal" re-pre-sent-at-ion, the private monopoly trade guild BAR Association bastard attorneys plying their odious trade of entrapment along the sides of, and in the corners of a republican institution where affairs are administered.

Dang Mrg, you beat me to it! Hahaha!
As usual, well put. Better than I could have said it.

Originally Posted by John F. Kennedy

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

History has taught me that violent tyrants are met by violent revolutionaries.

[ThomPaine]

I am not sure that trying to create one's own court will solve anything, I understand the concept and what they were trying to acomplish. It is the equivalent however of asking the jailer for the keys. I am looking for a quote here that says something along the lines of going to the PTB asking for permission to do something that usurps their power is not going to be met with sincerity or approval. In all cases, something that challenges anyone's power or authority will be met with animosity and disdain.

[palani]

Originally Posted by US Supreme Court

. "Our One Supreme Court" is a body established by persons who are apparently dissatisfied with the legitimate judicial systems in this country.

These persons believe that they have the authority to create their own courts. This view is, of course, preposterous since a court can only be created by the sovereign power of a state or the federal government. 21 C.J.S. Courts § 93 (1990).

legitimate 1494, "having the status of one lawfully begotten," from M.L. legitimatus, pp. of legitimare "make lawful, declare to be lawful," from L. legitimus "lawful," originally "in line with the law," from lex (gen. legis) "law."

Wizard of Oz: They have one thing you haven't got: a diploma. Therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Universitartus Committiartum E Pluribus Unum, I hereby confer upon you the honorary degree of ThD.
Scarecrow: ThD?
Wizard of Oz: That's... Doctor of Thinkology.

Professor Marvel: Better get under cover, Sylvester. There's a storm blowin' up, a whopper. Just speakin' the vernacular of the peasantry.

Exactly how did the state and/or federal government come into existence without involving people?

[ss_stealth]

Originally Posted by US Supreme Court

These persons believe that they have the authority to create their own courts. This view is, of course, preposterous since a court can only be created by the sovereign power of a state or the federal government. 21 C.J.S. Courts § 93 (1990).

I believe this judge's view is, of course, preposterous since I read no talk about ONLY states and the federal government in Law.com's definition of "court":

Originally Posted by http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=380&bold=||||

court
n. 1) the judge, as in "The court rules in favor of the plaintiff." 2) any official tribunal (court) presided over by a judge or judges in which legal issues and claims are heard and determined. ...

The "court" just has to be "official":

Originally Posted by http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1386&bold=||||

official
1) adj. referring to an act, document or anything sanctioned or authorized by a public official or public agency. The term can also apply to an organizational act or product which is authorized by the organization, such as an Official Boy Scout knife or emblem, an official warranty, membership card or set of rules. 2) n. a public officer or governmental employee who is empowered to exercise judgment. 3) n. an officer of a corporation or business.
See also: officer

I think the real issue with this is that the court that these guys created did not have jurisdiction over the US Supreme Court or the US Government in general. These folk were probably acting as 'US Citizens' who, being a creation of the US Government, and therefore had no authority to tell their boss(es) where to stick it -- so to speak. That'd be my assessment, but I'm still green.

Nevertheless, this is the "official" end of my "official" post!