Smj = Suject Matter Jurisdiction

[Big Al]

OK folks, Codee and I spent a good deal of time talking about this subject on the phone. We came to the conclusion that this topic more than any other needs to be hashed out. I'm laying down some grounds for myself, and I suggest anyone wanting to get into this subject reframe from coping and pasting off subject material to this thread. The only control I have is to use my personnel ignore button ( same as you folks). If anyone wants to get into the fray, lets do it!

I want all to know that a great deal of time has been spent in researching this subject. I can state now if done properly you cannot be beaten in court using this, They must dismiss, with prejudice, if done with complete knowledge of your subject. We are only going to deal with Traffic court. Much of what will be discussed will pertain to other administrative courts as well.

I would advise anyone reading these posts to contact James B. Woods III, for the full information needed to successfully understand the full extent of the discussions on this subject. http://beatalltraffictickets.com/index.htm This is most important, otherwise you wil be lost!

Good discussion topic Al. SMJ is one in which I agree with you, cannot be challenged by the de facto courts, when properly executed. I base this opinion of mine on the fact that the Florida Statutes, Preface portion of the Index volume, plainly state that the Statutes are only a prima facie evidence of the law. Further, the Florida Constitution plainlys states in the Judiciary portion of that Constitution, that the courts can only have jurisdiction by virtue of the 'Law', NOT statutes.

Jerry

[Big Al]

Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts

Good discussion topic Al. SMJ is one in which I agree with you, cannot be challenged by the de facto courts, when properly executed. I base this opinion of mine on the fact that the Florida Statutes, Preface portion of the Index volume, plainly state that the Statutes are only a prima facie evidence of the law. Further, the Florida Constitution plainlys states in the Judiciary portion of that Constitution, that the courts can only have jurisdiction by virtue of the 'Law', NOT statutes.

Jerry

Jerry: you are correct and fortunate to live in the state of the real SMJ pro James B. Woods III. He has spent many years in the study of this subject and has it down cold. As you have discovered about Florida's laws the same applies to all the states.

In fact Jerry this is a perfect place to start our discussions and that is with the issue of color of law and the fact that the so called courts that will handle these matters are administrative only and do not have the power of the judiciary.

You all will recall that time after time the complaint most often heard at the hands of these so called courts and at the hands of these so called judges is that they have denied me my Constitutional Rights. The constant theme that will run through this discussion is the fact that the so called judges and prosecutors do not know the law or the Constitutions they have sworn oaths to protect and defend. This in it's self is the greatest hurtle to overcome.

Let us start our study by looking to our own state Constitutions for what must be the qualifing language for any bill to pass and become law in our states. This is a key factor in your sucess with SMJ.

I would advise anyone reading these posts to contact James B. Woods III, for the full information needed to successfully understand the full extent of the discussions on this subject. http://beatalltraffictickets.com/index.htm This is most important, otherwise you wil be lost!

[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.

Section 18. Enacting clause. The style of the laws of this state shall be: "Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado".

Regards,

David Merrill.

[Big Al]

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.

Look at the top of the box we do the posting from underA with the line you will note lines the one on the left says decrease Indent and the one on the right says Increase indent.

Regards,

David Merrill.

In regards your information David on the Weisman book I will order it today. Thank you for that great information David!

[powder]

So the easiest method is to look for the lack of the enacting clause. In Canada that would be the Commencement clause.

What other options are available?

[Codee]

Subject matter jurisdiction is a more broad jurisdiction.

In order to meet SMJ requirements the administrative court must

1) have been given the authority to hear the type of case and to prosecute on a certain statute.

2) be propperly formed under the governing statutes for that tribunal. This means a tribunal must have actuall officers instead on Non-Bonds pretending.

3) the court must not act in "excess" of its jurisdiction or the judgment is "voidable" by one of the parties.

4) the court must not act "without" jurisdiction or the judgment is "void."

5) the court must prove jurisdiction and the proof must be on the record.

6) the subject (statute) must been properly enacted positive law.

[Big Al]

Originally Posted by powder

So the easiest method is to look for the lack of the enacting clause. In Canada that would be the Commencement clause.

What other options are available?

There are many more but let's wait for more folks to look up there own states's language so we can proceed. No jumping around at this point (sorry)

I would advise anyone reading these posts to contact James B. Woods III, for the full information needed to successfully understand the full extent of the discussions on this subject. http://beatalltraffictickets.com/index.htm This is most important, otherwise you wil be lost!

As for the Florida language:

CONSTITUTION
OF THE
STATE OF FLORIDA
AS REVISED IN 1968 AND SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED

PREAMBLE
We, the people of the State of Florida, being grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, in order to secure its benefits, perfect our government, insure domestic tranquility, maintain public order, and guarantee equal civil and political rights to all, do ordain and establish this constitution.

ARTICLE III
LEGISLATURE

SECTION 6. Laws.--Every law shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, and the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title. No law shall be revised or amended by reference to its title only. Laws to revise or amend shall set out in full the revised or amended act, section, subsection or paragraph of a subsection. The enacting clause of every law shall read: "Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:".

Originally Posted by Big Al

Jerry: you are correct and fortunate to live in the state of the real SMJ pro James B. Woods III. He has spent many years in the study of this subject and has it down cold. As you have discovered about Florida's laws the same applies to all the states.

In fact Jerry this is a perfect place to start our discussions and that is with the issue of color of law and the fact that the so called courts that will handle these matters are administrative only and do not have the power of the judiciary.

You all will recall that time after time the complaint most often heard at the hands of these so called courts and at the hands of these so called judges is that they have denied me my Constitutional Rights. The constant theme that will run through this discussion is the fact that the so called judges and prosecutors do not know the law or the Constitutions they have sworn oaths to protect and defend. This in it's self is the greatest hurtle to overcome.

Let us start our study by looking to our own state Constitutions for what must be the qualifing language for any bill to pass and become law in our states. This is a key factor in your sucess with SMJ.

[Big Al]

§ 13. Form of Bills

Every bill shall be confined to one subject unless it is an appropriation bill or one codifying, revising, or rearranging existing laws. Bills for appropriations shall be confined to appropriations. The subject of each bill shall be expressed in the title. The enacting clause shall be: "Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Alaska."

§ 14. Passage of Bills

The legislature shall establish the procedure for enactment of bills into law. No bill may become law unless it has passed three readings in each house on three separate days, except that any bill may be advanced from second to third reading on the same day by concurrence of three-fourths of the house considering it. No bill may become law without an affirmative vote of a majority of the membership of each house. The yeas and nays on final passage shall be entered in the journal.





I would advise anyone reading these posts to contact James B. Woods III, for the full information needed to successfully understand the full extent of the discussions on this subject. http://beatalltraffictickets.com/index.htm This is most important, otherwise you wil be lost!









"We the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land, in order to secure and transmit to succeeding generations our heritage of political, civil, and religious liberty within the Union of States, do ordain and establish this constitution for the State of Alaska."

Yes this is the kind of language we are looking for Jerry. All states will have similar language in there Constitutions.