NoSSN - Federal Court Case, United States District Court, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Federal Court Case, United States District Court, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Involving an American Worker’s Right and the Right of ALL AMERICANS to Earn a Living in America without Participation in the Voluntary social security system
July 20, 2003

<<Previous

Next>>

Dear Fellow Concerned Citizens,

The following is an "info piece" I have been trying to finish. Sorry it has taken longer than anticipated, but I came down with a weird viral illness which slowed my efforts considerably. In any case, this "saga" relates some of my experiences in federal court, along with some of the methods I used, which everyone can apply to overcome the unjust indifference, incompetence and arrogance usually demonstrated by virtually all of the judges, attorneys, governmental officers and administrative staff who purportedly work for the People.

The information presented is not "legal advice", but rather is intended to aid anyone, who faces judicial or governmental problems, in presenting their cases in the most effective way. The methods describe are clear, direct and Lawfully based in the Constitution. Our Constitutional Study Group members have used them with great success in New Mexico courts, as stated in this piece. We believe everyone should know and use them if they hope to prevail in court and to restore Constitutional governance to this Nation.

I realize this is a long piece, but I ask you to put it out to members of groups in which you participate, to family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, and anyone else you can think of. Please ask your those you select to send it to anyone and everyone in their sphere of influence for the ultimate benefit of all. I intend to send this to any and all organizations and individual Citizens who are working for justice, truth and freedom for all People. If you have suggestions in this regard, I would be most grateful to hear them.

Please note that I have set up another email account so that I can handle responses more efficiently. Direct all comments or questions on this piece to: constitutionalcitizens@yahoo.com.

Sincerely,
Margy Edwards Flynn

Margaret D. Edwards Flynn
739 Dalbey Drive

Las Vegas, New Mexico
Phone/fax: (505) 425-0659
Email: constitutionalcitizens@yahoo.com

Former New Mexico Grand Jury Foreman who tried to expose Rampant Disregard for Citizens’ Rights by “Our” judicial system now is a Plaintiff in Federal Court, further opposing that corrupt system to uphold her Rights and the Rights of All American Citizens

Federal Court Case, United States District Court, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Involving an American Worker’s Right and the Right of ALL AMERICANS to Earn a Living in America without Participation in the Voluntary social security system

Dear J.A.I.L.4 Judges Members and other Citizens in Pursuit of Freedom,

First, I want to thank everyone who responded in support of my Constitutional positions and demands upon the judicial system, expressed in the letter I sent to J.A.I.L.4Judges a few weeks back, wherein, I related my experiences during my tenure as Grand Jury Foreman in San Miguel County, New Mexico, two years ago. I was truly heartened by your interest, humbled by your words of appreciation, and honored to learn your stories. We have much in common, not the least of which is our concern for the unconstitutional course government and judicial “leaders” of this Nation have taken, and our desire to correct that course by returning this Nation to its Constitutional roots. To accomplish this, we must first remember an old adage – “There is strength in numbers.” Next, we must motivate those “numbers” to take action, individually and collectively for the common good, for we are ALL in this together.

This work is a joint-effort between my husband, John F. (Jack) Flynn, and me. His family helped to settle this land and found this country, and there are several Presidents in his family background. Jack’s ancestors also founded many old Eastern institutions, and were among the founders of Harvard College and Boston Latin School. He is committed to the Constitution, as am I. We present this material by all provisions of the First Amendment of the Constitution of these united States of America and all our Rights guaranteed within that Constitution, as well as the Constitution of the Republic of New Mexico. I am a Plaintiff in a case in federal court and hereby claim and invoke ALL of my Rights to speak and present any and all aspects of that case and matters pertaining to social security. The law is for the People and is not the exclusive property of lawyers or the courts. If this were the case, then the law would not apply to the People. Warning is hereby given to anyone who attempts to stop my free speech and my Rights guaranteed within the Constitution that you will be held fully LIABLE for your actions.

This expose of part of our fraudulent judicial system is divided into separate sections and is somewhat lengthy in order to cover the subject matter. Despite this length, I was only able to cover some, and not all, of the subject. For those of you who want more detail or information, please Email or call me. What is presented is based in and on our Constitution, federal laws, rules and regulations, Supreme Court rulings, Citizens’ Rights, Truth and common sense. The judicial system as established by our Constitution is incorruptible; however, many, if not most of the judges and public officers who operate this system, pursuant to their oaths, are incompetent, deceitful, corrupt and must be held LIABLE for their actions.

SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The actions, which we can take to restore our country to its Constitutional position are ready and waiting for us to initiate them. Some of you may feel that we have to be patient, proceed slowly and cautiously, without “making waves”. However, NOW is the time to start a tidal wave, because it grows more obvious each day that we do not have the luxury of time. In fact, since the awful events of 9/11, our Civil liberties are rapidly disappearing under such unconstitutional laws as the “U.S.A. P.AT.R.I.O.T.” Act and, in reality, government officials and public officers have little, if any, RESPECT for the Law and the People. We cannot count on them to restore our Republic to its original state, so we must do it, ourselves, by taking back our inherent political power. It is well past the time to take Lawful, Effective Action that will hold public officers responsible and LIABLE for their actions. If we all work together to help each other accomplish specific objectives, we can and WILL make that DIFFERENCE, which will be seen, heard and felt by thousands, if not millions of others. What matters most now is EFFECTIVENESS!

Common sense and basics are not too “common” or very basic anymore within our artificially contrived society and governmental systems. Procedure should never replace, obscure or obviate the INTENT of that procedure. Yet, government, courts and public officers, by their actions, obscure this intent with devious and complicated procedure to undermine Citizens’ efforts to accomplish the intent. Is this what you want? Remember, these “public officers” work for you. When in doubt, it is best to follow the money or the benefit. Who receives financial gain and benefits from implementing, requiring and maintaining devious, complicated government procedures? It certainly is not the People. Follow the MONEY and the BENEFIT trail to ascertain who gets the “bennies”.

At this crucial time in our Nation, it is imperative to get back to BASICS. The basic, FUNDAMENTAL and SUPREME LAW of this land is the Constitution of these united States of America. ALL politicians, public officers, judges, prosecutors, etc., have taken oaths to defend and support this Constitution, as required by the Constitution in Article VI, clauses 2 and 3. This oath is given, in part, in exchange for the Public Trust. The oath-taker has two choices: he/she can either abide by his oath, or not. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. If he does, then he performs his duties correctly. If he does not, then he has, including, but not limited to: (1) violated his oath; (2) perjured his oath; (3) violated the Public Trust; (4) violated the Constitution. (All are CRIMES against the People!) By his own actions, this “public officer” has invoked the SELF-EXECUTING sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution and has VACATED his office and is entitled to none of the benefits of that office, including salary and pension. If he continues in office, he does so under “color of law” and without lawful authority, and all his decisions are vacated. For those unfamiliar with Sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th, please review them. They are extremely powerful.

Please be fully aware that ALL laws, rules, regulations and procedures, including court procedures, applied to American Citizens MUST be in full accord and consistent with the Constitution or they are unconstitutional, unlawful and unenforceable. Any public officer who enforces or advocates an unconstitutional “law” violates his oath and can be held both accountable and LIABLE for such action. “Any law which is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U. S., 137, 174, 176. “Insofar as a statute runs counter to the FUNDAMENTAL LAW of the land, it is superceded thereby”. 16 Am. Jur. 2^nd 177, late Am. Jur. 2^nd 256.

It is the duty of every American Citizen, who loves this country and wants to restore Her to Constitutional government, to take lawful action against and oppose all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. The latter includes virtually all politicians and public officers in this Nation, both national and local. REALITY and TRUTH are concepts that we Americans must realize and demonstrate if we intend to make changes. The rose-colored glasses must come off. The People of this country have fought in many wars on both domestic and foreign soil, told by our government that they were fighting for our “freedom” and the “freedom” of those foreigners in whose countries we fought, but in the process we lost tens of millions of loyal, patriotic Americans, and further, destroyed millions of families, both foreign and domestic. What is the purpose of fighting those wars of “freedom” against foreign enemies when we allow the domestic enemies in our own governments and courts here, at home, to defy our Constitution and outright steal our freedoms from us every day? This is an insult to those brave, loyal Americans who gave their last, full measure of devotion, including my father and my husband’s uncle, while the vast majority of the Citizenry does nothing.

I participate in a Constitutional Study Group in Santa Fe, New Mexico, whose members have won over 200 cases in New Mexico courts over the past three years, based upon violations of Constitutional and Citizens’ Rights by municipalities and by public officers. This represents a win record of over 97%. Do you know any lawyer with that record? We win because we base our actions in the fundamental law, the Constitution, and we hold the judges to their oaths. Since one has to crawl before he can walk, the vast majority of these victories occurred in lower “courts”. Based upon those successes, however, many of us now have cases in state and federal courts.

Our methods, rooted in the Constitutions of these United States and of the Republic of New Mexico, are provided throughout this article and are listed at the end of this piece. Judges, attorneys general, prosecuting attorneys, police, public officers and lawyers really do not know how to respond, which usually results in dismissals. In some instances, and in spite of the fact that they have sworn oaths to uphold and support the Constitutions, these public officers have failed to provide due process and uphold Citizens’ Rights, thereby violating their oaths. As previously stated, this oath is given in exchange for the Public Trust which conveys upon the oath-taker a fiduciary RESPONSIBILITY to the Citizens to act in accordance with his oath.

The above-referenced action in which I am the Plaintiff is taken against a large corporation which fired me for political and others reasons herein described. The legal and lawful positions in this case can help those who are or have been in similar situations. For others currently not involved in court actions but who love Freedom and Justice and the quest to rightfully restore them to our People and this Nation, this can also help you, and I ask for your Support in my struggle in this case against an unconstitutional and treasonous judicial system and former federal judge. I would appreciate your direct comments to me, and if anyone would like to provide comments concerning this case and/or the corrupt, unconstitutional judicial system and the judges who operate it, I would very much appreciate that. You can write to Judge James A. Parker, Chief Judge, U. S. District Court, District of New Mexico, 333 Lomas Blvd., N.W., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 and to Honorable Deanell R. Tacha, Chief Judge, Tenth Circuit Court, 4830 West 15^th Street, #100, Lawrence, Kansas 66049-3846. Please refer to my case number, which is: 02-CV-1443, and is captioned: Margaret D. Edwards v. N. Martin Stringer, et al.

Three years ago I was hired by a large corporation without mention of a social security number. Shortly after I was hired, my manager demanded my social security number, which I refused to furnish since I do not participate in the voluntary social security system. Although I offered her a lawful alternative to the SSN, this manager threatened to fire me if I did not provide the number. Under this threat and against my will, I reluctantly provided it. While working for this corporation, which has approximately 8,000 workers, I informed my co-workers of their Rights in the Constitutions, including social security choice, and was fired. I immediately wrote to the President, CEO and Chairman of this corporation with my complaints, but was never answered. I persisted, eventually reached corporate personnel who “stonewalled” me, then opposed me, and I was finally forced to bring suit in federal court, in which the federal judge assigned to my case defied federal law, his own oath, our Constitutions and the Rights of an American Citizen.

This is where it gets interesting. For over three years I had been acting alone on this case, without legal representation. I have little respect or trust for most attorneys and our judicial system with which many attorneys act in collusion and conspiracy to defraud the Public and the court, act contrary to their oaths, act as a privileged class in defiance of free enterprise as monopoly members, and participate in other acts, which all amount to fraud upon the court. I acted for myself as a non-licensed attorney litigant and filed numerous Motions and Responses with the United States District Court, District of New Mexico, regarding this case. All pleadings were Constitutionally based, sound, and founded in law and fact. I believe that the lawyer for Defendants, the federal judge and magistrate did not expect the level and type of response they received from a non-licensed attorney litigant. The lawyer for Defendants is seemingly inept, deceitful and presented a “defense” non-specific to my charges, which amounts to no defense and is grounds for summary judgment.

SECTION TWO: THE CASE

A hearing took place on May 19, 2003, at the federal court in Albuquerque, New Mexico, before former federal judge Bruce Black, concerning Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and my Objection to former magistrate judge, William Deaton’s, illegal and unlawful order. The opposing lawyer spoke first, continued with his defense non-specific to my charges, lied to the court, attacked my character, acted arrogantly and smugly, as though he had this case “wrapped-up”. When he finished, I started to present my case, but was interrupted by a very arrogant and apparently uninterested judge whose facial expressions conveyed bored annoyance that I was wasting his time and obvious eagerness for me to stop talking. Perhaps I should have been intimidated, but instead, I was angry and more motivated than ever to have my say.

In summary, I was fired for refusing to supply a social security number, for personal and political reasons, and for exercising free speech. Defendants claimed that they were required to abide by federal law in forcing me to provide my social security number, or be fired. What I did next is an extremely important Constitutional consideration for all Americans. I stated, in open court, that an unconstitutional law allowed the government to make me, against my will, chattel property of the government, and that another unconstitutional law required a private company to make me chattel property, or be punished. I waited for a response from the then-judge who is duty bound to uphold the Constitution and federal law. There was absolute silence. The then-judge said nothing.

I continued to present my case by specifying federal laws, rules and regulations which defendants had violated or ignored, as well as part of a case brought to federal court by EEOC and the Justice Department on behalf of an American Citizen who was fired for not participating in the voluntary social security system. The EEOC prevailed during a hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss so the Defendants settled rather than expose this fraud to an American jury. Bruce Black, by his actions and questions, was, apparently, so unimpressed by the lawful actions of another federal judge and so unconcerned with upholding federal law and Citizens’ Rights that he granted Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and orally dismissed my case. Black’s decision was made without any lawful or legal evidence from Defendants’ attorney, without any serious consideration of my evidence, and without providing me due-process of law, in blatant violation of Black’s oath and my Rights. I immediately made an oral objection.

What occurred in the hearing that day was a total and complete travesty of justice, an insult to the Constitution, the Rights of the American People and federal law. There definitely appeared to be collusion and conspiracy between Black and Defendants’ attorney. The few questions Black asked me mostly revolved around matters totally unrelated and irrelevant to the charges in my Complaint and whether I had gone to law school, which I have not. At one point he asked me if I think that my Rights, as an American Citizen, are superior to the Rights of a corporation. I answered: “Yes, I do. A corporation is an artificial entity, not even mentioned in the Constitution, whose rights do not supersede those of a living American Citizen.” Black’s response was: “Funny, that’s exactly the opposite of WHAT I TELL MY JURIES EVERY DAY.” When I quoted famous Supreme Court rulings, he said: “You have some interesting opinions, but with no legal standing in this court”. Incredibly, this man did not even know or recognize landmark Supreme Court rulings, well-used for years in federal and all other courts to establish legal positions.

Black said that he had read my pleadings and was “not impressed”. Either he lied, or he is a very stupid man and totally unqualified for his position since all of my pleadings are based upon the Constitution, law and fact. It would seem, by his actions and comments, that his reaction to my Complaint depicts a consistent attitude because he was also unimpressed with upholding federal law and decisions by other federal judges regarding similar cases. The only thing that seemed to impress Black in that hearing were the outright lies, distortions, slurs, accusations and off-point defense of the Defendants’ attorney, a member of the New Mexico bar. Black is a former New Mexico licensed attorney and an honorary member of the New Mexico Bar.

As a seemingly spontaneous gesture of good fellowship, Black said that if I brought the text of the federal case I cited to court, within ten days, he would not require me to pay the costs of defense attorney. I did file that case within ten days, but under no circumstance would I pay any such extortion, which amounts to conversion of my funds, or, more simply, theft, and I, as an American Citizen, do not have to obey any unlawful order from a former judge, acting under color of law. Neither do you.

As an added note, I have begun researching Bruce Black’s decisions regarding cases involving non-licensed attorney litigants (or as the courts term, pro se). In the ten or so cases I have reviewed, he has dismissed virtually all of them or found against the pro se, non-licensed attorney litigant. I intend to find out the decision record of all federal judges for the District of New Mexico concerning non-licensed attorney litigants.

On May 23 I filed two papers with the court: (A) an Objection to Black’s Oral Order of Dismissal; (B) a Sworn Testimony of Treason. My witness also filed his Affidavit of Treason. As of June 26 neither the court nor Black has responded. In my paperwork and in my witness’ paperwork, we stated, including, but not limited to: (1) Black and lawyer for Defendants engaged in a seditious conspiracy against both Constitutions; (2) those not represented by licensed attorneys are rarely given due-process of law and equal protection under the law within the District of New Mexico; (3) Black, by his actions, invoked Sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment and has vacated his office; (4) Black usurped powers not possessed; (5) all orders from Black are null and void; (6) I notified Black, in open court, that unconstitutional laws made me chattel property of the government, against my will. By his actions, Black supported an unconstitutional law that made me chattel property of the government, against my will, and another unconstitutional law which required a private corporation to make me chattel property. I further stated that Black abused and exceeded his authority in making his decision, that he and the defense attorney acted in collusion and in conspiracy to deprive me of my Rights and that, by his own actions, Black is a traitor to this Nation. There has been no response or rebuttal, and a non-rebutted affidavit stands as TRUTH.

SECTION THREE: LAWFUL POSITIONS re: SOCIAL SECURITY (SS)

This sections concerns what Citizens can use, do and present to public officers, courts and judges regarding lawful positions concerning social security. This information is not restricted to that subject and has universal application. The law was written for and applies to all Americans, not just for the courts, judges, prosecutors and lawyers, although these groups seem to think and state that the law is their exclusive domain. If this were the case, then the law would apply ONLY to them and not to the Citizens and, thus, Citizens would not be subject to the law. Think about this, and then tell them. Since the law was written for and applies to us, then we have absolute Right to know and deal in the law. This is not exclusive to the American Bar Association, which is an illegal but “authorized” monopoly dealing in the law, for profit. Equal protection of the law applies also to those who oppose unconstitutionally approved monopolies.

“Truth” is widely-professed and publicly advocated as the basis of the American governmental system, our justice system, our courts and the law. As most of us are firmly aware from the reality of experience, there is little, if any, truth within these systems. This being so, Truth must be loudly spoken by all freedom loving Americans at every opportunity, especially in courts and to public officers. Most people either forgot or never realized that our Constitution is the Supreme Law of this Land, and that all laws must conform to and be consistent with Constitutional requirements, or these “laws” are unconstitutional, and thus, unenforceable. All public officers and judges, pursuant to their oaths, required by Article VI, clauses 2 and 3, of the Constitution, must not validate or enforce “laws” which are in direct opposition to the Constitution, or they violate their oaths and vacate their offices. If and when we witness such actions, it is our responsibility and duty, as American Citizens, who oppose all enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC, to enforce this.

Social Security participation by American Citizens is voluntary. For those who claim it is required by law, it should be very simple for them to cite that specific law which requires participation. When in doubt, go to the source. The Social Security Act was passed in 1935 and neither I nor countless other Citizens have found anywhere in the Act any language expressing a lawful requirement for an American Citizen to participate in the voluntary social security system, against his will, to earn a living in this Nation. If there were such a requirement in the Act, then, obviously, it would be unconstitutional, unenforceable and certainly not voluntary. If this were the case, then the fraud perpetuated by the government upon the People since 1935 would be staggering. This is why there is no such requirement in the Act. Remember: “Any law which is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.” Marbury v. Madison. Any public officer who enforces or advocates an unconstitutional “law” commits treason.

In the EEOC case I cited, the judge denied the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and three relevant points were made: (1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for failure to make a claim upon which relief could be granted was denied as frivolous, and a Supreme Court case, Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41(1957), was cited; (2) It was Defendants who fired the worker, not the government; (3) Defendants could have accommodated the worker lawfully and legally by using federal laws, rules and regulations available to them to do so, but they refused. As previously stated, when the judge dismissed Defendants’ Motion, they had no case, knew it, and rather than be humiliated before an American jury, settled with the worker. EEOC and the Justice Department prevailed on behalf of the worker. The judge also ordered the Defendants to change their procedures to comply with federal law.

In this country, under Constitutional mandate, we are guaranteed equal protection and treatment under the law. See 14^th Amendment, Section One. If one American can work without a social security number or participation, then ALL Americans can. Equal means equal. If the government allows one Citizen to work without the SS and demands that all others must participate, then that is unequal, selective, and establishes at least two classes of Citizens, which is totally unconstitutional and unenforceable.

Taco Bell corporation and numerous other corporations and companies have revised their job applications by placing the words “optional” or “voluntary” in the section which requests a social security number. If these corporate policies regarding social security were illegal or unlawful, then the government would have forced these corporations to cease these policies. The government has not done so because these policies are fully legal and lawful. Again, equal protection and treatment under the law applies. If any American can work without SS participation, all those who so choose can also work without SS. Many state workers work without SS participation. If they can do this, so can you. Any government official or public officer who forces any Citizen, against his/her will, to participate in SS, while other Americans, for whatever reason, are not required to do so, acts in defiance of his oath and, thus, vacates his office, pursuant to sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment.

Federal laws protect the Rights of American Citizens with respect to SS, here are two examples: “Whoever discloses, uses, or compels the disclosure of the social security number of any person in violation of the laws of the United States, shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined under Title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both” 42USC, 408(8); “It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his social security account number” …P. L. 93-579, 7, 88 Stat. 1909, (a) (1). It is obvious that a Citizen cannot be compelled to disclose the number, and further, it is obvious that the federal or any government cannot force a private company to do that which is illegal for the government, itself, to do. If the government has no authority, it can condone or convey no authority.

If the government uses unconstitutional law(s) to make an American Citizen, against his will, chattel property of the government, and then the government uses other unconstitutional law(s) to force a private company, under threat, to make an American Citizen chattel property, then clearly, the government acts unconstitutionally, illegally, and unlawfully, in defiance of federal law and Citizens’ Rights. Any government official or public officer who enforces or advocates such policies, pursuant to his oath, perjures his oath and vacates his office. .

The government cannot impair the obligations of contract. See Article One, Section 10 of the Constitution. Obviously, then, if the government cannot do this, the government cannot force an American Citizen, against his will, to accept the obligations of a contract, especially, when there has not been full disclosure by the government regarding that contract and the contract is fraudulent. Lack of full-disclosure is self-explanatory and typically consistent with most government policy. Fraud, briefly, is an act or omission with intent to deceive. As previously stated, there is no language within the Social Security Act that requires participation, yet the government implies otherwise. Further, when payments are deducted through F.I.C.A for “employment taxes”, per the Form W-4, voluntary withholding allowance, they are lawfully authorized under Title 26, Subtitle C. However, the government uses the same W-4 to “authorize” deductions for “income taxes” which properly fall under Subtitle A, in defiance of the fact that the Subtitles are not lawfully interchangeable. To add insult to injury, these payments are not deposited into a separate account, dedicated to the Social Security trust fund, for the benefit of the “beneficiaries”. They are paid into a general fund, which is constantly looted for other “expenses” and full of “I. O. Us”. There is little, if any, actual cash in the fund, and it is miniscule in relation to the enormous funds paid into the system. At its whim, the congress can stop the program and the benefits at any time. There is no guarantee that those who participate in the system will receive any benefits. In fact, though the Social Security program is described as “old age insurance”, the system is not now, nor ever was, an insurance program at all. The language which speaks of “insurance” does not appear anywhere in the body of the Act, and, thus, has no legal force or meaning. This is just some of the fraud and lack of full disclosure perpetrated by the government against American Citizens. After the recent corporate scandals in which millions of Americans lost nearly everything, and government did nothing, should you trust government with your money and your retirement?

SECTION FOUR – LAWFUL POSITIONS IN DEALING WITH GOVERNMENT & OUR COURTS

The American courts are owned by the American People, not by the judges, the prosecutors, the lawyers. These courts belong to “us”, not to “them”, and those who mistakenly think otherwise need to be educated. Likewise, all judges and public officers who have taken oaths to support and defend our Constitution, and are required to do so by the Constitution, must be reminded of this fact and made aware, by us, that they work for and serve us, PURSUANT TO THEIR OATHS. This phrase is not just a formality or rote utterance; it has meaning because an oath is an attestation that the oath-taker knows the Law and will abide by it. Since the oath is taken, in part, in exchange for the PUBLIC TRUST, the oath-taker MUST perform his official duties according to his oath, and the Law, or he perjures his oath, breaks the Law and violates the public trust.

Sadly, we are living in such a corrupt society, fostered by corrupt governmental and judicial systems, that we constantly have to be aware of our Rights in any situation which involves government. As mentioned before, this necessitates getting back to BASICS in the form of the real basic, the Supreme Law - the fundamental law of this land - the Constitution. This is what all court and governmental laws, procedures, actions and decisions SHOULD be based upon, and NOTHING ELSE. It is so basic and simple, but government constantly complicates, confuses and obfuscates the issue so government can control that issue, and you in the process. Take control, yourself, based in the Constitution. Keep to this very basic, fundamental principle. Do not allow subterfuge from the judge or anyone else. Keep it simple, directed, and hold them to their oaths. There is only one “litmus” test necessary: If the governmental or judicial action, decision, policy, etc., complies with the Constitution, it is lawful. If it does not, then it is unlawful, unconstitutional, and unenforceable. Any public officer who enforces it perjures his oath, vacates his office and can be sued and held LIABLE, personally, for his crime, pursuant to his oath.

Public officers have two basic choices: they can either abide by their oaths, or not. Nothing could be simpler or more direct. Now it is up to you to enforce Constitutional requirements on a public officer in court. Can you do it? Of course you can. We have done it in well over 200 cases in New Mexico. You are an American Citizen who wants to restore Constitutional government and you have a Right, in the First Amendment, to redress government when it acts wrongly.

Amazingly, most public officers I have encountered or have been told about, including judges, are totally ignorant concerning their lawful duties, pursuant to their oaths. Once a Citizen notifies a public officer of his duty and/or crime, and that officer takes no action to stop, correct, remedy or report the crime and perform his duty, pursuant to his oath, then he commits crime. This is known “misprision” of a crime, and is, in fact, a crime, itself. NOTIFICATION is the key, and that should be done in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested.

In order for courts to lawfully operate, they must have been founded under Constitutional law and need proper jurisdiction over the person and/or the subject matter. If a “court” does not meet these requirements, then it is not lawful and operates under color of law. In other words, it is a “bogus” court, a fraud, perpetrated against the People by some criminal governmental body. Do you want to subject yourself to a bogus, fraudulent court operated, most-likely, by a bogus judge? Proper courts for American Citizens operate under Article III, AND NOT ARTICLE I, of our Constitution and were founded by Congress. They and the judges who preside over them are duty bound to provide due process of Law and full Constitutional Rights. If they do not meet these requirements, then challenge the jurisdiction of the court. “Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action.” Melo v. U. S., 505F. 2^nd. 1026. “The Claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted to a crime”. Miller v. U. S., 230 F 2^nd. 286,489

Any time an American Citizen enters a court, either as plaintiff or defendant, he/she should openly state in court and/or file a prior Motion of Judicial Notice which states the Citizen hereby claims and invokes ALL his RIGHTS guaranteed in the Constitution. The judge and court are duty bound by oath and by Constitutional law to protect your Constitutional Rights and afford due-process of law. “But whenever the judicial power is called into question, it is responsible directly to the fundamental law and no other authority can intervene to force or authorize the judicial body to disregard it” Yakus v. U.S., 321 U. S., 414 pg. 468. “Waivers of Constitutional Rights not only must be done voluntarily, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and consequences.” Brady v. U. S., 397 U. S., 742 at 748. Demand that the judge, pursuant to his oath, abide by that oath, by these Supreme Court rulings, and provide all of your Constitutional Rights, in a Constitutional forum.

Obtain a certified copy of the judge’s oath, file it with the clerk prior to your proceeding, then, present it directly to the judge via the bailiff. Inform the judge, orally, in open court, that he has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution and your Rights. Any judge who presides over what is referred to as a municipal, magistrate or metropolitan “court” is really an administrative orderly, presiding over an unconstitutional tribunal that dispenses administrative law, which has no force and effect over an American Citizen. The only law that does is duly-enacted law, in compliance with the Constitution, and the state and federal Constitutions. Under the Law, simply by presiding over this unconstitutional “court”, the “judge” is in violation of his oath and vacates his office under 3 and 4 of the 14^th.

No American Citizen or public officer is required to obey an unlawful order. This is established throughout the Constitution and was firmly re-established at Nuremberg. In the same vein, no American Citizen is subject to or required to comply with an unconstitutional “law”, whether it be federal, state, or local. In fact, most if not all, “ordinances” and regulations are administrative law, not duly enacted and not applicable to an American Citizen.

SECTION V – SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC COURT POSITIONS

“I am an American Citizen who hereby CLAIMS and INVOKES ALL of her RIGHTS in the Constitution of these united States and the Constitution of the Republic of New Mexico (or wherever).” This puts the court on notice that you, as a party to any action in this court, assert all of your Rights and fully expect that all of your Rights will be honored by the court and by the judge, pursuant to his oath. Remember, “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted to a crime”. Miller v. U. S.;

1. Ascertain whether the court is one of proper jurisdiction. If not, file a challenge of jurisdiction with the clerk. (There are specific documents available for this purpose.)

2. File a Motion with the court of judicial notice, which positions the court under Constitutional law in its dealings with you, including your claim and invocation of ALL Constitutional Rights. Let any judge dismiss this Motion, and he, by his own actions, has committed treason;

3. Remember, all judges and public officers have taken oaths to our Constitutions, including state, in exchange for the Public Trust and must abide by that oath when dealing with Citizens and enforcing “laws”, which “laws” must conform to the Constitution. If they do not, then they are unconstitutional, null and void, and any public officer who attempts to enforce them perjures his oath and his fiduciary responsibility to the People and, by his own actions, invokes sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment and vacates his/her office;

4. Deliver to the presiding judge a certified copy of his oath in which he swears or affirms that he will support and defend the federal and state Constitutions, and hold him to it;

5. In this case, the public officer has a simple choice to make: he either abides by his oath, or he does not. If he abides by it, then he acts correctly. If not, then he: (a) perjures his oath; (b) violates our Constitutions; (c) violates the Rights of the American People; (d) commits insurrection and rebellion against our Constitution, our Nation, which is the People; and commits crime against the People, dealt with by the course of action previously described;

6. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of this land, and takes precedence over
all other laws. Other “laws” must conform to and be consistent with the Constitution or they are not “law”, thus, unenforceable. Any public officer, including a judge, who upholds unconstitutional “law”, pursuant to his oath and in his official duties, perjures his oath and can be held liable for his actions, as above described.

7. “Truth” is widely-advocated and publicized as the basis of our governmental system, our law, our courts and our legal system. When one appears to testify in court, he is asked: “Do you swear to tell the Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth?” Since this is such a strongly professed belief, then it is the duty and responsibility of all public officers, especially judges, pursuant to their oaths, to know, enforce and disseminate the Truth. If these public officers do not know the truth, then it is their duty to ascertain the Truth prior to taking any official action with respect to an American Citizen;

8. Pursuant to his oath, a public officer should be fully aware of his/her duties, the Truth and the Constitutional law governing any matter. However, in the vast majority of cases, this officer is wholly ignorant. Once this officer has been notified of his duties, pursuant to his oath, and/or of crimes, he must stop, correct, remedy or report the problem. Once he has been notified and takes no action, he has committed a crime. Misprision of crime is crime, itself;

9. When public officers violate their oaths, they can be sued, personally, in
federal court, pursuant to sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment, and criminally prosecuted, with liens taken against their personal assets, and their bonds invoked because of their crimes against the Public Trust;

10. No public officer nor any Citizen has any duty or responsibility to obey an
unlawful order, act or “law”. This is clearly established throughout our Constitution and was solidly re-affirmed at Nuremberg.

11. Any law which conflicts with or is contrary to the Constitution is null and void, without force and effect. “Any law which is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 174, 176; “Insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.” 16 Am. Jur. 2^nd 177, late Am. Jur. 2^nd 256; “Waivers of Constitutional Rights not only must be done voluntarily, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and consequences.” Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S., 742 at 748.

SECTION VI - CONCLUSION

American Citizens are facing the most blatant, insidious and callous invasion by government upon the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens that this Nation has ever encountered. The vast majority of elected and appointed politicians, public officers, judges, police and military routinely violate their oaths and the Rights of People each day. These entities will not help the People and will increasingly continue to rip your Rights from you and your families. We must help ourselves by enforcing our Rights before government in the courts, where the Citizen still has the opportunity to make lawful changes. The courts are the last hope for America’s Freedom, but unless we demand Constitutional responsibility from them and those who run them, even the courts cannot protect us.

You may already know this, but in case you do not, there is a distinct difference between a federal citizen and a Citizen of these united States of America. The former, which only properly applies to those who were born or live in Washington, D.C. or in any of the U.S. territories or possessions, is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, and the latter is within, under the jurisdiction of and protected by the Constitution and all the Rights guaranteed therein. In order to obtain your Rights, you must KNOW and CLAIM them, and UNDERSTAND the difference between “citizen” and Citizen. If you do not, then government will assume that you are a federal citizen. If one does not vociferously object, then, by his silence, he accepts. The next time you see the question “Are you a U.S. citizen?” on some form or application, draw a line through U.S. citizen, and write in American Citizen. Time to leave the sheep pen.

When congress legislates for the federal citizen, congress has no restrictions. However, when congress legislates for the American Citizen, the restriction to that legislation is the Constitution to which ALL members of congress have sworn or affirmed oaths. The governmental and political process has become a gigantic FRAUD to which the American People must awaken, and the way to do that is to recognize REALITY, the TRUTH and take LAWFUL ACTION. Without this, there is virtually no hope of restoring Constitutional government and preventing our Nation from dictatorship, thinly disguised as “democracy” when it really is a Republic. As Ben Franklin once said, “Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.”

Two Supreme Court rulings specify the above position: “It is a well-established principle of law that all federal legislation applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contrary intent appears.” Foley Brothers, Inc., V. Filardo, 336 U. S., 152 U. S. 211. “The laws of Congress in respect to those matters (outside of Constitutionally delegated power) do not extend to the territorial limits of the states, but have FORCE ONLY in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government.” Caha V. U. S. 152 U. S. 211. Review the applicable, following code: “Legislation enacted by Congress applicable to the inferior federal courts in the exercise of the power under Article III of the Constitution cannot be affected by legislation enacted by Congress under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution.” D. C. Code, Title 11 at p. 13.

We need no more passive followers, but Leaders who can garner legions of knowledgeable and dedicated doers who will take effective action and turn back the tide of tyranny which threatens to submerge America. If we don’t stand up for our Country, who will?

Although the true state of this Nation looks dire, and our “leaders” have veered way off course, we remain hopeful, for as an ancient Chinese saying so well states: “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” We implore you to take that step, speak out and take action!

Our intention is to send this piece to patriotic, aware Citizens, groups, and organizations throughout this country. Some are relatively small, while others have over a million members. We hope that each individual within these organizations, who sees this, will share it with at least ten (10) others. In this way, the exponential exposure potential is enormous. One could think of it as multilevel marketing for Citizen Empowerment! Email is certainly the quickest, easiest way to do this, but snail mail and fax will work, too. The most important thing is to spread the word, not just to those of like mind, but also to your “clueless” or doubting friends and family, who really need to learn the truth. The future of America, all of her promise, and perhaps the world, depends on You, the Citizen reading this, and me, - in other words, We The People. The dream inherent within the founding of this Nation must come to fruition now, or never. Unless we change the course of history, there will be scant, if any freedom in our tomorrows. The evil monstrosity of government for the sake of government, wealth, corporations, position and power, at the expense of the People, must cease, and FREEDOM for the People must prevail.

In the words on the original flag of this Nation, born of the spirit of our courageous forefathers, who dreamed and thought and fought this Nation into being, driven by a unique and daring concept, a vision of Freedom and Justice, amid a world of deceit, treachery and tyranny: “Do not tread upon me.”

"... the key question is: can we define 'income' in a fair and reasonably straightforward manner? Unfortunately, we have not yet succeeded in
doing so.." -- Shirley Peterson, former IRS Commissioner, April 1993

DISCLAIMER: The data on this website is the collaborative experience, contributions, and research of various websites, legal books, tax documents, researchers, associates, attorneys, CPA's, etc. and does not constitute legal advice. The primary purpose of this site is education. We do not advocate any specific course of action. What you do with this information and any course of action you decide to take, if any, is entirely your responsibility.

]