Jefferson-A.I.T-MO's picture

http://www.kspr.com/content/news/Federal-court-rules-assault-rifles-not-... This should raise  giant red  flags for everyone who knows the Supreme Law Of tHe land ,,This is  yet another direct infringement attack on Our Unalienable Right To Keep and Bear  arms and the puppet masters are using the  Fed Appeals Courts to push their globalist  agenda.They are chipping away at the bill of rights daily.And the 2nd amendment is the bullseye.After all its the only Right that they need to strip from we the people to finish their evil diabolical puzzle and the rest they can  easily take by brutal force .

Fourth Branch's picture

The ruling is by default null and void as it is unconstitutional for the Government to act upon an unalienable Right. it is a poor attempt to make God's Law  Positive, man made Law and therefore is repugnant to the U.S. Constitution. Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark Supreme Court Case of Marbury v Madison (1803) stated:
"Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle,supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void."
Nullification dates from the time tha act occurred, not from the time it is ruled on. To quote American Jurisprudence Volume 16 Second Edition Section 256:
" The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted."
THe People need not comply.

Ron Flick's picture

We offer a FREE Constitution Class to all of our new members and encourage them to complete it during the first 30 days. https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/constitution-course-directions  It is only 12 hours long, 15 if you read slow.

officerkirkland's picture

Really good wisdom, and its little long but its well worth it when you need to control the corrupt leaders and the judges and lawyers.
actual locked laws...........https://youtu.be/oT9G4hSswD8
carl miller , no licese .....https://youtu.be/Q35DoJroTYY
secrets the police dont want you to know. https://youtu.be/B3nok7Cby28
Unconstitutional Official Acts 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256: The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby. No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. Jon Roland: Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.
All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life.
Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.
Locked laws......... in the Constitutions. bill of rights. and the limited powers of the branches. https://youtu.be/31zRfrGU0P4

Flicka's picture

I need to challenge juridiction to a frivioulous citation/crime of not licensening dogs/vaccinating them. I have no summons, (only a citation) have challengened them to show me the law I broke and anyone injured, only have the law officer and DA and judge as accusurs and a jury trial in june with no witnesses against me other then officials. The DA has not answered my challenge to jurisdiction of subject matter, and the court has not answered my demand for the law broken or accusors. They claim an anonomous complaint but I have to assume there was one. The Taylor County Sheriff Department is the Taylor County Humane Officer with all powers and duties of that position. They also receive money from the fines collected. The DA admitted (I have it on tape) I have a right to own a dog. She also said she has and doesn't need a bond. Do I need to file an offical form to challenge jurisdiction?

Ron Flick's picture

Officer Kirkland, I see that you are a new member with us. Welcome to NLA.  You hail from a fine state that is represented well in NLA. It is the only state in the union that has its entire Leadership having completed both our Constitution Class and Civics Course and all remain Active participants in NLA. A man of your talents and language diversification may be useful to our goals. Under the Welcome tab (top left of page) Please view our Mission Statement, Preface,  and Disclaimer. Being new, you may not be aware of many of the opportunites which we offer on this site.  For instance - our Committee of Safety registration site under the COS tab, might be of interest to you.  I see where Montana is represented in Park, Fergus, and Flathead Counties, but shows no one registered in Ravalli County, yet. Information on the COS can be found just above the registry link under COS tab. There is alot to keep one busy there. It holds a primary key to our taking back the courts to a Common Law jurisdiction.  Also, perhaps you might find interest in the papers and documents that we have published and FAX'd, emailed and snail mailed out to each of our 12,000 to 20,000 Oath takers.  Please Oath taker is NOT to be confused with Oath Keepers. It is one thing to take an oath. It is quite another thing to KEEP it. You may find these documents under the Grand Jury tab - top right of the NLA website. Under Grand Jury Tab, click on Dockets. Begin your reading with the Writ Quo Warranto listed under Informations and Writs that was sent out May 15, 2015.  The next 6 documents - also great reading - were sent out every 4 working days for the next 3 weeks.  Where virtually no one in our government knew who NLA was on May 14, 2015, rest assured we were a household name by June 6 and talk around the water cooler was.....well, you know.  And it didn't stop there. For the rest of the year and well into last year we kept our new readership fair busy. Mr. Trump was sent a copy of everything as well.  Good Reading Officer Kirkland. Please join us on our Monday Night Calls. Top Left of page, click on Weekly Call. You may participate there as well.  Thanks for coming.

Ron Flick NC-Zone 2 and Welcome Committee Director.

mkphillips's picture

Could someone please post last nights call? Thank You.

officerkirkland's picture

Spc/Kirkland- Discovery.
Exercise the 5th amendment, collect your ticket and fight it in court.  Read your bill of rights, the locked laws that the police must follow.  https://youtu.be/YWUx3-b0F_Y   
Cops are under commerce, uniform commercial codes, this only applies to road for hire, if your making money on the roads.   (https://youtu.be/UFbkNxFMVeo)
This does not apply to the private American traveling.  If a cop encounters you he must follow the law, and there must be a crime committed in his presence, witch there is no crime.
So keep your mouth shut, and collect your ticket that is commerce and fight it or just pay it, your choice.  If you do sign the ticket sign UD under duress.   Or under the uniform commercial code, U.C.C 1-207-w/o prejudice. Or updated 1-308. 
I would choose to fight and then we can all stop them from invading the privacy of Americans.  And violating Americans bill of rights the locked laws ………….  https://youtu.be/UFbkNxFMVeo

officerkirkland's picture

spc/ Kirkland’s 2017  Discovery,

Knowing the  difference between a locked law versus a unconstitutional act.  Its the key to a perfect society of true freedom. Let the facts be submitted to the candid people.  My fellow brothers who took the same oath I did.  As a Constitutional officer, its my duty  to share the wisdom I have learned and practiced. This wisdom will prolong your life as a protector of life and limb, and property, and the Constitution.
No other purpose ,the good cop must know the law, and he must know the limitations of his police powers, under the 10th amendment.  Infantry words embedded in my mind to share , stay alert stay alive, follow me............
Power and Authority of the County Sheriff pdf
The purpose of this page is to empower the County Sheriff and U.S. Marshal through knowledge of the Supreme Law of the Land and history; in order that they may serve the People and save/preserve America.
There is no elected or appointed official that can remove the Sheriff or Marshal from office. The Sheriff is elected by the People of their county and the Marshal is appointed by the President who was vested with that power by We the People through the United States Constitution.
In the case Marbury v Madison in 1803 the Court made it clear that the Constitution gave the power to the president to appoint but not the power to remove, that is reserved to the People alone through indictment for bad behavior.
There are only two Law Enforcement officers in America; The County Sheriff and the US Marshal. The sheriff is the only elected law enforcer whose duty it is to protect the unalienable rights of the People both in the court room and within the county. While the U.S. Marshal is responsible for protecting the unalienable rights of the People in the Federal Court room.
The Sheriff is the only person able to call for the posse comitatus (Latin, Power of the county) Referred at Common Law to all males over the age of fifteen on whom a sheriff could call for assistance in preventing any type of civil disorder.
Today, under a national emergency the Sheriff is both the first and last line of defense should our government go rouge; since congress has been derelict of duty in the providing for the militia.
U.S. Constitution Article I Section 8 clauses 15 and 16: "The Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; 
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
The Bill of Rights makes clear two (2) things (1) A well regulated militia is an unalienable right and (2) a well regulated militia is necessary to our security.
Amendment II "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Today all seats of government have unlawfully incorporated and therefore all police forces (city, town, village, state, etc.) work for corporations and owe their allegiance to the corporation, therein “code enforcement officers”; whereas Sheriffs and Marshals are “constitutional officers” owing allegiance to the People. There exists no Constitutional authority for police forces.
U.S. Constitution Article VI clause 2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
The Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights are founded under common law, a/k/a the Supreme Law of the Land. ALL CASES AT LAW: Black's Law 4th, "within constitutional guaranty of jury trial, refers to common law actions as distinguished from causes in equity and certain other proceedings."
Breimhorst v. Beck-man, 227 Minn. 409, 35 N.W.2d 719, 734.
The Sheriff and the U.S. Marshal just like We the People have lost their way. We have forgotten who we are and by what authority we act upon and therefore our servants rule over us.
The purpose of this site is to help us find our way back to the Liberties our founding fathers discovered and pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to establish for themselves and their posterity.
It is now our turn, our duty, to re-discover our roots for ourselves and our posterity. There are forces within our government that are doing everything they can to prevent that from happening.
These people are called progressives and over the years they have taken control of both major parties and thereby methodically removed civics, God and constitutional studies from our education and through the media, entertainment and education have demoralized us.
What We the People and our Sheriffs need to know is that:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
When we the People ordained Common Law, U.S. Constitution Article VI, the Supreme Law of the Land We the People took control of all decision making within the courts through Grand and Trial Juries and the Common Law Sheriff became the only Law Enforcer of the court and the county.
The common law court is well established and defined in history, Blacks Law and Bouviers Law.
“The Sheriff is the “Chief Executive and Administrative Officer” of a county chosen by popular election. His principal duties are in aid of the criminal and civil courts of record [common law courts]; such as serving process, summoning juries, executing judgments, holding judicial sales and the like.
He is also the chief conservator of the peace within his territorial jurisdiction.” Harston v. Langston, Tex.Civ. App., 292 S.W. 648, 650.
The word "Sheriff" is a contraction of the term "shire reeve", meaning a royal official responsible for keeping the peace throughout a shire or county on behalf of the king(s).
We the People “Ordained” the Constitution for the United States of America which puts the People as the said kings above the Constitution and our elected servants under the Constitution, therein the great American experiment. Our servants have no more power than that which We the People gave them and any law they write to the contrary is null and void as if it has never been passed; as we read:
"All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 180
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491

Editors picks.......
Important videos collected by Spc/ Kirkland Bill of rights advocate Constitutional officer , 11brv infantry 1-10 underground elements in Montana.
For education purposes intent, I have the deepest respect for law enforcement, and I would protect life and limb and property and the Constitutions of the states that are in harmony. 
Message to the police........
Why good cops get shot, because they don't know the actual law.
what cops higher ranks don't want you to know..........
Carl miller..................... my professor........
Kris Ann hall, lawyer , Constitutional officer. 
Why good people should be armed.........

officerkirkland's picture

Let the facts be submitted to a candid people................... and the State Of Oregon..................
I waited long enough…………………………
For your record………. With respect………. File this……….  Along with the other letters I submitted .. 
Your state is a disgrace to our nation even there is a few who is good, but I cant judge all , for when there is some bad apples in the bag, because all are not bad. But soon we the people will know about you, by your actions, the scruty test coming your way. .
Why because you don’t know the difference between actual laws versus unconstitutional acts that is not law. I pray that you know or learn them ….. some in your state take weapons away from good people. Maby you support that or not but soon we the people will know.
The taken weapons who served for you and the nation peoples weapons- and create illegal laws called law that is not law, infractions and codes and statutes that are illegal against the fundamental inheratant rights for individuals.
No state can make a inheratant right into a crime . it’s a crime its self. ..
Your state put people in jail and violated peoples privacy and its 4th amendment … your state also put people in jail that have no victim or property damage for equity for judges and lawyers.
A crime must have a victim or property damage or a violation of the Constitutions of the states that are in harmony. Your state violates the bill of rights the locked laws that are not for change or sale or bid, or vote.
The only way I would think you are for our Constitution and the people of the state and the nation at a state and federal level, return my weapons. Duane Kirkland. My riffle given to me from my best friend and my side arm.
Your state police took them when I was traveling through my home state I served as a soldier. Arrested me incarcnated me set bail 300,000 dollars and then all of a sudden let me go because of no charges of a crime , or maybe because of no due process. Whos to say , but I have not received my property and no one seems to know where my weapons are.
I wrote the state governor and the state police and know one seems to care. I think that my weapons , my property given to me for the work I did for horse trading in Montana. My rifle was worth 1,000 dollars, and my pistol was worth 800 dollars. But it was never returned from the state, my car my vest was though, I’m not sure why, they had no crime or reason to initiate a stop anyway -As a free man traveling freely in private.
And they treated me like a war criminal in Harney county in Oregon, when the Constitutional officers was summoned to be a buffer zone for peace, I stood for the Constitution . you might have those weapons, but you will never get the weapons of war. If I was you I would learn the bill of rights, because it’s the key when the actual fighting starts. With love spc/kirkland in Montana. …………… out of love. If you really care about our nation. Return my weapons or what they are worth. 1,000 dollars + 800 dollars. Worth of labor I worked for.  
This is not a threat, it is a request, and its been long enough to know I’m not a criminal, I don’t drink smoke or take any medication.  I study law, and I collect evidence to expose judges and lawyers who violate article 6 paragraph 2, at a state level and a federal level. 
Duane Eugene Kirkland / bill of rights advocate and Constitutional advocate / 1115 south 3rd street Hamilton Montana, 59840, 406-363-5284 -05-27-1967- served in the Guard , the protectors of the western gate, for years. 11brv infantry. ETS march 2001, six year of service across the states..
Treason by sedition

officerkirkland's picture

To All State Governors and State Legislators:
War is coming to America. Obama is importing young able-bodied males to make civilizational jihad on us; and Congress can’t summon up the moral courage to stop him.
To see what is ahead for us, watch this 20 minute video. It as European countries are being repopulated by millions of young able-bodied Muslim males (euphemistically called “refugees”) who are explicit about their intention to breed the native Europeans out of existence, and replace the European cultures with Islamic culture.
And Obama is bringing it here.
This paper discusses the two courses of action set forth in for situations such as this: (1) The States must refuse to cooperate with the federal government; but if that doesn’t solve the problem, (2) The States must use their State Militia to defend their State and Citizens.
Invaders are not “Refugees” or “Immigrants”
Those pushing for an Islamic takeover of Europe and North America are referring to these able-bodied young Muslim males as “refugees”. The use of that term brings the Muslims who are brought into the United States within the federal Refugee Resettlement Act. And since the Constitution delegates power over immigration to Congress, and Congress re-delegated refugee policy to the President, the States must submit to Obama’s Will and accept the “refugees” he forces on them. Thus goes the specious argument recently made by Ian Millhiser.
But we will look at the Truth.
What does our Constitution say about Immigration and Naturalization?
Immigration (or migration) pertains to new people coming to this Country to live.1 Naturalization refers to the process by which an immigrant becomes a Citizen.
Our Constitution does delegate power over immigration and naturalization to Congress. Article I, §9, clause 1, delegates to Congress (commencing January 1808) power to control migration. 2 Article I, §8, clause 4, delegates to Congress power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
But what is going on now with the importation of large numbers of able-bodied young Muslim males is not “immigration” as contemplated by our Constitution. It is an act of war being committed against the People of the United States by their President. The plan is to overthrow our Constitutional Republic and set up an Islamic Caliphate over America. 3
That is Treason – it is Insurrection. It is not “immigration”, and it is not “refugee resettlement”.
The States must refuse to cooperate
explains how the federal resettlement program works: The federal government coordinates resettlement of “refugees” with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) located within the States, and thus circumvents state and local governments. Accordingly, the States should promptly stop all such NGO involvement; take control of the programs themselves; and then refuse to cooperate with the federal government.
James Madison, Father of our Constitution, spells this out in (7th para). Respecting unpopular acts of the federal government:
“…the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the Union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large State, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.” [emphasis mine]
But if the federal government persists, then the States must move to the next Step.
Our Constitution Imposes the Duty on the Federal Government to protect us from Invasion
Article IV, §4, requires The United States to protect each of the States against Invasion:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion…” [emphasis mine]

In (3rd para under 6.), Madison says of this provision:

“A protection against invasion is due from every society to the parts composing it…” [emphasis mine]

Article I, §8, clause 15 delegates to Congress the power:

“to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

Article 1, §8, clause 16 delegates to Congress the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia. The States retain the power to appoint the Officers and conduct the training.
Article II, §2, clause 1 makes the President Commander in Chief of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States. [But remember: the federal government may call forth the Militia only for the three purposes listed in Art. I, §8, cl. 15].
But the federal government hasn’t called forth the Militia to protect the States from the Islamic invasion. To the contrary, the President is importing the invaders and foisting them on the States.
So! What are States and The People to do? Because the President is aligned with the invaders, and Congress filled with moral cowards, must we passively submit to having ourselves and our, and then let our surviving daughters and granddaughters be handed over to the ?
No! The People have the Natural Right of self-defense; and the States have the reserved Power to defend their Citizens. With the State Militia, The People and the States have the means to exercise this Natural Right and reserved Power.
The States must Revitalize their State Militia
What is the Militia? As 4 on the Militia and how it guarantees the right to keep and bear arms shows, the Militia has a long history in America. That history began with the English settlements in the early 1600s. Every free male was expected to be armed and prepared at all times to protect himself, his family, and his community. Laws in the Colonies gave effect to this requirement. So at the time of the drafting of our Constitution in 1787, everyone knew of this 150 year long history of free American males being required to be armed, trained, and ready at a moment’s notice to answer the call of Duty.
Accordingly, the above identified “militia clauses” were written into our Constitution of 1787.
In 1792, Congress implemented these militia clauses and passed “”. This Act required all able-bodied male citizens (with a few exceptions) between the ages of 18 and 45 to get a rifle, bayonet, ammunition and an ammunition pouch, and enroll in the local Unit of their State Militia for training.
click for remaining Discovery...... spc /kirkland studies..... 

officerkirkland's picture

spc/ kirklands ready to join and assist. pass it on .....

 Willing to join a team and assist , i am a Constitutional advocate in Hamilton Montana. 406-363-5284. officerkirkland@icloud.com. 7 months experience by myself, challenging judges and lawyers. I have become a advocate for people who are violated of the bill of rights and Constitutional matters. I have a ability to read discovery and write dispositions on the basic violations of the bill of rights and the violation of the oath of office. Article  6 paragraph 2. , and also understand conflict between a actual law versus a unconstitutional act. I can go on forever on the abilities. I have, but i am ready to help and assist in Montana or anywhere needed.Pass this info on -if anyone wants my help. We the people must know the Constitution at all levels, and to claim to be the beneficiary  of the Constitution of the states that are in harmony.Lets get the judges and lawyers who violate the basic responsibility of the definition of the jobs of the trial of factors. Violators of the bill of rights. Lets expose them and document it so we can arrest them and replace them. spc/ Kirkland , a victim who gave everything to expose the judges and lawyers. From my experience, the lawyers seem to not want to bring any Discovery of the Constitution of any level, they seem to make excuses and then file a paper of ethics issues, and then don’t even give a copy of the ethics issue.  Funny, they just obstruct and abuse the authority they have been delegated. .  The other things I noticed is they have a problem with each others role in  due process matters .  The judges in Ravalli county  seems to act like the prosecuting attorneys and tricks you to sign paperwork to waive your Constructional , Constitutional rights, and tricked into U.C.C. uniform commercial codes.  And they seem to try to create a crime , with no victim or property damage or any violation of the Constitution , the supremacy  clause, at all levels .  And the lawyers don’t really defend  nothing but what the judges say or demand.Its seems to be a racketeering game of making money - equity .. That is a conflict of intrest.They are all on the same corrupt  team to make money. By the statues and codes and unconstitutional regulations.  They seem to not let you bring any written colleted discovery of the Constitution to defend ones self.  The judges will shut you down and intimidate all who questions the illegal authority..  The judges and lawyers don’t like declaratory questions that have threshold question pertaining to the Constitution of the state or the federal level.  I seem to do well in the due process , but my argument skills need to sharpen. I have been through so much, that I am still in shock, but they don’t violate me anymore, because they did not make any money off me, because I fought in court for all issues and actually got free practice of my studies because-  I was tired of not being free.  I am truly free and when I walk in and sit down in court ... the judges and lawyer seem know I am a over watch.  Anyways like said- I can go on and on, like a run on sentence. but I am ready to work and assist.   Thanks....  Pass it , Duane Kirkland, social network, Constitutional officer , advocate, and a bill of rights advocate, pro si. ...................

officerkirkland's picture

   Spc/ Kirkland Notes .......................
Hi Duane
Good morning. Below is the weekly digest of podcasts and points to ponder. As well please take note of a special invitation to come to the Roots of Liberty seminar in Salem Oregon on the 26th. Also on January 28th. there's a special event called, "The Meeting that Never Happened" in support of the Finicum Family. Here's the Facebook event page for more details.
1. Nullifying Slavery - 2017-01-16 11:03:19-05In 1850 the Federal Government passed the “Federal Fugitive Slave Act” requiring states to return slaves who escaped to their owners. However, some states believing this law to be unconstitutional exercised their right to nullify this law. Maybe Kansas should take a page out of the American history book and step up and support Cox […]
The post Nullifying Slavery appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.2. Yes- I Am An Attorney - 2017-01-16 21:06:22-05
Today’s #Point2Ponder: Yes I am an attorney.  But, do not quote to me “the law” to justify your position.  If your justification for your position is “the supreme Court says so,” then you have no position. Just because it is the law doesn’t make it lawful.  Just because it is the law, doesn’t make it […]
The post Yes- I Am An Attorney appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.
3. What the GOP Promises for 2017 - 2017-01-17 10:25:46-05Now that the GOP has a majority in both houses and a Republican in the White House will they finally follow through on their past promise for a more Constitutional government? It is time for feet to be held to the heat of the fire. No more excuses GOP. Alternatively you can listen to “GOP […]
The post What the GOP Promises for 2017 appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.4. How The Government Goes Wild - 2017-01-18 09:13:24-05
Today’s #Point2Ponder: This is how the federal government gets out of control: http://goo.gl/rnO1iZ 1. Congress creates an Act that expands federal power beyond the limits of the Constitution: For example: The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. This Act limited the area of land a farmer could devote to the production of wheat. The purpose was to manipulate […]
The post How The Government Goes Wild appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.5. A Constitutional Look At DeVos, Pruit, Haley - 2017-01-18 09:42:02-05Today we’re going to be taking a look at three of Trumps nominees in light of the Constitution. Alternately you can listen to the “KrisAnne Hall Show” on YouTube. The post A Constitutional Look At DeVos, Pruit, Haley appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.
6. Guilt, Malice, or Folly? - 2017-01-18 22:28:57-05Today’s #Point2Ponder: I just want to put politicians on notice. They seem to use words that don’t mean what they think they mean. So, let’s clarify: Just because you are a Republican, doesn’t make you a conservative. Just because you are a conservative, doesn’t make you a Constitutionalist. And just because you went to law school, […]
The post Guilt, Malice, or Folly? appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.7. The Inauguration of Trump - 2017-01-19 10:54:09-05
While the nation is transfixed on the upcoming inauguration of Trump it is important that we do not forget that cabinet appointee’s and the President are meant to be our humble servants  dedicated to the protection and preservation of the people’s liberty. It is time that we begin to demand this kind of service and […]
The post The Inauguration of Trump appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.8. Fighting Trickle Down Tyranny - 2017-01-20 09:36:26-05
2 stories that you will not want to believe are true…but they are.  Will we stand in defense of Liberty with these people, or will we surely hang separate? Alderman Scott Levin 630-530-3000 https://www.elmhurst.org Mark O’Connell, President Kellogg Community College 450 North Avenue Battle Creek, Mi 49017 269-965-3931
The post Fighting Trickle Down Tyranny appeared first on KrisAnne Hall.
Thank you for supporting our liberty
KrisAnne Hallhttp://krisannehall.com
Constitutional Educator, Speaker. Author

officerkirkland's picture

NEW YORK - A group of prominent constitutional and ethics lawyers sued senators and congress instituions on Monday, accusing the democratic parties and all institutions, of violating the U.S. Constitution by letting there illegal instituions  and other businesses  to accept payments from foreign governments. by hiddien behind the color of law. Authority delegated under the Constitution. By Duane Kirkland relayed.Trump exposes corruption as he drains the swamp.....

To understand this Artcle because its complicated- this video id attached.   (https://youtu.be/bAUwrz3wmpY)
Democratic congres and senators have been the problem the whole time. by illegal operation and a threat to the Constitution. By using and mis interaction to narrative a unconstitutional law against the people , to rob the branches purse. By utilizing Article 1 against section 8 - its whole purpose of Constitutional law and its authority.

Trump Constitutional officers sues over foreign government payments to democratic parties , senators and congress ,and the supporting illegal agencies, that violates Artcle 1 section 8. and not to mention the many other Constitutional enumerated laws.

(deep rooted fraud by democratic agencies and institutions)
Clearly under probe and research by Constitutional officers, there has been abuse of the enumerated powers, by over stepping its actual authority - and creating authority who have no authority to drain the funds from the state treasury., and creating offices and institutions with more authority than legal authority. This is a conflict with the founding forefathers officers before 1920, and after the civil war on  economic slave control.

Who says so - by illegal agencies , that actually have no authority.

(listed below)
Conflict of infest and Constitutional law, and unconstitutional acts, and no actual authority over the governed people by the iron contract.

1- foreign aid, no Authority. 2- Housing institutions illegal under Obama democratic institutions. 3- Education democratic illegal authority hidden behind the color of law. 4- Transportation institutions illegally operating without the authority and jurisdiction. 5- Energy operations without authority . 6- wild life institutions and illegal operations . 7- Health care institutions planted in place to rob the branches purse and operating without authority under the color of law.
Iron clad contract.
vioation of the Constitution check this evidence out.

The Trump administration is finding out the illegal authority is deep and probed all the way back for many years, the trump institutions ar finding that the agencies and institutions that are listed above really have no authority and jurisdiction to excessive its unconstitutional acts upon the states or the people. By violating the bill of rights 9th and 10 Amendment.

These intuition are illegal operating against the whole purpose of the fundamental right s of the American people, and is frauds at all levels s of government.The trump administration has launched a investigations into the violation of the illegal acts unconstitutional acts. the trump administration says it will continual to work hard to enforce the rule of law and weed out the fraud of the Congress and the sentors on both sides of the delegated powers.

They said that they will work hard to expose and destroy the corruption of the enumerated laws the locked laws that the institution have been ignoring for many years. the trump administration say it’s a major problem and it will be involved with the remedy and recourse to make the change to follow the actual delegated powers.

Case to read.... in correlation- ( Reid vs Covert 1957. Constitutional law) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert)
Editors video, to see how this is in harmony to the fact of the message written in Tex..Duane Eugene Kirkland. Constitutional officer, 11brv infantry 1-10. bill of rights.(https://youtu.be/bAUwrz3wmpY0) We can see you.........
(There is a remedy and a recourse . by just following the contract of the people and the government who sworn to govern by Constitution.)
Facts........1. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that American civilians outside of the territorial jurisdiction of the United States cannot be tried by U.S. military tribunal, but instead retain the protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution, in this case, trial by jury.Although the plurality opinion stated that "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty", the case itself was with regard to an executive agreement, not a "treaty" in the U.S. legal sense, and the agreement itself between the United States and Great Britain has never been ruled unconstitutional.
key to knock them out....... Nullified void- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_Crisis)
extremely distasteful; unacceptable:"the thought of going back into the fog was repugnant to him"synonyms: abhorrent · revolting · repulsive · repellent · disgusting · offensive ·[more]objectionable · cringeworthy · vile · foul · nasty · loathsome · sickening · nauseating · hateful · detestable · execrable · abominable · monstrous · appalling · insufferable · intolerable · unacceptable · contemptible · unsavory · unpalatable · ghastly · gross · horrible · horrid · noisomeantonyms: attractive · pleasant(repugnant to)in conflict with; incompatible with:"a bylaw must not be repugnant to the general law of the country"synonyms: incompatible with · in conflict with · contrary to · at variance with

officerkirkland's picture

Locked laws that are not for bid ,sale , or vote , or change)



First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 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.
No unconstitutional acts committed from goverment institutions and agency's and administrations of delegated powers.  The goverment institutions shall not use the Amendments the locked amendments upon the people they serve. 
They shall not have the ability to use it against its people they serve.  The religious foundation  shall not be infringed and encroached for the goverment ,or the peoples religions is private and its a free agency of choice.. The freedom of religion is a private fundamental God given inheratant right. 


Second Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
No other sub paragraph to encroach and infringe of individual Americans right -fundamental inheratant god given right to obstruct to have a weapon of choice to secure- the locked laws that are enumerated in the bill of rights -all Americans shall be armed and ready to defend each other and the states and the nation as a whole in harmony, shall be a weapon behind every grain of grass.


Third Amendment

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The people we the people shall not allow any goverment intuitions or supporting elements to secure our homes our property or our Constitution- in any form of encroachment or infringement during any emergency.


Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No officer of the oath or delegated powers shall violate the fourth amendment- by unconstitutional acts , nor by  hidden so called laws , statues, and codes- shall not be in conflict -only shall be in harmony. all laws must be construed to the Constitutions of all states and the nation as a whole by the locked laws and the limitations of the branches delegated powers.   


Fifth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
No one shall change the word of the Constitution and the bill of rights , shall not be infringed and encroached, nor the 5th amendment shall not apply to those who are serving the people as a commission and delegated power , nor to plead the fifth amendment, nor shall the goverment utilize the fifth amendment when a investigation of violation of the Conditions at a state level or federal level, nor a violation of the  oath that they swearer to govern by  and to protect and preserve.  Under article 6 paragraph 2. let the candid world be submitted the facts. 


Sixth Amendment

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
The goverment intuitions and administration, judges lawyers , under the due process clause shall not violate the oath and they shall not enforce illegal laws , unconstitutional laws , and no judge and lawyer may trick by scam to give up ones inheratant rights and the beneficiary of the Constitution.  Nor put anyone they serve in jail without a victim or property damage or a violation against the Constitutions they are to preserve and protect.  No judge or lawyers can have equity on the illegal bill of attainder and a direct tax , and a capitation of scheme. 


Seventh Amendment

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.
During a trial the judge and the lawyers are obligated to put the Constitution rule of law first during the trial, and to know the definition of their  job and part, and shall know the law . The trial by factor , and the prosecutor , and the defense ,
shall be impartial and except written collect discovery for evidence.  Indirect and direct. or verbal or written. No judge  or majesty can act like the prosecutor or defense attorneys or appointed pro si, in a court of law. the judge shall construe the states and codes to the Constitution, and if he fails to then all orders are void, and is considered a violation of article 6 paragraph 2. 



Eighth Amendment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
No goverment institutions  or administration shall violate the eighth amendment nor any enumerated bill of rights , and no judge and lawyer or delegated commission officer  have no equity in the matter of  bail and excessive fines and cruel punishment , nor put anyone in jail for a victimless crime without a actual victim or property damage or a violation against the Constitutions of the state of the union.



Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
If any violations of delegated power at any level of goverment , shall give all power back to the people , or replace them with new Constitutional republic officers.


Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
When proven infringement and encroachment in levels of high goverment that does not operate  by contract as the agreement- to govern by Constitution , all illegal acts and illegal laws are void and nullified , and power returned to the people of the states , then shall have a convention to appoint new Goverment Constitutional officer of the republic , old republic of the founding fathers of the nation. 





Aresposito49's picture

i am trying to learn all I can ever since I realized how corrupt our courts have gotten. mY FIRST, goal is to learn everything and my second is to get my son, who was railroaded into 73 yrs of his life in prison, Home. Is there anyone who can mentor me? Im willing to do what I have to but I need guidence and advice. Can anyone help me? Please contact me if you can. Thank you and God Bless.

juliojsuriel's picture

I understand the Common Law very well, which is the law that may help you. However, the Common Law is for the people, which means that whoever is in need of it,  to use in a Court of Record (the court of the Common Law) needs to understand the procedures and what is on the paper work that is filed, with the court clerk. The one who file is the one in need. You may be his asistant - but you may not speak for him, in a Court of Record. The judges are very tricky and out to crush those who challege them, and the court reporter (who is in charge of the transscript) will delete words that may make the judge look bad. For that reason (and more), it is wise to let your paper work stand alone, without much words being spoken with the voice, only to "object," when the judge attempts to assume jurisdiction (authority) without proving it. If one fails to object, then one agrees. This is their game, which they will not tell you about.
I have the paper work, however you can not file them blindly. 

Aresposito49's picture

would love if you would help me. My sons not doing good and I need to do something soon. Please contact me
April from North Carolina

Kidd's picture

 I would I would be happy to discuss what could be done to help your son and help you what you want to learn but you have to  contact me so I can get more details on your specific situation  email me  ... kidroc7734@gmail.com

Aresposito49's picture

could you please call me sometime to talk about this. AFternoon to evening and weekends are good, just not to early as I am handicaped and got to get my self going. Also, do you know about the group that they are going to do on habeas corpus.?

officerkirkland's picture

Unconstitutional Official Acts

16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:

    The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:


    The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.


    Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....

    A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.

    No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

Jon Roland:

Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.


All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life.

Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.

jf6363's picture

How do you explain this to the Sheriff when he has replied in the past that all laws are constitutional until a judge says otherwise?Speaking specifically here about the NY Safe act.

Fourth Branch's picture

Marbury v Madison:
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation, that in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, theconstitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shallbe made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle,supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument

officerkirkland's picture

#1To the American people..............
Let the facts of my study notes be submitted to the candid world..................................................................................
Duane Kirkland wisdom and home work, enjoy..........
Unconstitutional Acts The court follows the decision of the highest court in the state in construing the constitution and the laws of the state unless they conflict with or impair the efficacy of some principle of the constitution or of the federal statutes, a rule of the commercial or general law. Duane Kirkland Constitutional officer
(So to keep it simple , no law made that is in conflict with the Constitution's at a state and federal level, will be forced or obeyed or implemented.) ( its suppose to be that way but the one in power have robbed so long that they really believe they can keep enforcing and robbing and creating illegal unconstitutional acts against its people.)
(The decision of the state courts and questions relating to the existence of its subordinate tribunals and the eligibility of election or appointment of their officers and the passage of its laws are conclusive upon federal courts. )
(The delegated powers to the officers or goverment institutions shall not make illegal unconstitutional act against the people, we the people. no justification what so ever to overreach or over rule the rule of law, or the letter of the law, or the latter.)
Carl Miller Constitutional officer. Now, the most important thing is “While acts of defacto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law, an existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy.
Duane Kirkland Constitutional officer. (No law can be made and not be in harmony with all the states in harmony. At all levels of goverment and institutions shall be construed to the beneficiary of the iron contract between the people and the government.) (who says so, the people say so)
(The goverment made a promise to govern by the Constitutions that are in harmony. when the first 13 colonies become the free from one man rule........mob rule, democracy.
(The colonies became free and independent states and became a republic of liberty and justice for all.) (Each branches have limitations and delegated authority.)
Carl Miller the teacher of the Constitutional officers..
That's a very important point…Public Policy. You want to watch out for the term “Public Policy…” it's often confused with the state's right of eminent domain of police powers.
Duane Kirkland Constitutional officer......
(it would be wise as one should know the difference between police policies v police powers. There is a distinctive difference, however the judges and lawyers have no clue... the judges and lawyers are part of the problem violating and not obeying the actual laws .)
Carl Miller the teacher of the Constitutional officers..
Police powers and public policy are almost the same thing, except that one is done without law because they want to, and the other is done because they‟re claiming a police authority to do so.

lawman2's picture

Hi April. I take it you are new to the NLA website? If so, please navigate to the top of the page and go to the section titled "Free Courses". When you hover your mouse over that link, you will see several menu options. You will want to begin your education here at NLA by completing this free U.S. Constitution course. Afterwards, I would highly recommend you take the free Civics course. 
When you have completed both courses, you may want to go to the "Education" taba t the top of the screen, and choose the "Judicial" menu. From there you can access several useful resources in helping you understand how courtroom rules and procedures are conducted. Finally, you can reach outr to any of the leadership members at NLA, and they may be able to offer more specific recommendations regarding your son's prison sentence, and what you can do to assist him.
I hope that is helpful to you. 

Romona's picture

Recently I was charged with a Feloney (Tampering with a witness) which I did not know about until I received a letter from a bonds man requesting to go my bond. I called him and told him I didn't have a warrant and had done notthing to break the law. He told me to go online at closenet.com and I would see that I had charges and a warrant. I did, and to my surprise , he was right. I called the sheriff and he said he had not gotten around to arresting me and to go to the police and turn myself in and post a $4900.00 bond. I told him I was not guilty of a crime and had very little money and he said I would have to go to jail for 23 + days until my court date. When I asked about a Jury and due process he got upset and said " Look lady I am just doing my Job". I told him he was not doing his job and then had to go post bond. I have been unable to even function with this pending and the way the law is operating here.  I am not guilty of a crime, the state took the police report and file charges of Tampering when all I did was ask a "Friend" to please drop the charges against my niece. She told the law I threatened her and all I did was warn her that drugs were responsible for all of hers and my nieces problems and I was going to do something about all the drugs.  I did not threaten her about not dropping the charges. Now I am guilty until I prove that I am innocent. This will cost more money and could cost me my rights and freedom. I am considering filing papers concerning jurisdiction but I am afraid, because the law is not following the law. Just thought I would share this to get it off my chest.

officerkirkland's picture

Duane Kirkland's discovery and notes.......... claim your contract under the Constitution. Then during due process , file motion to have the victim and the property damage come forward.  You will find that there is no victim or property damage.  You can ask the judge to construe the statutes or codes to the Constitutions. 
No victim no crime, no property damage  and no violations of the bill of right Constitutions then they have no crime.  simple.  Try and you find they will not win-  but don't give up.  spc/kirkland pro si , Any appearance you make , make sure you file a motion to claim to be the beneficiary of the Constitution, and don't sign anything waiving your rights, if you sign anything at all, make sure you sign U.C.C 1-207 w/o prejidice.  Under remdy and recourse. 
Special Argument developed Now, we‟re going to get into a very special argument…This argument has taken 18 ½ years to develop, and I want you to pay attention. This argument is a unique concept that has been honed like a razor, to a very meticulous edge so that you can understand what‟s going on. Obviously we have established that you have a constitutional right. And obviously we have established that you are the beneficiary of the contract. We have established that the constitution is a contract in writing enforceable in a court of law, and that you have a right to claim specific performance on the contract. We have established that it is supposed to be interpreted in your favor. So if you have an honest constitutional belief, they have to listen. 
Now let‟s take that to the next step”  Can a state arbitrarily and erroneously convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it?  Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) (Supreme Court trumps everything else) Murdock is basically a religious test case. A religious group wanted to go out and preach among the public as that is their right to evangelize. Pennsylvania wanted them to have a license to solicit. 
The group claimed their first amendment right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the right to worship and exercise their religion unencumbered.  The points on the case that are established are “A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution; and that a flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the constitutional liberty of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress the exercise thereof.”   That the ordinance is non16  discriminatory, and that it applies also to peddlers of wares and merchandise is immaterial.  The liberties granted by the first amendment are in a preferred position. Since the privilege in question is guaranteed by the federal constitution, and exist independently of the state‟s authority, the inquiry as to whether the state has given something for which it cannot ask a return is irrelevant. No state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it. Now a lot of people will come back to me and say “Well, I‟m not a part of that religious group…It doesn‟t apply to me”.  
You need to reach. Understand we‟re not talking about whether you are in the religious group or not.  We‟re talking about here is „are you and American and do you have rights?‟ What they are talking about here is that that religious group exercised their rights timely. That they had a right to worship and evangelize as they chose, and that the state came in and arbitrarily converted that right into a privilege and issued a license and a fee for it. That is totally unconstitutional. 
Now we took that case as a pioneering case, and we argue that case for all of your constitutional rights. All you need to do is keep in mind that  1. You are an American and that you have constitutional rights. 
2. You have to keep in mind “What right”? Can you pull the right out of the constitution?
If you can pull the right out of the constitution…and I will give you and example: How about the right to travel freely and unencumbered, pursuant to Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969)?  How about the right to keep and bear arms? Does the state have the right to require a license and fee for the exercise of the right? And if they do can you ignore the license and fee?
Let‟s jump to the next case: Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262 (1963)…This is another unique religious case. In this case six ministers were accused of inciting to riot and otherwise create a disturbance…Disturb the peace. They had a sit-down (this case came down in 1962). The city said they needed to have a license to have a public gathering.  It went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said  “No, you don‟t have to have a license for the exercise of a first amendment right to freely assemble.”
The gist of the case is that Negro ministers were convicted in the Alabama State Court of “Aiding and abetting in violation of criminal trespass ordinance in Birmingham Ala. The only 17  evidence against them was to the effect that they had incited ten Negro students to engage in a sit-in demonstration at a white lunch counter as a protest against racial segregation. The court held that on the case of Peterson v City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244 (1963) that the convictions of those ten students for criminal trespass were constitutionally invalid. Since those convictions had been set aside it follows that these petitioners did not incite, aid, or albeit any crime, and therefore the convictions of these petitioners must be set aside. Now basically what they were claiming was their constitutional right to freely assemble; the city was claiming that they had to have a license to put on a demonstration, which they didn‟t have, and they were charging them with a criminal trespass, for not having a valid license to freely assemble and/or protest.
Now I want you to see the significance of this case in view of the case we just had. Murdock v Penn clearly established that no state could convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.
Shuttlesworth v Birm. Said that if the state does convert your right into a privilege and charge a license and a fee for it you can ignore the license and fee, and engage in the right with impunity. That means they can‟t punish you…they have to let you go.
It‟s very important that you understand first your constitution is the supreme law of the land and that you have that right, and that right shall not be infringed, and it‟s supposed to be enforced in favor of you, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary.  It‟s very important that you understand that no state may convert that right into a privilege and issue a license and fee for it, and if they do. Shuttlesworth says you can ignore the license and engage in the right with impunity…They can‟t punish you.
Now, the next case is very important, and it‟s important that you see the argument.
U. S. v Bishop, 412 U. S. 346 (1973)…Basically what Bishop does is it sets a standard for what constitutes a criminal violation in terms of willful intent. Willfullness is one of the elements which is required to be proven. In any criminal element you have to prove that 1. You are the party, 2. That you had a method or opportunity to do a thing, and  3. That you did so with a willful intent.
Now, when we get to willful intent, willful is defined as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with immoral uncertainty. Obviously you have decided that you have relied on the United States Constitution, and you have relied on the decisions of the supreme 18  court. So could you have willfully done any deed or crime? Obviously not. So this case stipulates that you have a perfect defense for the element of willfulness. Since the burden on the prosecution is to prove that you did willfully and knowingly avoid a known duty or task under the law with immoral certainty he cannot perform that task, because you obviously have your constitutional immunity to that.
The previous case, Shuttlesworth says they couldn‟t even punish you. The case before that said you don‟t even need a license for the exercise of a right. And the case before that said your constitutional right is supreme over any state law.
  So if they pass a law in violation of your constitution, the constitution overwhelms the state law, so the law doesn‟t even exist in law. Now, since the prosecutor does not have a cause of action for which relief can be granted, you honor would it please the court, counsel is specifically precluded from performing his major task, therefore your honor, would it please the court  at this time I would motion most graciously for dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted by this honorable court, and I‟d kinda like to collect my costs and fees for having to defend this patently frivolous and spurious complaint, sir, may it please the court.
This argument is a killer argument. It‟s good for every single constitutional right you‟ve got.  All you have to do is fill in the blanks:  What constitutional right, Prove you have the constitutional right, Tell them that the state does not have the right to convert that right into  a privilege, and they can‟t punish you if they do, and then claim that the prosecutor can‟t prove willfulness so you obviously didn‟t do any crime, and then flip around and demand for you dismissal, which is your right, and get your costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case may it please the court, and I promise you, you will be amazed at the results.
These things have personally happened to me…I can relate the exact cases. That goes for practicing law without a license. Obviously you have a right to work…The right to contract you labor as you see fit, not as some arbitrary and capricious bar association sees fit. If you don‟t want to belong to the union, that‟s your right. You are in a “right to work” state.
The bottom line is this: They cannot compel you to have a license or pay a fee for the exercise of your right. And if they do, you can ignore the license and engage the right with impunity.  That means they can‟t punish you.  And since you have a perfect defense for the element of willfulness, punish you. They have to dismiss, don‟t have a cause of action.
Now this argument, I‟m tellin‟ you, has taken us over 18 years to develop in the courts, and in law libraries over the years; compiling and arguing cases and using this argument…It‟s a killer 19  argument…Have yet have they ever won against us on this argument, nor could they in the United States of America as long as the constitution stands.
Pay attention to this argument and start using it.  We‟ll show you some if the techniques later. Now the word willfully has the same meaning, all right?  In controlling the voluntary intentional violation of a known legal duty.  And the distinction between the statute is found in the additional misconduct that is essential to the violation of the felony provision. If they can‟t prove willfulness they can‟t prove nada.
Unconstitutional Acts The court follows the decision of the highest court in the state in construing the constitution and the laws of the state unless they conflict with or impair the efficacy of some principle of the constitution or of the federal statutes, a rule of the commercial or general law. The decision of the state courts and questions relating to the existence of its subordinate tribunals and the eligibility of election or appointment of their officers and the passage of its laws are conclusive upon federal courts.
Now, the most important thing is “While acts of defacto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law, an existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy. That‟s a very important point…Public Policy.  You want to watch out for the term “Public Policy…” it‟s often confused with the state‟s right of eminent domain of police powers. Police powers and public policy are almost the same thing, except that one is done without law because they want to, and the other is done because they‟re claiming a police authority to do so.
When they‟re talking about public policy, the acts of the person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist can have no validity whatever in law. An unconstitutional act is not law,  It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office, it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
Now, if you take these basic cases that we have gone over so far, you will have gone a long way in getting your constitutional rights back. This book (Citizens Handbook) It includes the Constitution, jury instructions, arguments, and a lot more. Some of the important arguments in it go along with what I‟ve been talking about.
All laws which are repugnant to the constitution are null and void Marbury v Madison 5 U.S. 137  Where rights secured by the constitution are involved there can be no rule or law making legislation which would abrogate abolish them Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office, it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed   Norton v Shelby County 118 US 425 The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute though having the form and name of law in in reality no law, but is totally void. 16 Am Jur Vol. 2, sec 177, 256 Officers of the court have no immunity from liability when violating constitutional rights  Owen v. City Of Independence , 445 U.S. 622, and Maine v Thiboutot, 448 U.S.1 24  No state shall convert secured liberties into privileges and issue a license and a fee for it  Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 If the state does convert your liberty in to a privilege you can engage in that right with impunity.  
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262 The court is to protect against any encroachment of constitutionally securities   Boyd v United States, 116 US 616 Constitutional rights must be interpreted in favor of the citizen   Bryars v United States,  273 U. S. 28 We have covered all of these cases thoroughly, so that you can see clearly In the Citizen‟s Rule Book….
“The jury has the right to judge both the laws as well as the facts” John Jay, first chief justice of the Supreme Court. “The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts” Samuel Chase, Supreme Court Justice.
“The jury has the power to bring in a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact”  Oliver Wendall Holmes, U. S. Supreme Court “The law itself is on trial quite as much as the cause which is to be decided” Harlan F. Stone, chief justice, Supreme Court The pages of history shine on instances of the jury‟s exercise of it‟s prerogative to disregard the instructions of the judge” United States v Dougherty 473 fed 2nd, 113.
Arguing  Jurisdiction Now this is an important case, if you are going to be in this seriously battling and want to argue jurisdiction…Which is a very good defense on almost anything they can pull on you, you‟re gonna have to read these cases:  Erie Railroad v Tompkins 304 U.S. p. 64.  It‟s vital that you understand these arguments. I just finished battling a United State‟s Attorney and we were arguing and he‟s talking about “This is all gibberish”, and I told him, I said “Sir, I don‟t think you are well read on law.” All you have to do is read several of these cases and they‟ll tell you that One there is a duality of citizenship, Two it has to be clearly defined and Three I have defined it.
And now I‟m asking you to prove that I‟m not a party, or prove that I am a party, you tell me. It‟s your burden…You‟re the one making the complaint. You make the complaint, you get the burden of proof. Who says so?  McNutt v General  Motors Acceptance Corp.  56 S.Ct. 502. You made it…You prove it. And if you don‟t prove it timely, I motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action for which relief can be granted, and I will beat your little tail.  
Now if you think this stuff doesn‟t work, let me tell you something here…today the government came and told me “motion dismissed”. The United States of America hereby moves pursuant to federal rules of criminal procedure for leave to dismiss the indictment. 
They can‟t argue. I don‟t care if we go to court…In fact I like it…‟Cause I know who‟s going to win. And I pray to God that he‟ll help me do that.
So, if they want to go to court I tell them “Make my day.” When I‟m in court and the guy tells me “Well…we can get you for income tax evasion, and you might win one, but you won‟t win them all.” I looked at him most calmly and I said “Sir, I‟m gonna advise you to go look in those law books real carefully, because I‟m gonna tell you straight arrow, I have had occasion to look in them law books, and I‟m telling you sir if you bring that complaint against me I‟m going to tell you to „make my day‟, „cause I‟m a pretty serious fellow, and I‟m not going to fool with you. I‟ll sue your sox off and attach everything you own, bank, business, and home. So the best thing I can tell you sir is that before you make a complaint sir I would highly recommend that you seriously consider the merits of your facts before you go writing a bunch of drivel. 52  The bottom line is if you know your facts, and you got your stuff together I‟m telling you that you can do this stuff.
Now let‟s talk about procedure.  If you‟re going to go to court and be your own attorney, You have to be sharp. You have to keep records. You go to court you write it down.  You get any paperwork, you write it down. You send them anything you write it down. Dates and times are vital. If you don‟t take care of your own business…they aren‟t going to do it for you….You‟re your own attorney. If you want to be your own attorney ya gotta have records and keep on top of things.
Every time you do something you write it down…And you make sure you can go back and say “Yeah, I remember on such and such date at such and such a time this happened”. You can construct a chronological order of events. Also write down all important numbers of anybody that has anything that has to be done.
UCC - REMEDY AND RECOURSE FULL REPORT:>>http://freedom-school.com/the-ucc-connection.htmlEvery system of civilized law must have two characteristics: Remedy and Recourse. Remedy is a way to get out from under that law, and you recover your loss. The Common Law, the Law Merchants, and even the Uniform Commercial Code all have remedy and recourse, but for a long time we could not find them. If you go to a law library and ask to see the Uniform Commercial Code, they will show you a shelf of books completely filled with the Uniform Commercial Code. When you pick up one volume and start to read it, it will seem to have been intentionally written to be confusing. It took us a long time to discover where the Remedy and Recourse are found in their UCC. They are found right in the first volume, at 1-308 (old 1-207) and 1-103. REMEDY The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel. (UCC 1-308 (old 1-207).7)It is important to remember when we go into a court that we are in a commercial international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say, " I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ," the judge will most likely say, "You mention the Constitution again, and I'll find you in contempt of court !" Then we don't understand how he can do that. Hasn't he sworn to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged under one jurisdiction, and defend under another. For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you filed your French income tax in a certain year, do you go to the French government and say, "I demand my Constitutional Right?" No. The proper answer is: THE LAW DOESN'T APPLY TO ME - I'M NOT A FRENCHMAN. You must make your reservation of rights under the jurisdiction in which you are charged - not under some other jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your reservation of rights under (pursuant to) the [their] U.C.C. 1-308 (old 1-207). UCC 1-308 (old 1-207) goes on to say: When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date . (UCC 1-308 (old 1-207).9) You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says: The Sufficiency of the Reservation - Any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights, is sufficient, such as "WITHOUT PREJUDICE." (UCC 1-308 (old 1-207).4)Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve Notes -in any way, shape or manner - under your signature write: Without Prejudice UCC 1-308 (old 1-207). This reserves your rights. You can show, at 1-308 (old 1-207).4 that you have sufficiently reserved your rights.It is very important to understand just what this means. For example, one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the judge just what he meant by writing "without prejudice UCC 1-308 (old 1-207)" on his statement to the court. He had not tried to understand the concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket. He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant by signing in that way, he told the judge that he was not prejudiced against anyone .... The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and fined him an additional $25.00 for a frivolous defense. You must know what it means. WITHOUT PREJUDICEpursuant to UCC 1-308When you see "Without Prejudice" UCC 1-308 in connection with your signature, you are saying: "I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract, commercial agreement or bankruptcy that I did not enter knowingly , voluntarily , and intentionally . And furthermore, I do not and will not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement or bankruptcy."Actually, it is better to use a rubber stamp, because this demonstrates that you had previously reserved your rights. The simple fact that it takes several days or a week to order and get a stamp shows that you had reserved your rights before signing the document. What is the compelled performance of an unrevealed commercial agreement? When you use Federal Reserve Notes instead of silver dollars, is it voluntary? No. There is no lawful money , so you have to use Federal Reserve Notes - you have to accept the benefit. the government has given you the benefit to discharge your debts with limited liability, and you don't have to pay your debts. How nice they are! But if you did not reserve your rights under 1-308 (old 1-207).7, you are compelled to accept the benefit, and are therefore obligated to obey every statute , ordinance and regulation of the government, at all levels of government - federal, state and local. If you understand this, you will be asked to explain it to the judge when asks. And he will ask, so be prepared to explain it to the court. You will also need to understand UCC 1-103 - the argument and recourse. If you want to understand this fully, go to a law library and photocopy these two sections from the UCC. It is important to get the Anderson [Anderson, Uniform Commercial Code , Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Company] edition. Some of the law libraries will only have the West Publishing version, and it is very difficult to understand. In Anderson, it is broken down with decimals into ten parts, and most importantly, it is written in plain English. RECOURSEThe Recourse appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6, which says: The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in force , except where displaced by the code. A statute should be construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law . This is the argument we use in court: The Code recognizes the Common Law. If it did not recognize the Common Law, the government would have had to admit that the United States is bankrupt, and is completely owned by its creditors. But, it is not expedient to admit this, so the Code was written so as not to abolish the Common Law entirely. Therefore, if you have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit reservation of your rights at 1-308 (old 1-207), you may then insist that the statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law. If the charge is a traffic, you may demand that the court produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint. If, for example, you were charged with failure to buckle your seatbelt , you may ask the court who was injured as a result of your failure to "buckle up." However, if the judge won't listen to you and just moves ahead with the case, then you will want to read to him that last sentence of 1-103.6 which states: The Code cannot be read to preclude a Common Law action. Tell the judge: "Your Honor, I can sue you under the Common Law, for violating my right under the Uniform Commercial Code." I have a remedy, under the, UCC to reserve my rights under the Common Law. I have exercised the remedy, and now you must construe this statute in harmony with the Common Law, you must come forth with the damaged party."If the judge insists on proceeding with the case, just act confused and ask this question: "Let me see if I understand, Your Honor. Has this court made a judicial determination that the sections 1-308 (old 1-207) and 1-103 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the system of law you are operating under, are not valid law before this court?" Now the judge is in a jamb! How can the court throw out one part of the Code and uphold another? If he answers, "yes," then you say: "I put this court on notice that I am appealing your judicial determination."Of course, the higher court will uphold the Code on appeal. The judge knows this, so once again you have boxed him into a corner. PRACTICAL APPLICATION - TRAFFIC COURThttp://freedom-school.com/the-ucc-connection.htmlAPFN" group.To post to this group, send email to APFN@googlegroups.comFor more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/APFN?hl=enAPFN-1 YahooGroups:Subscribe: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apfn-1/joinUnsubscribe: apfn-1-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.comAPFN MSG BOARD:`In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.'http://disc.server.com/Indices/234999.htmlAPFN CONTENTS PAGE:http://www.apfn.org/old/apfncont.htm"RADIO YOUR WAY" APFN POGO NETWORK (( WOW!! ))"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people ofgood conscience to remain silent" -- Thomas Jeffersonhttp://www.apfn.net/POGO.HTMFind elected officials, including the president, members ofCongress, governors, state legislators, local officials, and more.http://congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/APFN,PMB 206, 7549 W. CACTUS RD. #104, PEORIA, AZ 85381
carl miller ............... know your Constituion.
iron clad contract........

Ron Flick's picture

See COS Flyer 2 - Under the COS Tab and fist drop down - regarding the Second Militia Clause that DIRECTLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY DEMANDS THAT 57 MILLION MALES UPHOLD THE LAW OF THE LAND!  There are roughly 57 million males between the ages of 17-45. Only 7.3% of the total population have served in the military (23,000,000) of which 10% are females.  Many of these ex military are over 45.  Roughly 2,300,000 females have served in the military. So, the vast majority of the 17-45 aged males who make up the Unaffiliated Militia - many of whom hunt in the forest, target shoot, own guns for self defense, or collect guns, and many not even even owning a gun have never read or studied the Constitution. Therefore, many,if not MOST have no clue as to THEIR Constitutional duties under the Militia Clauses of the several states.    This is a gross neglect of our representative government – the Oath Takers.  We have a problem Houston.  The Constitution is not working because our Representatives are not following the Four Militia Clauses of the Several states and the law of the Land.  Our Public School System and Department of Education is failing the nation in teaching the Constitution.   Clearly We the People have to start somewhere to correct this problem and the most direct route is the Second Duty of the Militia: to protect against enemies DOMESTIC.  The 57 million males between 17-45 need to get a course in the Constitution under their belt if we are to save the nation from the destructive path it is currently on. Just 34 pages and 30 days to learn it, and We, the People could enforce a major detour in this train wreck.  Please address any of the following parties to invite to your COS presentation: persons that might be members of a shooting club itself, a gun club, pawnshop owners, gun collectors, a patriot group. They might be members of a survivors group, a search and rescue group, a field medical group, a volunteer fireman’s unit. They might be HAM radio operators, ex-military intelligence, ex special forces, veterans of foreign wars. They might be retired military, policemen, SWAT team members, and/or belong to Oath Keepers.  They might be your neighbor, your father, your brother, your friend, your son, your husband, your doctor, dentist, auto mechanic and dry cleaner guy.  All of them might be between the ages of 17-45 so they need to be at your COS presentation. Set a Date, Reserve a room at the library where a projector is already there and just plug into it and show the COS video. Make up a Flyer with the Contact data on it ...the date, location (draw a map) and time of meeting with your name and phone number on it and staple it together with the COS Flyer 2 and start with the above fellows and Getter Done. Take a yellow marker and highlight the entire Second Duty of the Militia paragraph.  Need more input on the urgency...  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5E6LLbzQMYl6-6ntSjJ5nw     


Rhode Island Jim's picture

I brought this up at a Monday night meeting nearly one month or more ago, and it was discussed, agreed upon by all who were engaged in the conversation, but to my knowledge, this has never happened. My question is why not? Everyone appeared to think it was a good idea.

americanmister's picture

How can I get some. I tried to order but it is sold out is there a way to backorder

Jan@NLA's picture

we are currently sold out, and have not placed another order yet. You can go here and download a copy. https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/sites/default/files/Grand%20Jury%20Hand%20Book%20Final.pdf

Jefferson-A.I.T-MO's picture

Hello everyone our new NlA chatroom system is up and running  ,when logged in it will be located bottom Right corner of screen ,then scroll list for PUBLIC CHATROOM .. OR you can pm message another member directly just click on their profile name ,,Spread the word  ..westill need more communication if we are to reach CRITCCAL MASS...vEry pleased to see this communication line opened up so we can chat with eah other from state to state.Information and Education should flow  well .And great for New members to ask questions as well .WE hope to see you come by and visit this onsite chatroom and get to know your neighbor states.I have been seeing a few people come and go in chatroom but we need more people to come in and start communicating as the people.Once again its agreat place to come and get any questions one might have answered.

jkwilborn's picture

Hello, I have unwittingly damaged the Blue Ray disk that I keep all the sites agreements. I don't seem to be able to find or down load them here...

Is there a link for these kinds of questions?

BTW If you want donation, don't give them the option of $60 ($5 X 12) or a $20 one time shot. Let them give what they wish to donate.

I get repeated emails, "Donate 5 bucks", which is not true, there is no $5 option (only with the 'monthly' option.) Going to donate $10 bucks but you won't take it, so you don't need it very much. You won't see any monies from me with this setup and I don't know how much money you have lost from others, that feel as I do, that didn't take the time to tell you.

Ron Flick's picture

In a world of Paypal and Visa, Checks and Cash are still king. I have used the latter from day one.....the last 33 months and never missed a month. If you really want to donate to the cause, simply mail your check or Money Order to:

National Liberty Alliance
3979 Albany Post Road, Suite 107
Hyde Park, New York, 12538
Fax - 888-891-8977

rls4979's picture

Is there any way to email somebody, anybody for help? I have searched and searched. I am taking the Constitutional course. I just started and doing the introduction, question 3...The word “unalienable” means incapable of being alienated; that is, ____ and ___________. (Separate words by space)

My answer sold transferred that is exactly what it says...UNALIENABLE RIGHTS – The word “unalienable” is synonymous with inalienable which means incapable of being alienated; that is, sold and transferred. [Black’s 4th]

But for some reason I get it wrong and I cannot advance until I get it right. I came here wanting to learn more but all I did was frustrated!

Sagji@aol.com's picture

i am still on chpt 8 trial by jury can't advance bc i cannot get an answer from kathleen. does anybody know why? my answers are; 1 free administration 2 rents 3 had reason 4 natural right 5 peacefully 6 accomplice 7 proportion 8 voluntary 9 groundless 10 malice 11 lawlessness thanks again anyone at this point

KathyNYPutnam's picture

If you send me an email, I will respond.  I did not get an email from you.  Make sure you send it to Kathleen@NationalLibertyAlliance.org    I respond many times a day, and every day.    Kathleen

pkhileman's picture

I can not access the civics course. Am signed in. There are only 2 places to click. One for updating the years of experience and the other is quizzes. When I click on the here for the years experience it says I am not allowed access. Can I get some help? Thanks.

grizzlyhopehugger's picture

Q: Is there an app that can be downloaded that will allow me to access the material that requires flash, such as the civics course audio?

A: Yes. You should be able to downloading Puffin, Dolphin, or Photon Browser through playstore for free and then open nationallibertyalliance.org through it. I've had the most success with Puffin for both my tablet and android cell phone which do not support flash.

Here is a link that maybe helpful for ipad devices:

God bless!

ML wilson's picture

I have been feeling stuck for a few months, not having Flash and therefore unable to access the civics courses, but that all changed today when I saw the message by grizzlyhopehugger about using Puffin as a browser, I loaded Puffin onto my IPhone 3 from the app store and now I am a happy camper working on the civics course. Thank you Grizzly!

grizzlyhopehugger's picture

Anytime we can help each other it is such a blessing! I'm glad I could share the info. that also helped me, as the civics course is vital to us all learning how to save our Country.

KathyNYPutnam's picture

Thank you!   I will add this information to the "Before you Begin the Quiz" page, so others can know!

Fourth Branch's picture

It maybe better not to argue any traveling infraction on the specifics of the case. Doing is to acknowledge the Nisi Prius Court has jurisdiction over you. Object on the grounds a Nisi Prius Court does not have jurisdiction over you since you are one of the People subject only to Common Law jurisdiction and entitled to due process of law per Amendments V, VI and VII in the Bill Of Rights. Make it clear you do not give consent for the hearing to proceed under Statute Law.

Additionally cite the fact using the roads for personal, not commercial purposes, is to engage in traveling and that traveling is an unalienable right not subject to Statutes. There are many Federal Court opinions affirming this claim. They include but are not limited to Thompson v Smith, 154 SE 579, Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293, State v. Johnson, 245 P 1073, Kent v. Dulles 357 U.S. 116, 125, SHAPIRO v. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) 394 U.S. 618, Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, CANTWELL v. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, 310 U.S. 296 (1940) 310 U.S, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491, Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262, Murdock v Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105, Miller v. U.S. 230 F 486 at 489, Sherar vs. Cullen 481 F 2D 946, (1973),

You can also cite Federal Statute 18 U.S. Code § 31(a) confirming using the road for personal reasons is not subject to Statue Law since you are not operating a motor vehicle as it is defined in the following: (6) - “The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.” Many State Statutes have similar language.

The issue can also be raised a speeding ticket is an Appearance Ticket that does not confer jurisdiction over a defendant. The following cases buttress this claim:

[People v. Gabbay, 670 N.Y.S.2d 962, 175 Misc.2d 421 678 N.Y.S.2d 26,92 N.Y.2d 879, 700 N.E.2d 564 (1997)] "Appearance ticket is not accusatory instrument and its filing does not confer jurisdiction over defendant."

[People v. Giusti, 673 N.Y.S.2d 824, 176 Misc.2d 377 (1998)
"Service of an appearance ticket on an accused does not confer personal or subject matter jurisdiction upon a criminal court."

[U.S. v. Beckford, 966 F.Supp. 1415 (1997)] "Only Congress can make an act a crime, affix punishment to it, and declare court that shall have jurisdiction."

Any traffic ticket is a Bill of Attainder and an ex post facto Law. A Bill of Attainder is a legislative Act that finds a person guilty and imposes a punishment without a trial or conviction. A Bill of Attainder is unconstitutional per Article I Section IX Clause III and Article I Section X Clause I of the U.S. Constitution. An ex post facto law makes illegal an act that was legal (traveling) when the act was committed, increases the penalty of an alleged infraction after the alleged infraction was committed or changes the rules of evidence to make a conviction easier. Traveling, being an unalienable right, is legal but the ticket is attempting to make it illegal. Sometimes a District Attorney will inform the accused just before the hearing the penalty will increase should the accused challenge the ticket and lose thereby increasing the penalty after the alleged infraction was committed. The rules of evidence are changed by the mere fact no evidence can exist against a person who is using the roads solely for personal purposes and not for commercial purposes.

Bradley Amendment's picture

DO the courts have to refund the BOND for alleged speeding tickets, once the alleged defendant shows up to court!  The officer did not sign my ticket and nor did I, and I motioned for appeal! They held me in the county jail, until I paid the BOND.  I used case law and the CONSTITUTIONAL OATH that officers are bound by as the JUDGE made a statement, that the city of COLUMBUS, GEORGIA is a consoldiated government and officers do not have to follow the law!