In America (under the Law of the Constitution); we have all the protections we need to shield us from abusive powers of an administrative government in that the administrators could not press us without "Probable Cause" (4th Amendment). A person had to be charged pursuant to a written Complaint which demanded a victim (injured party) and that Complaint must be supported by sworn affidavit.
The way our God given Law in America was designed, a man could not be "compelled" to do anything he did not want to do. He was free to do anything he pleased provided he did not injure another person or his property (free enterprise). If he did; the complaining person could go to the law (sheriff) and sign a formal Complaint against him (a sworn affidavit) which would "wake up the law." The Sheriff would then take the complaining persons affidavit to a judge and gain Court authority to "serve" that Complaint upon the person who committed the trespass. And the Law (under the authority of the Court) could "Compel Performance" for an answer. The party served with the Complaint could defend or confess to the allegations. If he himself knew he was guilty; he could remain silent or demure and suffer the "civil" penalties or he could confess and subject himself to "criminal" penalties. At a trial under law; he had to be proven guilty by the evidence alone. He could not be "Compelled" to confess (5th Amendment.).
So we were never bothered with a "non-victim crime." There was no such thing as a "non-victim crime" and Blacks Law Dictionary - 4th Ed., states: "There is no such thing as a common law crime against the State." You had to have harmed someone before you could be charged with a crime. Not so today!!! However; the Constitution nor the Law has been changed. You still have not committed a crime short of injuring someone (unless of course you agree with them and accept their charge against you) and if you do not know the law; they will convince you that you have committed a violation of some kind which will have the appearance of a crime (such as seat belts?).
The Sheriff/Policeman/Law could do nothing without a signed complaint by the "injured person himself." It has been said that the Sheriff/Policeman (and there is a difference) was like a nick-el-o-deon in that a signed complaint was the "Nickel," and without it, the Law (sheriff/Policeman) could do nothing.
Now how were "they" able to accomplish this "Protective Shield?" Today we have a lot of what is "Called" Law that is not Law at all (Color of Law). You can now be protected from or charged with what you "might" do which is "Compelled Performance" or Administrative Public Policy Law which is Police Power and not Law at all.
In the Law Libraries there is a set of books entitled "Statutes At Large." Volume 37 of the "Statutes" has two books recording the Acts of Congress. "Part One" is "Public Acts and Resolutions," and "Part Two" is "Private Acts and Resolutions."
"Part Two" is "Private Laws Of The United States Of America" passed by the 62nd Congress in the years of 1911 - 1913. How many people know that our Congress passes "Private Law?" In this book is listed all the Private Resolutions and Proclamations passed by Congress in those years which includes the 16th Amendment "Income Tax Law."
What is Private Law? Private Law is in contradistinction to Public Law in that such part of the law which administers or regulates between Citizens enforcement of Rights where both the person in whom Right inheres and the person upon whom the Obligation is incident (the latter being fiction with bestowed rights [city?]) which is to say; Rights obtained by Contract between citizens and their government. For Contract purposes; the "Government" is a "person" of "bestowed Rights" (14th Amendment.).
Contracts are enforceable by Equity Courts to the letter of the Contract. The Constitution provides for cases "In Equity" and actions "At Law." Equity is the enforcement of "Contract obligation." Equity then is a lawful jurisdiction in which a "Court Of Equity" has the authority to "Compel your Performance" to force you (by law) to "live up to" an agreement you entered into by "Contract." There are no Constitutional Rights within the parameters of a legitimate Contract.
The U.S. Supreme Court says that your Right to Contract is unlimited so long as it is a full upright and lawful enterprise or undertaking. The Constitution protects your Right to Contract and the Courts of Equity are there to force the "big guy" to be responsible for his agreements in case the "little guy" is not able to get him to perform according to his Agreement or Contract (City Hall). At the same time; you can not (by law) be forced into an Agreement or Contract you do not want. Within a "Contract;" you are outside the law and outside the jurisdiction of the Constitution. You are in Equity.
To help explain a number of things is the issue of the Income Tax Law. The 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is an obligation subject to enforcement in an Equity Jurisdiction under Contract. Title 26 of the U.S. Code is the "Contract." BUT there are three parts that must be present for a Contract to be valid. They are:
Without the above three parts; there can be no valid lawful Contract.
The active "Real Patriots" have been learning more all the time but to little knowledge to late has seriously hurt some of us. For instance; how is it that these "traitors" have been able to "send out swarms of the Kings Men to eat out Our Substance" .... and get away with it?
Another one of the reasons has finally come forth. The U.S. Constitution was created by free white "Preamble People." This is to say; there is a Declaration that holds the "Black People" as "second class" or less citizens. We will use this "Declaration" as a demonstration so that we may understand another aspect of our Constitution.
The "Preamble People" were free white men. These men were the "We The People" who set up this United States Government. Then along came the 13th and 14th Amendments. The 13th Amendment freed the Slaves and the 14th Amendment identified Them and created for Them; "New Privileges". These were not new Privileges extending the "free People;" but to the newly freed Slaves; these were new Privileges.
The "free men" which set up this government were the indisputable "Sovereigns." That<is; They were not the Subjects of the Constitution but were above the Constitution. Those were the "Free Men" who created (by our Constitution) the government we now have and at the same time; they retained to themselves and their posterity (which is who we are) all their God given and Common Law Rights of Life, Liberty, and Justice for all which was and is granted to all men by their Creator; God.
These men (which included you and I) did not then nor do they (or we) now (under our Constitutional Government) have a grant of "Privileges;" but the Privileges created by the Constitution were for their "14th Amendment" dentified Individuals as "New Citizens."
Those new Privileges were guaranteed and protected to Them by Federal and Lawful Constitutional Authority. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment and Section 2 of the 13th Amendment lawfully granted Congress the Authority and the Power to protect and enforce the new "Freedoms" and "Privileges" which were "granted" to all Individuals lawfully claiming "Privileges" granted under that "14th Amendment."
The "Preamble Peoples'" citizenship was not "created" nor was it "granted" by any Constitution because their Citizenship was won by war Declared, Defended, and Fought for against their and then existing Citizenship which was under the "Crown" though their Declaration of Independence. Their Citizenship (and Ours through Them) existed from the time They created this Government and Theirs and our Citizenship (with its Freedoms) was not relented, relinquished, or forfeited.
With the Constitution Of These United States; they (as the free people they were) established this Government with limited powers which by law they could "control." But (through the anarchy of Government Employees) we lost that control because They (being TRAITORS to our Nation and because of usurpation of power) will not abide by or comply with the law.
When Congress was "granted" the Constitutional Power to enforce the 13th and the 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; the Congress was given the power to now pass Legislative or "Civil Rights Acts" which can be and are lawfully tried in Its own Legislative Courts.
Let us explore this situation. We know that our government has three separate branches. We have the Legislative branch which is the Congress (with two separate branches within) that makes the laws. In the several States; we have the Legislatures which also has two branches and makes laws. You have the Executive branch of both Federal and State Governments which creates lawfully all Administrative Offices which have enforcement powers of law. The third branch of government is the Judicial branch which are the Courts that judge the law. These are clear and distinct "Separation Of Powers" within one governmental structure (working together - but separately) in order to keep our Government in "control."
Under the 13th Amendment; the slaves were freed. And under the 14th Amendment; there was "created" a "new citizenship." The "slaves" were not specifically identified but these "Amendments" were for Them and identified Them as Citizens which (by implication) included all individuals who claimed or did not deny status under that "Amendment" identification. They were "Protected" and their "Rights" guaranteed to them under the Constitution (this being then their "new" Constitutional Rights being granted to Them as "Privileges"). Section 2 of the 13th Amendment and Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gave Congress the full power and authority to enforce the 13th and 14th Amendments (and ALL Laws pursuant to them) so now Congress can (Constitutionally) legislate its own laws for these people. It can enforce its own laws for these people and judge its own laws pertaining to these people (which obviously is not a "separation of powers" pursuant to the U.S. Constitution).
Now watch what happened. Because our Constitution allows for judicial enforcement for the protection of these "new freed citizens" and their "Rights" within the Article I Courts and Article III Courts; the Article I Courts came under the power of the Congressional or Legislative branch of our government and the Article III Courts are under the power of the judiciary. The Article III Courts are not above nor are they "under" the power of Congress; but are entirely a separate branch of government which is not subject to the "whims" or "dictates" of the Executive or of the Congressional branches of our government (Constitutional checks and balances).
In the Constitution at Article I; we have identified the "Powers Vested In Congress." At Section 8; the Congress shall have power ... (at Clause (9)) to constitute tribunals inferior to the [S]upreme [C]ourt.
In the Constitution at Article III; we have identified the Judicial Department. At Section 1; "the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one [s]upreme [c]ourt, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." At Section 2, Clause (1) "the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority; ..." and at Clause (2) "In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party, - the [s]upreme [c]ourt shall have original jurisdiction. In all other cases before mentioned, the [s]upreme [c]ourt shall have appellate jurisdiction."
NOTE: The [S]upreme [C]ourt of Article I IS NOT the same [s]upreme [c]ourt of Article III.
Then in Articles V and VI of the U.S. Constitution; General Provisions - particularly in 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 the laws of any State to the contrary NOTWITHSTANDING."
An Article I Court is of the Congress which sets up the legislative part of government which is needful for that department in "policing" itself and the "Franchised" Individual (those of its own creation [corporations]).
The Article III Court is of a completely separate part of the three branches of government which exercises its lawful jurisdiction in disputes outside the sphere of Congress. These judges become (by their Oath) "Protectors at Law" of the "Free People" of the United States (from the tremendous power of the government) and the use of that power by its over zealous and un-monitored and un-checked employees exercising those powers many times in conspiracy.
"WE THE PEOPLE" - those not knowing their U.S. Constitution are not aware of their Natural Rights, therefore have been included into a 14th Amendment citizenship condition right along with the legal aspect of the City, State and Federal governments "person" identification, and as such no longer have Natural Rights because all your Natural Rights have been converted into government issued Privileges. And by this you are under contract to your government and are therefore "controlled and protected" by the U.S. Congress pursuant to a quasi-contract administered through the Article I Court which is Equity, and in this jurisdiction "their will" is your "compelled performance," and is enforceable outside your protections of the Constitution. You are a subject of the Constitution, not a creator and therefore not a Sovereign.
There are many angles and aspects of this "thing," and one more is - that when Franklin Roosevelt took office, he ignored the Founders' doctrine of "enumerated powers;" taking strong control of the government, he issued 1006 Executive Orders. For this to become somewhat relative, we will compare: - President Cleveland issued 71; McKinley issued only 51, but President Roosevelt broadcast Executive Orders in every direction spending money like a drunken sailor, advertising "the new deal," which to the understanding of the average "John Doe" American citizen, was the opportunity to "get something for nothing," and greed set in according to "their" plan, and opened the door by "vote of the people" for "deficit spending" with no responsibility.
Anyway, Roosevelt spent our country into an un-payable debt, spending money without bringing taxes up to meet the expenditures. He then "borrowed" from the International Bankers, for the deficits. But he did not borrow money; he borrowed "credit" and agreed to pay it back with gold coin. It was not long after he took office that he/we had borrowed more credit than we had gold coin (or gold bullion) to repay the debt and this Nation (at that point) defaulted and went bankrupt under a "contract."
Well, - the Congress (under the "influence" of the Bankers) did not want to alarm the American People, - sooo.
The International Bankers set up the International Bar Association and the International Bar Association set up a Bar Association in every Nation in the World. The American Bar Association also set up a Bar Association in every State in our Nation. What is the significant of this you say? Well, - the Bankers knew that what they were doing was (under the Law) a very Traitorous and Treasonous act against this Nation which could lead to a lawful charge of Treason subject to a penalty of death so they needed the Courts of "Law" and all the judges on their side. Their plan worked so smooth that they set up these Bar Associations in such a way so that they could issue their own licenses. Their license requirements demand compliance to "their" standards or you were not accepted into "their Bar" to practice law and further; they "fixed" the practice of law so that only licensed attorneys could be judges, (yes, we voted on it). We have in our Courts today (by "their" design) a condition that when a "Natural" and free person attempts to achieve "Justice" through the Courts (he is denied "due process" of law through "procedure" (which is controlled by the "Bar" judges)) and he (the natural individual) may even be "charged" with practicing law without a license.
This was so successful and worked so well that "they" continued by "un-educating" our children through the control they had of our "Public Schools" (even the curriculums of our "Private" schools) so that through our "un-education" we "vote" only licensed attorneys into Congress. If you look around, you will see that we have licensed attorneys in the upper levels of most of our administrative offices of our government as well. Is it no wonder that the "injustices" committed by all our administrative government officers are not corrected when we have perfectly legal and just causes for a grievance we make them known to them?
Now when Roosevelt did what he did, he did so as representing all of us. When he defaulted on the debt (contract), you and I (as the surety or collateral) came under bondage and the "income tax," (as we are lead to believe it is) is really a payment on the interest of an ongoing debt that cannot be paid. This was not an accident. This was done under "Spiritual Anti-Christ" knowledge and direction in known violation of law put in place by God for the very purpose of preventing this kind of thing from ever happening. So we have all lost our Freedoms? Don't you believe it! God is still on his throne, and He answers Prayer and changes things.
Now the Bar Associations (rather than telling the people that they are bankrupt) told the people that they were just "blending" the procedures of Law with the procedure of Equity. The average person doesn't know the difference between Law and Equity so he will never know what happened to him.
But how can you blend "Compelled Performance" with "Freedom?" You don't. You can't. They don't blend. But what they did in the blending was to do away with our "Freedoms" and now everything is "Compelled Performance." And IF we are a "bankrupt" people; you can be compelled to perform in the interest of your "Creditors" to the letter of the contract by the lawful force of law in an Equity jurisdiction.
So you see; what we have had since 1938 is not "Public Law" statutes; but are in fact "Public Policy" statutes (in the form of Law) passed by Congress in the interests of our Nations Creditors.
Example - If you are stopped along the "Public Highway" and the police officer says; "Let me see your drivers license!" or "You haven't fastened your seat belt!" This is not LAW, but IS a direct violation of what IS "Public Law," (U.S. Code, Title 18, Sections 241 & 242). How could that be Law? The only person you could injure is yourself or those who are your God given responsibility. The police officer is enforcing "Public Policy" not "Public Law." You are the surety and the collateral for the credit that President Roosevelt borrowed and defaulted on. The International Bankers are only trying to "Protect" their interests (at their discretion) and that is not law and cannot be law; at least here in the United States.
Law does not compel performance. The Law, is designed so that it prevents you (by severe penalty) from injuring some other person or their private property. This is "Common Law," which is afforded to you by our United States Constitution. All your inherent Rights and Protections are protected under this Constitution from the potential abuse of the power of administrative law.
As you can see (under this "quasi-contract"); the judges take silent (in their mind) "Judicial Notice" that you and I are a "bankrupt" person and therefore (under the default condition (contract/equity law prevails)) your/my Constitutional Rights are not at an issue. Therefore you/I lose. The judges are only interested in whether or not you "fastened your seat belt" or fulfilled any other "Policy" administrative law.
This is what we are up against in our courts today. The question must be asked: How do we survive in the courts when we have the U.S. Constitution to protect us? Well, Christ told us that He sends us out as sheep in a wolf infested country. How does a sheep survive in this situation? The sheep just stays close to the Shepherd. "Ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free" (if you know where the enemy is, you can run free). This is not symbolic - this principle is real. You must understand that Christ said we are sheep, not a wolf.
You are a sheep and not a wolf. Sheep do not attack or eat wolves. "Speak the Truth in Love" is the example Christ left for us and His Word had NOT changed that. To attack is to destroy - not win over to our/your side. Study to show yourself approved of the Lord and be ready always to give reason for your belief in God.
With the right knowledge; we know what questions to ask (not tell) in order for us to make our God given Law to begin protecting us.
Our Judicial Officers will never admit that they are administering law in an Admiralty Jurisdiction. But that is exactly what it is. As you saw; if you and I are in "default" under an International Contract (Roosevelts'); we are under International Law (that is the Law of Nations, or the Law of the sea) and International Law is enforced under an Admiralty Jurisdiction.
Now lets look at the Admiralty Jurisdiction. You must understand the rule of "The Captain of His Ship" and that rule is the Admiralty Law or Admiralty Jurisdiction. When a business or company decides to "sell" his goods on the other side of the ocean; he does not want to put all his goods into the hands of an incompetent ship owner so before he decides to ship his goods; he checks out the shipping company.
He might ask: "What kind of a Captain do you have sailing your ships?" If the shipping company "Wants" your business; they will hire only good, reliable, and competent Captains to sail their ships. You conclude that you will ship your goods by them.
Now that Captain has a big responsibility to "get your goods to where you intended them to go and at all cost; save the ship." The Captain must have the authority to give and expect obedience to what ever orders he may choose to give. For example; the ship is at sea in a severe storm. The sail on a mast has been wind blown and tangled in the mast rigging. The Captain orders an employee to go up that mast and untangle the sail. Because of the storm and the sea; the employee, or deck hand, or sailor, says: "No, I'm not going up there in this storm." But the Captain knows (by his experience) that if the sail is not straightened out; the ship will soon be in jeopardy. So the Captain orders his employee to be taken to the ships brig, or jail, and orders another sailor up the mast. After the storm is over and the ship is saved; the Captain orders the dis-obedient employee up on deck for trial. The Captain has "his" witness, "true or false," to be at the trial. The Captain ask the witness: "Did you hear me order this employee to go up the mast and untangle that sail?" The witness says that he did. Then the Captain calls out an order known as "keel haul." The ship is rigged with a line that goes over the decks and under the ship from port side to starboard side and then the disobedient sailor is tied hand and foot to the line and is cast overboard and pulled by the line under the ship for its full width. If that sailor was able to hold his breath for the "pull" (as he was drug along the barnacles on the bottom of the ship); he would be cut into ribbons to the point that when he was pulled back up on deck he would (if not dead by then) surely bleed to death. Nevertheless; this was a death sentence at sea and the Captain of the ship has full authority to do "what ever is needed to save the ship;" even at the expense of the cargo if necessary which included a sentence of death for disobedience to His Orders. That is Admiralty Law. That is Admiralty Jurisdiction. That is the Law of the Sea or International Law. It is all the same.
Do you see what "We the People" are up against? We got here by our negligence in not being on guard and by relying on someone else to watch our "Rights" for us. That someone else has been given us just enough information to keep us distracted from what has really been going on and we are now very close to being too late to fix it. But if we don't try, it will never be fixed.
The Holy Bible - at Hosea 4:6, says, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, ... I will also reject thee, ..." (King James). Look also into Isaiah 5:12 & 13; and Isaiah 28:7; see also II Peter 1; and 3:12.
There are two (2) criminal jurisdictions in the United States. One is the "Common Law" criminal jurisdiction and the other is the "Admiralty" criminal jurisdiction (which includes "Equity," "International Law," "Law Merchant," etc.).
Under the Common Law criminal jurisdiction; we have all the "Rights" and "Protections" we need and there must be an injured party. That is our Constitutional guarantee of the "injured party." Article I, Section 9, Clause (2) of the U.S. Constitution declares this fact: "The writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended." That is the Law for our whole Nation and Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution are the restraints by the lawful and superior authority of our Federal government upon the States, to prevent the State from limiting our protections. You will need to read the 5th Amendment, and the "Preamble To The Bill Of Rights" (which is the Amendments to our Constitution) for you to be able to see clearly and to understand what the Amendments were for, and to see clearly that the Amendments gives us further identified protections under the law. The 6th Amendment "Protects" to us (and makes available upon our demand) the "Right" by law, to have "habeas corpus" (to produce the victim or the injured person, enforced by LAW) for our "Protection." In Article VI, Clause (2) of our Constitution, the Constitution clearly states that "this Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land."
Now under this "supreme law of the land," the State is able to grant more liberties and protections, but is not permitted, (by creating its own law), to limit our/your protections or liberties to LESS than those identified and protected by the law of the Constitution of the United States. Under the Common Law; we have all the Rights and Protections we could possibly need for an adequate defense (which is the way America was founded). As you see, we don't have those Rights and Protections any more do to the result of our willing ignorance (through our public school system).
There is only one other Criminal Jurisdiction you can be tried under and that is in a condition of International Contract under the criminal aspects of an Admiralty Jurisdiction.
Under the Common Law we have many defenses. But under an Admiralty Jurisdiction; there is only one defense available (and that is only available under the International Law of Contracts). The International Law of Contract (as before identified) is being enforced upon us in an Admiralty Jurisdiction and that Contract is an INVALID Contract. There is no court in the our land (or in the world) that has the authority or the jurisdiction to enforce an "invalid" Contract. There is a number of aspects in the law of contracts, but there is one particular aspect that you need to know. That is - The debt that President Roosevelt contracted us into with the International Bankers is an "invalid" contract by the very laws that the Contract is/was contracted under. That Contract is what is called a "no interest Contract." Under International Contract Law you find that "no interest Contracts" are void and are not enforceable in any Court of the world. But IF you are "enfranchised;" you are under the "law of the Captain of the ship," which is Admiralty.
The question must be asked: What is a "no interest Contract?" To give answer to this question, the following example will be given: - Why can't you take out a fire insurance policy on somebody else's house? The reason that no-one can insure another persons house is because you have no interest in that house. To give explanation; lets say that the neighbors house is worth $100,000 and the owner (for $500) could obtain a "fire insurance policy" worth $80,000 on that house. Now he doesn't want to see his house burn down because he has a $100,000 house and if it burns down he'll only get $80,000 in return by the contract insurance policy. He stands to lose $20,000. The insurance company doesn't want to see that house burn down either because they would have to pay out $80,000. Both parties have a "protective interest" in the same house.
Now we come along (and for the same insurance premium as the owner has to pay) and say, "We want to insure that house." The insurance company will say, "nothing doing." But why? We ask. The reason we can't obtain insurance on the "other" persons house is because we do not "care" if the house burns down or not. In fact; we would probably hope that it would burn down. We paid out the same insurance premium as the owner and if it burns down; the insurance company pays out $80,000 to us and the owner and the owner loses $20,000 while we would make $80,000 less the $500 premium. In essences, we can only win. We may (if the house doesn't burn down) lose the $500 premium; but the gamble is worth it to us because (for the stakes) we have no real interest in the property. As you can see; the insurance company is betting that the house won't burn down (within the time period of the "contract," which is the insurance policy) and the owner is betting that it will burn down. That is a "gaming" policy licensed by the State and that is why its OK for the Insurance Company and not OK for you or I to run a Lottery?
Now you see why Roosevelt "Contract" is invalid. Roosevelt borrowed "credit," from the International Bankers (which they created out of thin air [which is nothing]) and contracted to pay it back with "Substance" (Gold Coin which is substance OF THE LAND; dug up by the labor of man).
Let's see then if that Contract is a valid Contract. Did the International Bankers have any "interest" in the survival of America? No! Because they brought no "substance" into the Contract and therefore they had nothing at risk relative to the Contract. They gave only "credit" which was only created on paper. Credit is NOT SUBSTANCE nor can it be substance. The International Bankers really don't care if we are able to make payment on the loan or not. If we survived as a nation, they would have gained Gold Coin (substance) in exchange for nothing loaned. But if we could not repay according to the contract; we would default and be declared "Bankrupt" (which is what we have done) and by law; they would own all the property within the Country which is our whole Nation. They could not lose. By default and under International Contract pursuant to International Law (or the Law of Nations); they own our Country and "They" can take possession anytime.
That is why it does not matter who we vote into Congress or who we put in as President for they (our Congress and President) are owned by the International Bankers and are subject to their will. The Bankers say: "We want public policy statutes passed in our interest." So Congress just "compels" our performance under public policy statutes (private law) in accordance with the will of the bankers (in the interest of the International Bankers) which is $$ in their pockets.
Since we know that once they name their jurisdiction as an admiralty jurisdiction, we then are able to bring all these things out in open court, and therein the very law it was contracted under, and therefore America owes no debt.
If America owes no debt, then you and I cannot be tied into that debt subjecting ourselves to the international Admiralty Law Jurisdiction. We therefore, at that point, are able to come back under the Constitutional Common Law, and make claims thereto.
Let's look into the subject of "Contract." Example: In America, (unless you are a slave), you were born with the Right to travel (drive) on the Public "Right Of Way," (highway). Now with an understanding of all the above information: if you claim a Constitutional Right under the 14th Amendment, you actually trade-in a Birthright in exchange for a government issued privilege. The license you "applied" for is the legal proof required by law that you have entered into a contract by your own free will. Therefore, Licensed and/or Enfranchised persons can by law of contract be lawfully "Compelled" to perform under that contract and you have no Constitution Rights with a contract.
Let's look now at why you are charged by the administration for a civil violation of their rules (ordinances or statutes) with a crime? The natural law tells us that a man cannot judge his own issue. What does that mean? The power of our government was set up so that one power could and would keep each of the other two powers in check.
The U.S. Constitution at Article III, which establishes the Judicial Department of our Government, at Section 2, Clause (2), says that if the State is a party in a case, the [s]upreme [c]ourt shall have Original Jurisdiction.
The reason for this is that the State has the power to make laws. If the State makes a law that an individual disagrees with, like an un-constitutional law, and he dis-obeys that law, the State, (City or County, they are the same) will bring a criminal charge against him, if it was not for the Separation Of Powers Doctrine of the U.S. Constitution, the State could make the law, and with the authority of the sheriff, (or State Police), they could enforce the law they just made and then bring you to trial in their own State Courts and Judge their own laws.
This is not permitted under Constitutional Law, and that is the purpose in the [s]upreme [c]ourt retaining to itself the Original Jurisdiction in matters where the State is a party.
Now the 14th Amendment, under the full and lawful Constitutional Authority, has created a "legal person." This legal person is a creation of Congress, and can be identified as "Freed Slaves," "Corporations," "Government Agencies," "Cities," "Counties," "States," Licensed "persons," (those are persons exercising privileges). NOW WATCH! - Any "person" (legal or free) claiming government issued privileges. If you do not claim your natural Rights, but ignorantly claim your Civil Rights which are under the 14th Amendment, YOU ARE A LEGAL PERSON!!! Using the authority of Article I Courts, they rightfully assume all three powers that the Constitution has separated. By the default of President Roosevelt, all American Citizens have been lumped by a 14th Amendment contract into a "legal person," or a "Created Citizen" status.
Now under the 14th Amendment, the Congress, within the sphere can make the law; enforce their own law; and judge their own law. In this case, a man is the judge of his own issue.
Now the Constitution has given Congress this lawful authority as long as it is used within its lawful sphere. This is granted by the Constitution in Article I, Section 8 at Clause (9), quote - "To constitute tribunals inferior to the [S]upreme [C]ourt." Which means they have the lawful authority to create their own courts to "Police themselves." Policing themselves is within there own sphere.
Now Clause (10), Congress has the power, and I quote - "To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, [shipping on the oceans of the world], AND (to define and punish piracies and felonies) against the law of nations." This grants Congress the authority to enter into and participate in International affairs and controversies, which would include disputed international contracts. Continuing now in the Constitution and I quote at:
A close and careful reading of all the above quotations will reveal a tremendous grant of power to the Congress of these United States of America; the Union of States, [the land? not necessarily]. These powers properly administered serve a very vital function in the operation of our government and for the protection of our Nation from invasion by outside forces as well as from within. But when the integrity of these employed and entrusted by "We The People" pursuant to their Oath of Office: to Operate, Defend, Protect, and hold our peoples' Lives, their Liberties, and Pro-parties Sacred, fails, our whole country lies in jeopardy.
The failure of those whom government has employed whether they be hired, voted in, or appointed, to Honor their own identity and integrity has perverted the intent of the Founders' wisdom in the creation of this government, and they then become greedy self indulgent empire builders with absolutely no regard for the well being of this Nation. These are the Anarchists, not the Patriots.
Now under a condition of bankruptcy, the bankrupt party becomes, as we have shown above, subject to the forced compliance of the contract defaulted on. When the people of the United States became a bankrupt people pursuant to a contract to the International Bankers, at that time we also become subject to the laws of Congress regarding International matters enforceable under the Admiralty Jurisdiction which is outside the protection of our Constitution. This also was no accident!!
There is no such thing as a common law crime committed against Congress, even under the 14th Amendment contract. But under the authority of Congress to pass all needed laws, and the authority to enforce those laws, and judge the violations of those laws; and because you cannot civilly violate a statute, the violation of a statute has to be a crime.
Congress has not been granted the authority to judge civil violations outside of its Article I jurisdiction of the Constitution, but statute violations within Congress' Article I jurisdiction IS within its authority. Therefore, pursuant to the 14th Amendment, all legal persons claiming civil rights are subjects of the Congress, and IF you are one of these people, your "parking ticket" violation is a crime. Under this condition it cannot be any other way.
Equity under an Admiralty (international law) jurisdiction comes with a criminal penalty. Equity under American Constitutional Civil Common Law jurisdiction is basically an Equity Court forced or "Compelled" restitution penalty rather than a criminal penalty which involves possible jail sentence or even live forfeiting penalties which penalties are not permitted to render. Under the Admiralty (international law) jurisdiction, there are no civil rights at all, and therefore ALL statute violation are crimes pursuant to Admiralty (international law) (under the Captain) which are punished as crimes with criminal penalties sufficient to bring the rest of the people (subjects) into compliance, because of the "Contract" default.
Are we a Sovereign "WE THE PEOPLE" Creator of this government with inherent natural rights of life in God? - or are we a Congressional "Created legal person" who receives your right to life from a government issued grant of privileges. If you have Natural Rights which do not intrude into another persons life, you can claim them, Government is NOT self restraining, and will do its best to "Control" us by convincing us through our ignorance of the law that we do not have any Rights.
How to make respectful demand and claim those God given Natural Rights, as the LAW requires, is the subject of most Patriots, not all, but again, we should be careful what category we decide someone is in. The Bible tells us that we "may entertain angels and not know it," Hebrews 13:2.