1. Existence of inherent fraud.

  • 37 Am Jur 2d at section 8 states, in part: "Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments."

  • 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 its 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 Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.

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

    Sixteenth American Jurisprudence
    Second Edition, 1998 version, Section 203 (formerly Section 256)

2. Existence of inherent lack of bona fide jurisdiction.

  • "Although there formerly was a conflict of authority with respect to the proof of jurisdiction or the lack of jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has declared that one who claims that the power of the court should be exercised in one's behalf must carry throughout the litigation the burden of showing that he or she is properly in court. Accordingly, if a party's allegations of jurisdictional facts are challenged by an adversary in any appropriate manner, he or she must support them by competent proof, and, even where they are not so challenged, the court may still insist that the jurisdictional facts be established or the case be dismissed, and for that purpose the court may demand that the party alleging jurisdiction justify his or her allegations by a preponderance of evidence. However, it is not mandatory upon the court to call upon the party asserting jurisdiction to establish it by proof, in the event that the party's jurisdictional averments are not properly challenged by the adversary, and, in such a case, application may be made of the rule that proof in support of jurisdictional averments need not be offered where the defendant does not formally plead to [challenge] the jurisdiction." 2.455, Federal Procedure

    [EDITOR'S COMMENT: Hello!!!! Does that last statement wake anybody up to the critical reason why it is important to always challenge jurisdiction to be sure it is truly bona fide? Since there is no statute of limitations on fraud, jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even after a case has been "decided". [smile] And further, were you ever given bona fide written full disclosure that by hiring an attorney, you had been automatically presumed to have waived any jurisdictional challenges because of the attorney being an "officer of the court"???? Hello!!!!]

  • JURISDICTION the power to hear and determine a case. 147 P.2d 759, 761. This power may be established and described with reference to particular subjects or to parties who fall into a particular category. In addition to the power to adjudicate, a valid exercise of jurisdiction requires fair notice and an opportunity for the affected parties to be heard. Without jurisdiction, a court's judgment is void. A court must have both SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION and PERSONAL JURISDICTION (see below). See also territorial jurisdiction; title jurisdiction."

    SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION refers to the competency of the court to hear and determine a particular category of cases. Federal district courts have "limited" jurisdiction in that they have only such jurisdiction as is explicitly conferred by federal statutes. 28 U.S.C. 1330 [EDITOR'S NOTE: see also 40 U.S.C.S. 255] et seq. See LIMITED [SPECIAL] JURISDICTION. Many state trial courts have "general" jurisdiction to hear almost all matters. The parties to a lawsuit may not waive a requirement of subject matter jurisdiction.

    TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION the territory over which a government or a subdivision thereof has jurisdiction, 147 P.2d 858, 861; relates to a tribunal's power with regard to the territory within which it is to be exercised, and connotes power over property and persons within such territory. 94 N.E. 2d 438, 440.

    TERRITORIAL COURT a court established by Congress under Art. IV, Sec. 3, Cl. 2 of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to make "all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." 370 U.S. 530, 543; 371 F.2d 79, 81. Above definitions from: Barron's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition.

  • "...Unless and until the United States has accepted jurisdiction over lands hereafter to be acquired as aforesaid, it shall be conclusively presumed that no such jurisdiction has been accepted." Excerpted from 40 U.S.C.S. 255

    "In view of 40 USCS 255, no jurisdiction exists in United States to enforce federal criminal laws, unless and until consent to accept jurisdiction over lands acquired by United States has been filed in behalf of United States as provided in said section, and fact that state has authorized government to take jurisdiction is immaterial. Adams v. United States (1943) 319 US 312, 87 L Ed 1421, 63 S Ct 1122. Excerpted from 40 USCS 255, interpretive note 14.

3. Existence of inherent lack of bona fide due process of bona fide law.

  • "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 search, and the persons or things to be seized." Article IV in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "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 or life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation." Article V in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "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 defence." Article VI in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Article IX in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "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." Article X in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Article XIII in amendment to the Constitution of the United States

  • "All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same, whenever they may deem it necessary; . . ." Article I, Section 2, Constitution of the state of Ohio

  • "This enumeration of rights shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people, and all powers, not herein delegated, remain with the people." Article I, Section 20, Constitution of the state of Ohio.

Note: Preliminary research has found that there may be as many as 50,000,000 (yes, 50 million!) inherently void and vacatable court cases that have already been decided in the courts across the nation. Do you think there's a possibility that one of those just might be yours or someone you know? Is it worth checking into and standing up and challenging? Only you can decide. What are you waiting for?


Copyright Family Guardian Fellowship

Last revision: August 14, 2009 08:07 AM
   Home  About  Contact This private system is NOT subject to monitoring