Im not sure where to post this, but it involves the use of the term United States, and the application of the 18th Amendment. This amendment ONLY ever actually applied to the FEDERAL UNITED STATES:

http://openjurist.or…ard-co-v-mellon

Quote:

‘Sec. 3. No person (see footnote 2 at bottom for meaning of ‘person’ in the act***FN2) shall on… Read more

Im sure we've agreed to disagree, but Ill respond…by the way good to be back. I actually REALLY enjoy our debates, and I hope you do too.

you quoted:

Quote:
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty,… Read more

Quote:
who aren't pushing the Fourteenth Amendment conspiracy theories that have no foundation.

No Foundation? Here is the foundation.

Lower case “c” for the first time…accident or deliberate?
14th Amendment has a second “due process” clause
14th Amendment follows the “1866 civil rights act” and uses essentially the same language.

now… Read more

Georgia, like every other state, lacks the authority to license a right. Georgia, like every other state, declares “driving” to be a privilege and not a right. The Courts have held that traveling by automobile is a Right.

What does this tell us? This tells us that “driving” means something different than “traveling… Read more

Well, the trick is this:

The Courts and the Police pretend that an “Infraction” is a “public offense”…however, if we look to case law and the code itself, we see that it cannot be. For example, the Cal Penal code is in conflict (or appears to be) where it states:

Quote:

Cal Penal Code:

16

Crimes and public offenses… Read more

I am filing suit against the police department, the tow company, and two officers in their individual capacity for violations of my fundamental human rights, caused by violations of their own code.

REMEMBER, when you are pulled over, you are “arrested”.

In California an officer can ONLY arrest someone without a warrant a few ways. see… Read more

I simply wanted to point the “trick” in § 19-11-9.1.

Quote:
(a) Any entity in this state including for profit, nonprofit, and governmental employers, upon the request of the department and its authorized contractors, shall provide the department with information, including the name, address, social security number, employment,… Read more

The term “State” more info:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/ghg2010/ghgisoratta.pdf

(176) “Jurisdiction” means U.S. state or Canadian province. For purposes of this article, “U.S. state” means U.S. State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa and includes the Commonwealth… Read more

“person” almost always includes a corporation. If you dissect the definition of Person, it becomes very telling.

For example:

(i) “Person” means a natural person, partnership, corporation, trust, estate, business trust, joint venture, unincorporated association, or any other legal or commercial entity.

The first thing to do when looking at… Read more

Im back again…

Quote:
Amendment XIV
Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;… Read more

All direct taxes in the united States of America must be apportioned…I will provide some caselaw as I find it. To be otherwise, the states could levy a 100% direct tax on its Citizens. The Federal Constitution is a limit on government in general, and an enumerated list of powers for Congress

Bouvier's… Read more

USC Title 5 is “records maintained on Individuals”, and Title 5 is TITLE 5—GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES.

Therefore, the definition of “Federal Personnel” that lumps together “officers and employees of the Government of the United States” and “members of the uniformed services” with “individuals entitled to receive immediate or deferred… Read more

A few examples of “STATES”

I think these may help to establish that “State” aint always “State” as some think it is.

http://www.ded.uscourts.gov/JJF/Opinions/recent/Sep2007/07-455.pdf

Quote:
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON D.C. Defendant.

http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/icr/state/DC.html

Quote:
Information Collections Rule Query Form
for the… Read more

The CVC has to be in compliance with the Supreme Court and the Constitution…for example, the CVC cant say “A peace officer shall shoot any driver that believes in God.”

The Code also cant say “A peace officer may arrest someone for sneezing.”

This is because in America, believe it or not, an arrest is a seizure, and an unreasonable seizure… Read more

'blue' wrote:

**************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Thanks for the input…

I think they would say penal code 836 a (1) above would be the reason for arrest
They would say it is a public offense to drive without… Read more

This week the 37th Circuit Court for the County of Calhoun ruled from the bench a “judgment of foreclosure” against me calling it an “uncontested forfeiture”, ignoring my documents…well sort of ignoring them.

1. They stated “you did not appear for the hearing today.” meanwhile I was told that I was not required to by the judges… Read more

here's the deal. You were arrested without a warrant. In California it is illegal to arrest you without a warrant unless you commit a crime or public offense.

see CVC 40300.5 and Cal Penal Code 836

Quote:
In addition to the authority to make an arrest without a warrant pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 836 of the… Read more

Georgia has caught on

http://www1.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/fulltext/hb875.htm

1. My guess is, like here in California, that “in this state” or “in this State” mean two COMPLETELY different things. I haven't had the time to go through Michigan code yet, but in California it is OBVIOUS:

Cal Rev and Tax code
http://law.onecle.com/california/taxation/6017.html

Quote:
6017
“In this State” or “in the State” means within… Read more

“What, if anything, would you change about the above forms to make them more consistent with the research you have posted. We aren't here for entertainment, but to improve the tools available on this site for protecting one's rights from being usurped by corrupt government employees.”

I agree for the most part with what you wrote, I would take… Read more

more evidence supporting the Federal interpretation of the 14th:

http://www.justice.g…es.31.htm#N_11_

Quote:
“Congress is, of course, constitutionally free to propose, and the states to ratify, any amendment to the Constitution. (21) Such naked power undeniably exists. The Constitution taken as a whole, however, stands for certain… Read more

Fixed link:
http://www.nmid.usco…-02-0039-18.pdf

http://edsitement.ne…plan.asp?id=804

Quote:
Lynching is more than murder. It is anarchy when a mob sets itself up as a judge, jury and executioner. In doing so it not only violates whatever rights the lynched person has as a citizen of the state in which he is lynched but also deprives him… Read more

1. I do have my mind 95% made up, and you have your mind 100% made up.

2. My approach to citizenship is from a concern of what the GOVERNMENT THINKS it is. As I have said before, even if you are 100% correct, the Government is agreeing with me:
http://www.state.gov…ation/86755.pdf

Quote:
d. “Subject to the Jurisdiction of the… Read more

any response to my admissions and denials?

1. Do you admit that a Union state Citizen is a “nonresident alien” for the purposes of the Federal Income Tax?

ABSOLUTELY, Famguardian and sedm are 100% the best information regarding statutory citizenship and all of the laws regarding that. The ONLY issue I have is that I think Congress is not above writing tricky Amendments…look at the… Read more

You said:

“Can a 14th Amendment citizen have the same status as a Union state Citizen? Absolutely . . . if you are referring to a 14th Amendment citizen that IS a Union state Citizen.”

This is incorrect. The proof is in the pudding, a 14th Amendment citizen RELIES on amendments to the Constitution for the privilege [appearing as a right]… Read more

with regard to B
I don't depend on my 14th Amendment citizenship when I travel overseas, I depend on my Article IV, Sec 2, clause 1 Citizenship:

Clause 1: “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”

I owe allegiance to my state, which is a member of the Union of… Read more

A) You said:

“Remember though, within the context of the 14th Amendment they are talking about POLITICAL JURISDICTION because they are talking about NATIONALITY. It cannot be LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION because in a Federal Government, POLITICAL JURISDICTION and LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION are two mutually exclusive things — there is… Read more

Neo,
The reason for denying the 14th Amendment citizenship, is because

A: WE DONT KNOW if the 14th Amendment is the stepping stone for the statutory citizenship. I have shown that the State Department uses the 14th Amendment, and Wong Kim Ark, as its footing for statutory citizenship:

Quote:
Pursuant to this ruling: [Wong Kim Ark] … Read more

Exactly, this is PROOF that Capitalization is used to distinguish between two different things.

One of the most amazing examples of this is in the California Revenue and Taxation code. The numbers are SOOOOO similar, and the wording is also similar, but devastatingly different meanings:

6017

“In this State” or “in the State” means within… Read more

Now you are being unfair…your “admissions” were added AFTER I responded!!

Secondly, I dont care if you lock this forum. As usual, I need to go back and re-read your posts to see all of the extras you add AFTER you “Add Reply”, so I will do just that:

Quote:
“It would be the vainest show of learning to attempt to prove by citations… Read more

1. you said:
“Fourteenth Amendment section 5 creates a CONSTITUTIONAL right that is not a Congressionally created right, to sue state officers in a federal court for a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and due process.”

Rights arent created! The reason the 14th had this provision, was to explicitly declare that the… Read more

Read THIS carefully!!

I agree with Neo here…for example:

Quote:
It's a beautiful scheme. I actually enjoy it for what it is — it's friggin' brilliant. Don't fight the Government or paint yourself as a conspiracy theorist. Simply use the distinction to establish context, and always discriminate between being a NATIONAL “citizen” which may… Read more

First to Admin:

Your “find law” source is not as reliable as gpo.gov with regard to what the feds have established.
see:
http://www.gpoaccess…tml/amdt14.html

And see page 7 (pg. 1671) vs 370 (pg. 2034)
http://www.gpoaccess…pdf2002/032.pdf

Also check the capitalization of “Citizen” in the 11th Amendment.

Secondly, I wasnt referring to… Read more

This idea still does not address the Careful use of a lowercase “c”, nor the cases providing that the 14th Amendment “created” a “new class” of citizen. An alternative to Neo's theory is:

1. “United States” throughout the Constitution DOES include only the “States of the Union”, but congress [and the courts] considers “Incorporated… Read more

With regard to your #4…

If someone gets a job sweeping floors, and uses the Social Security number on his W-4, is he acting in an “official capacity” every time he is at work?

Furthermore, it seems like the mere fact that he is eligible to eventually receive benefits under Social Security, that he is “Federal Personnel” according to USC… Read more

2. Is it “We, the people of the United States” or “We the People of the United States”
http://www.gpoaccess…html/pream.html
or
http://memory.loc.go…t(bdsdccc0801))

You dont think Capitalization is important, what about punctuation? This supports the two Constitutions theory.

3. I agree with your number 3, BUT I think the 14th… Read more

1. I wrote:
“ONLY the Incorporated territories, which exclude America Samoa and the Swains Islands [and others], are “in the United States”
perhaps I should have been more clear.

2. Why do you think that: “Statutory citizenship requires domicile on federal territory” and not just “residency”?
The IRS at usc Title 26, 7701 (39) makes those… Read more

Good stuff! all of this is Very interesting to me!

This is the ONLY thing that has supported my case along the way, is that “incorporated Territories” are “in the United States”, therefore, the phrase “born in the United States” changes from simply being born in one of the states and subject to the STATE jurisdiction: to Born anywhere in… Read more

1)
http://caselaw.lp.fi…04/17.html#t318
Territories: Powers of Congress Thereover

In the territories, Congress has the entire dominion and sovereignty, national and local, and has full legislative power over all subjects upon which a state legislature might act. 313 It may legislate directly with respect to the local affairs of a territory… Read more

I would be curious to get Admins thoughts on this translation:

“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of… Read more

1.
You are correct, it is the dissenting opinion, I forgot to Include the Case he referenced:

Quote:
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that

“all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,”

and this Court naturally held, in… Read more

Im not sure how much clearer this can be:

Quote:
Taking the words [“throughout the United States”] in their natural meaning — in the sense in which they are frequently and commonly used — no reason is perceived for disagreeing with the Chief Justice in the view that they were used in this clause [Clause 7 of sec. 9 of Article I] to designate… Read more

1.

Quote:
Thus it was, at the adoption of the Constitution, the United States, as a geographical unit and as a governmental conception both in the international and domestic sense, consisted not only of states, but also of territories, all the native white inhabitants being endowed with citizenship, protected by pledges of a common union,… Read more

When you wrote:

“3. The quote from Downes about territories being within the United States is NOT compatible with the majority opinion in Downes. It is a dissenting opinion. In Downes, as I have already pointed out, Puerto Rico was ruled as NOT being within the “United States” within the meaning of the revenue clausues of the… Read more

1. You must clarify your previous position then, you wrote:

Quote:
4. We can and already have determined why “subject to THE jurisdiction” was used in the Fourteenth Amendment rather than subject to THEIR jurisdiction. It is because it covers BOTH the states of the Union and federal territories, which share together “nationality” and… Read more

OK, I have done my research, and I now have proof that “United States” (in a geographical sense) as used in the Constitution is not restrictive to the states of the Union:
http://www.law.virgi…ion07/first.pdf (all cites therein)

Quote:
While addressing the citizenship implications of the incorporation doctrine, several scholars have… Read more

Let me suck your tit one more time then, because I don't comprehend this phraseology:

“from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof”

Subject to the jurisdiction of what? United States seems to be a geographical sense, yet the jurisdiction line seems to make it a federal government sense.

Is it, “from the… Read more

What are you going to give back in return?

Im sorry, Im really trying to troubleshoot this to death!! Is “United States” below the states of the Union, the Government, or the states and federal zones?

Quote:
Amendment XVIII (1919)

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation… Read more

Really??

“In all Territory of the United States lying north of 36* 30', and not included within the limits of any existing states”

or

“No more territory should ever be acquired to be owned by the United States or to be governed by Congress;”

YOU think “United States” in these two examples means “states of the Union”?

We agree that… Read more