Admin, What you refer to as ‘my presumptions’ are factual statements based in reality and supported by the law and court opinions.  Thus if you DISAGREE, you CARRY the burden of proof, not reality and facts. 

Your have the burden of proof.  Prove with evidence that: 1.  You can have a civil STATUTORY status without a federal domicile. I am…

Read more

Admin,
 
As usual, my responses are in red faced font–the commie font. 
 

1.  Even those in receipt of a CONSTITUTIONAL franchise and therefore POLITICAL privilege such as voting don’t automatically acquire a CIVIL status under federal law by doing so.  They have to accept a STATUTORY franchise and have a domicile on federal territory…

Read more

Admin,
 
I will explain it to you as easily and simply as possible.  
 

If you think possessions are not legislatively foreign, then why are:
 
They are NOT legislatively foreign because they are included in the definition of States in 4 USC 110, BUT they ARE constitutionally foreign to Article I legislative powers extending over the United…

Read more

Admin, I think you are wrong and i am going to explain why and prove it with quotes.  My corrections of your assumptions are in red faced ink.  

ANSWERS: 1.  District courts cannot act under Article III except against constitutions states or constitutional citizens.  They can only do what legislation expressly authorizes in respect to a…

Read more

Admin,
 
Section 28 USC 1332(d)(5) says:
 

(5) Paragraphs (2) through (4) shall not apply to any class action in which—
(A) the primary defendants are States, State officials, or other governmental entities against whom the district court may be foreclosed from ordering relief; or

 
 
Questions:
 
1. In what instance would a federal… Read more

2. Here is an example of voting, which is a constitutional franchise privilege, being identified as a franchise.
 

“Long ago in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370, 6 S.Ct. 1064, 1071, 30 L.Ed. 220 the Court referred to ‘the political franchise of voting’ as a ‘fundamental political right, because preservative of all rights.’ Recently in…

Read more

So a state citizen would have to accept a federal public right/office to vote in federal elections right?
So he has to accept the u.s. citizen status right? I agree and that is my whole point with this dual sovereign character. He can’t vote as a state citizen or NRA or can he?

Admin,
 
You are beyond wrong.
 

3.1.1 Constitutional franchises all relate to humans.
3.1.2 Statutory franchises all relate to public offices.

 
Nothing in the constitution is a constitutional franchise of private rights.  Where do you allege the evidence for this FRIVOLOUS claim is?
 
The constitution is a delegation/conferral of powers to… Read more

RESPONSES:
1. Post 3:
1.1 STATEMENT: Second, the United States in 26 USC 7701 is the constitutional United States because IRC is promulgated on Congress Art. I:8:1 constitutional authority thus IT CAN ONLY be the constitutional United States.
REBUTTAL: FALSE. Produce the EXPRESS inclusion of the constitutional states in the GEOGRAPHICAL…

Read more

Admin said more of the same:

4. Statutes such as 28 USC 1332 would be invoked for a tax case because they deal ONLY with public rights and franchises. Constitutional diversity in Article III Section 2 deals with PRIVATE rights and would be invoked only when both parties are PRIVATE non-corporate entities.
5. There may only be ONE truth, but…

Read more

Admin said:

NOTES:
1. The “United States” found in 26 USC 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) is different than that which is the subject above. This issue did NOT deal with a tax issue and therefore presumes the constitutional U.S.
2. 28 USC 1332 and Article III, Section 2 do not deal with the same geography because the “State” in 28 U.S.C. 1332(e) is not…

Read more

This is just one example you reference here where courts explain that NRA can bring suits in federal courts under Article III. This shows three things:
1. Article III courts are district courts empower under law promulgated under Art. III;
2. NRA can bring suits in federal courts;
3. NRA referred to in this decision are of… Read more

Admin,You overwhelm with useless or moot points. There’s no need to address them.For example, counterfeiting FRN’s is a legislated crime under Article I and not a real crime against private rights such as murder or theft, thus Mookini is IRRELEVANT man.Also I did not avoid the question about citizenship, I simply found it irrelevant and moot.… Read more

Yes, I agree that it’s pointless.  It is pointless because:
 
1. You live in fantasy land.
2. No court opinion supports what you allege.
3. The court opinions you quote EITHER are not relative to the argument at hand OR plainly support the truth when read as a whole.
 
Take this made up and blatantly frivolous conclusion of… Read more

Dude where did I say that the united states nation is only the 50 states?? I explicitly included D.C. and territorial possessions…don’t make me quote it to prove it.
Now….these are three distinct geographical locations comprising the geography of United States:
1. the 50 states; and
2. D.C.; and
3. territorial possessions.
WE AGREED ON THIS… Read more

Oh but you are confused. You are making a distinction between 1. and 4. when there isn’t one.
The United States is NOT a body politic comprised of state citizens their governments and their geography. Instead, it is comprised of state citizens who granted their federal govt explicit powers or sovereignty over their geography, as well as… Read more

Theoretical mass..?
1. Is United States nation-union a political association/body of state citizens conferring powers to a national government over their geography?
2. I thought we agreed that the Uniter States geographically is comprised of: above in 1,D.C., and territorial possessions, did you change your mind?
If you agree with the above… Read more

Answer 2. It is to delineate the geography where the constitutional consent for such subject matter legislation extends over–the 50 states only. Which is why D.C. is explicitly included.
I am not conflating anything. One cannot be a civil citizen without 1) being a political citizen and 2) maintaining a domicile within the civil… Read more

R#1.1. The statutes clearly include states in every definition of the united states. This ministry is of the opinion that the states referred are the federal states, but Article I legislation deals with powers the states conferred to Congress, thus the only states it can include by default is the same states that granted them the powers.… Read more

Neo, We accepted the following facts: 1. The state is a political association of people into one republican government sovereign over its geography.2. The United States nation-union is a political association of states’ people into one national government sovereign in powers delegated to it over the union’s geography constituted in part by the… Read more

 Admin said:
 

BURDEN OF PROOF UPON STIJA:
 
Thanks to both of you for your passionate contribution so far.  Since Stija is the moving party, he has the burden of proof.  I agree with everything Neo said so far.  The only thing Stija has offered are theories.  This dialog has been remarkably sparse on facts and there is too much THEORY that…

Read more

Political association plus domicile commute a civil status.  Both political status and domicile are YOUR elections, but civil status is not an election but a LEGAL CONSEQUENCE of your other TWO ELECTIONS: domicile AND political affiliation.  You can elect your domicile in Alabama, no one is arguing that.  And when you elect your political… Read more

One fairly can dispute whether our federalist system has been quite as successful in checking government abuse as Hamilton promised, but there is no doubt about the design. If this “double security” is to be effective, there must be a proper balance between the States and the Federal Government. These twin powers will act as mutual…

Read more

Let me make something clear to you all.
 
1. No one is claiming that an individual domiciled in AZ is a state resident and a federal resident.  SUCH AS IN IMPOSSIBILITY.  
2. No one is claiming that Article I legislative rights are operative territorially.  Article I:8 is SUBJECT MATTER regulation, cl. 17 notwithstanding.
 
If it is SUBJECT… Read more

Admin, 
 
i was going to answer your post but then i realized that that would be giving it merit it doesn’t deserve.  You have not supported one of your statements with a legal reference or court cite, yet you claim this:
 

Thanks to both of you for your passionate contribution so far.  In conclusion, I agree with everything Neo said so…

Read more

The easiest and most lucid way i can explain this is using the definition of a “state” from Texas v. White, which is a people and their government exercising jurisdiction or authority over a delineated geographical territory.  Now for anyone that can get that concept and understand it clearly, the next step should come as no surprise.
 
Now… Read more

Civil citizenship is something other than political citizenship. Allegiance and political association are separate issues from that of domicile. Political associations and civil associations relate to political bodies and geography respectively. They are separate issues.

 
We exist in two political capacities: first as state citizens and… Read more

It does contain the people, of course. That’s a given man…we are discussing/focusing on geography.I guess the question to you then is do you concede you exist as a united states citizen? And do you concede that the United States nation as a body politic is its citizenry (all state citizens), its geography (all states) and their… Read more

I think territorial sovereignty is a separate issue to that of subject matter sovereignty.

 
Yes it is.  United States exercises territorial sovereignty over the nation-union man.  We’ve went over that.  This nation-union is: D.C., the states, and the territories an possessions.  Over the three distinct geographical locations, the United… Read more

Go to page 35 (of the statutes) — page 59 on the pdf, and read about the retro-cession of Alexandria County from D.C. back to the State of Virginia.  Notice what it says about sovereignty over the territory.

 
Cession of territory to the United States is pursuant to clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I of the U.S. Constitution.  Such cession… Read more

But Stija, the issue is territorial sovereignty — not subject matter sovereignty.

 
Which issue?  The issue is dependent on the context of the question.
 
1. If the issue is a matter of state rights and sovereignty, then you are territorially their resident/domiciliary.
2. If the issue is a matter of national rights and United States… Read more

I disagree.  Sovereignty is NOT shared — it is split.  You are either sovereign or you are not.
 
Why is it that the Feds must have land ceded to them from the State legislatures per I:8:17?  I will tell you why.  It is because the states exercise sovereignty over their own respective territory UNTIL ceded, then the United States exercises…

Read more

I still believe you are confusing or conflating the Article I:8:17 exclusive power over D.C. with other delegated powers in cl. 1-16 and 18.  The cl. 17 power means that United States is the ONLY sovereign to have legislative jurisdiction within D.C.–nothing more.  The other clauses delegate powers to the United States over the nation-union… Read more

Stija, Do you believe that sovereignty is absolute?  Or is it shared?

 In American Jurisprudence it MOST CERTAINLY is shared between two sovereigns, thus the dual sovereignty doctrine and our dual political and civil capacities. United States v. Butler 297 US 1 quote says it the best: 

Each State has all governmental powers save such as the…

Read more

If you agree with the above, which we already agreed on within this thread, what geography are Article I:8 legislative powers operative over WITHOUT need for any additional consents of other sovereigns?
Choices:
1. The 50 states;
2. D.C.;
3. Territories and possessions.
Pick what you believe the correct answer is please.

How does my theory conflate body politic with geography? There are TWO political sovereigns, and two geographical territories they operate on. The first is a state and its geography, the second is the United States with its geography of 50 states united to form it.
Do you agree or disagree that the United States nation is comprised… Read more

Political citizens exist in dual capacities just like the dual sovereigns governing over theif affairs with respect to powers/subjects granted to each of them. Each political capacity confers a civil capacity through which one interfaces with each of the two governments within their respective spheres. Thus, when one interfaces with the… Read more

Dude…The nation-union is a body politic, just like states, but national and comprised of people of the states, their state geography and the national government conferred legislative powers in Article I.Are you suggesting that the United States nation is territoriless?? We already accepted the factual evidence/testimony that it comprises… Read more

Through your domicile man, but wrt to Art. I:8:1 legislation you are domiciled in the (constitutional) United States by being in one of the states forming such union.
With respect to state matters you are within that state only, your domicile within the union-nation being irrelevant to state affairs only.
SS and IRC are national… Read more

I am not having it both ways.
If state citizens do not involve themselves in any rights legislated undee Art. I:8 then they can sue each other under the diversity of citizenship so long as the requirements are met, per Art. III:2.
If, however, the same state citizens involve themselves with matters legislated under Art. I:8 then they interact… Read more

I guess another way of approaching this, from a strict territorial perpective is that there are three different ‘types’ of territory within the United States:
1. The United States as 50 states united–Art. I:8 legislative sovereignty extending over it (except cl. 17)
2. D.C. (and other lands)–Art. I:8:17 sovereignty extending over… Read more

The establishment of my civil status is a local affair — a reality inherent through the privileges and immunities of residual state sovereignty. That is, as a State Citizen, I determine my civil status under the laws of the United States. In this particular instance, it is the SS franchise and its related income tax.

For all matters of… Read more

I:8:17 does NOT just apply to D.C. It applies EVERYWHERE on the planet. Think military bases and embassies.

Yes. See above post.

Your position does not seem to be consistent with SCOTUS opinion nor the words I personally received from one of the Justices on the topic.

My position is 100% consistent with SCOTUS opinions. But it’s possible you’re missunderstanding the Hooven and Allison opinions wrt sovereignty of United States over its territorial geography and how… Read more

Look at what you said. “With the consent of the sovereign authority presiding over the territory.” You just made my point. If there is not I:8 subject matter in question, then the United States is NOT the sovereign presiding over the territory –it remains with the states.

I never alleged otherwise.
But wrt to Art. I legislation U.S. is… Read more

Territory? Those geographies embraced by I:8:17 & IV:3:2….NO PLACE else.

See…you’re confusing EXCLUSIVE and TERRITORIAL legislative authority with SUBJECT MATTER legislation authority.1. Exclusive means all.2. Territorial means proprietary, constitutional restrictions notwithstanding.3. Subject matter means only authority over… Read more

Yes…in China, BiH, anywhere really with consent of the sovereign authority presiding over tbe territory.
But over here, domestically, WHICH sovereigns (people, govt and land) have already expressly granted/conferred such subject jurisdiction over their geography?

Yes. So WHICH territory does U.S. exercise it’s Art I:8 powers over? (with constitutional permission/delegation expressly given already)

Can the United States exercise sovereignty everywhere within the nation? Yes . . . when those 17 conferred powers are at issue. But this is not a question of LOCATION . . . this is a question of the conferral of power. Do you not agree? Where? and What? are separate issues. Do you not agree?

The what is exercised where? Within the nation-union.… Read more

Yes…residual sovereignty is the 93 powers left, 17 having been conferred.