Time: Wed May 07 13:29:28 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA19626;
	Wed, 7 May 1997 13:17:46 -0700 (MST)
	by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA17413;
	Wed, 7 May 1997 13:14:05 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 13:29:02 -0700
To: liberty-and-justice@pobox.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: The American Future

... and I frankly think it is time to overturn
the doctrine established by Downes v. Bidwell,
in which the Supreme Court held that the
Constitution of the United States, as such,
does not extend beyond the boundaries of the
states which are united by and under it.

As federal citizens (read "citizens of the United
States"), the People have unwittingly opted into
an association which subjects them to a government
which is not bound by the Constitution, pursuant
to the Downes Doctrine.  The solution is to repeal
the Downes Doctrine outright, by overturning
Downes v. Bidwell, and by re-establishing the principle
that the Constitution created Congress, and Congress
is bound by it, no matter where Congress may 
legislate, whether for the whole nation, or just
for the federal zone.  Happily, this challenge has
already been put on the table, in a federal court
in Arizona, but that judge opted instead to commit
112 felonies in that one case, including obstruction
of justice.  Details are all being made available to
clients of the Grand Jury Track, a special class of
the Supreme Law School.

So, the battle rages onwards.  

See Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901), plus
the Harvard Law Review articles which came right
after the decision: 
12 Harvard Law Review ("HLR"), 365, 371,
12 HLR 464, 
15 HLR 164, 
15 HLR 169, 281


/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com

p.s.  For seminal insight into Congress as the
"State" government for the federal zone, see
"The Two United States and the Law," in the
Supreme Law Library at the URL above.




At 11:08 AM 5/7/97 PST, you wrote:
>   <It is a matter of the PRINCIPLE first whoever states it. Since you do   
>    not recognize the principle I take it you think you have a right to     
>    keep other peoples/cultures in bondage, ie TAKE AWAY THEIR FREEDOM.>
>   
>   I don't care about other countries.  I only care about *this* country.
>   I want the Constitution of the United States to once again be the 
>   supreme law of the land.  After we take care of ourselves,  and my
>   son's future is secure,  THEN I'll worry about Zimbabe or Bolivia or 
>   Timbuktoo.
>   
>   How can I help others secure what I do not have?  Why should I?  Is
>   not my first duty to *my* self,  *my* family,  and *my* country?
>   
>   
>   
>   Cordially,
>   
>   
>   
>   Dan Terry
>   
>   
>   
>   
>   
>
>
>
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with
>"unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject)
>Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman <whig@pobox.com>
>
>

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail