Does our government still represent and serve State Citizens???


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on August 19, 1998 at 15:32:31:

In Reply to: Does our governmet still represent and serve State Citizens??? posted by Shane Hanson on August 02, 1998 at 22:10:27:

Good question!

The Qualifications Clauses specify state Citizens,
and only state Citizens. See 1:2:2 and 1:3:3,
in chief.

The juror and voter qualification statutes
specify federal citizens, both at the state AND
at the federal levels.

Therefore, those who are now eligible to vote
on grand and petit juries, cannot lawfully serve
in the U.S. House of Representatives, or Senate,
or in the White House.

Moreover, those who are now eligible to serve
in the U.S. House of Representatives, or Senate,
cannot serve on grand or petit juries.

If you can make law, you can't serve on a jury;
if you can serve on a jury, you can't make law.

The PETITION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ENLARGED BRIEF
in U.S.A v. Gilbertson, in the Supreme Law
Library, goes into great detail on this point.

See also Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF for a
rather elaborate discussion of a method to
redress this crisis, under existing judicial
rules.

If the 14th amendment had been lawfully ratified,
then federal citizens, residing within the
several states, would automatically be state
citizens as well. As such, they would all be
eligible for the House, Senate, and White House.

Nevertheless, state Citizens are presently NOT
permitted to serve on grand or petit juries.
This is particularly the case for state Citizens
who are not federal citizens, by Right of Election
(read "freedom of choice").

Whether or not the 14th amendment was ratified
lawfully, the courts which adjudicated that
proposal have held that one may be a state Citizen
without also being a federal citizen. Without
the 14th amendment, there is no constitutional
authority for the proposition that a federal
citizen is automatically a Citizen of the state
in which s/he resides. See Dyett v. Turner
for judicial, and Congressional, authority.

See Alla v. Kornfeld, discussed elsewhere in this
forum, for a pivotal authority on this question,
namely: federal citizens were NOT contemplated
when the organic U.S. Constitution was first
enacted into law. This case proves that there
are now two (2) classes of citizenship in America.

So, it IS correct to infer that state Citizens
are NOT even represented by the state or federal
governments, at the present time.

This is yet another reason why state Citizens
should boycott the federal income tax: it is
a tax upon those same Citizens without lawful
representation.

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION was a proud
rallying crowd during the Revolutionary War.


Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

Counselor at Law, Private Attorney General,
Citizen of Arizona state




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]