Re: An old tax forum, here you will find a lot of what you are looking for.


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

Posted by continued on September 08, 1998 at 07:52:12:

In Reply to: Re: An old tax forum, here you will find a lot of what you are looking for. posted by continued on September 08, 1998 at 07:44:03:

is mandatory for My tax
that we are liable for; however, >the government has remained silent in
telling us who is liable for >the tax. Thus, even after reading the
government's official notices >under the Privacy Act and Paperwork
Reduction Act, we still do not >know if an income tax return is required of
us. In my opinion, by >maintaining silence on this central issue, the
government has not >complied with either the spirit or the letter of the
law of the two.Acts. >This opinion is shared by courts as well: >
>"`Silence' is species of conduct, and constitutes an implied
>representation of the existence of facts in question... When >silence is
of such character and under such circumstances that it >would become a
fraud...it will operate as an estoppel."Carmine v.Bowen 64 AT. 932 . >
>Since the government has not told you whether you are required to >file an
income tax return, you have asked me to research this >matter. Since you
must be a "person liable" to be a "person >required", lets address this
issue. > > > >The right to tax comes from the United States Constitution,
the >supreme law of the land, which authorizes the federal government to
>impose two broad categories of taxes: direct taxes under Article I,
>Section 2 and Article I, Section 9, and indirect taxes under >Article I,
Section 8. Direct taxes are required to be apportioned >among the states,
while indirect taxes must be uniform throughout >the United States. >
>Briefly, a direct tax is a tax on an ownership interest which the >owner
cannot pass on, while an indirect tax is on an event where >the transaction
and the impact of the tax can be passed on, in >whole or in part, to
others. >In order for a tax to fall into the indirect tax category the
>individual liable for the tax cannot be the ultimate, final >consumer.
This is so since the one paying the tax can then add it >on to the price of
the thing being taxed and recover it (pass it >on) when it is sold. The
ultimate, final consumer would have no way >to recover (pass on) the tax,
so any tax which the ultimate, finalconsumer is liable for would be a
direct tax based on an ownership >interest. > >"The Sixteenth Amendment
does not extend the power of taxation to >new or excepted subjects Pack v
Lowe, 247 U.S. 165. "The Sixteenth >Amendment conferred no new power of
taxation Stanton v Baltic >Mining Co., 240 US. 103, at 112. > >"The
individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the >mere privilege
of existing., The corporation is an artificial entity >which owes its
existence in charter powers to the State, but the >individual's right to
live and own property are natural Rights for >which an excise cannot be
imposed."Redfield v Fisher, 292 P.813, at >819. > >"Neither can the tax be
sustained on the [natural] person, measured >by income. >Such a tax would
be, by nature, a capitation rather than an excise." >Peck v Lowe, 247 US.
165. (emphasis added). > >"Income has been taken to mean the same thing as
used in the >Corporate excise Tax of 1909 (36 Stat. 112). The individual
worker >does not receive a profit or gain from his/her labors - merely an
>equal exchange of funds for services. "Brushaber v. Union Pacific >R.R..
240 US. 1, l7,36S.CT.236,24t. > >"The taxpayer must be liable for the tax.
Tax liability is a >condition precedent to the demand. Merely demanding
payment, even >repeatedly, does not cause liability" Bothke v. Terry, 713
F. 2d >1405, at 1414(1983). > >"The Treasury Department cannot, by
interpretive regulations, make >income of that which is not income within
the meaning of the revenue >acts of Congress, nor can Congress, without
apportionment, tax as >income that which is not income within the meaning
of the Sixteenth >Amendment."Helvering v. Edison Bros. Stores, 133 F.2d
575. > >Also, please note the voluntary nature of Social Security or the
use >of the W-4? The only place in the code that addresses the Social
>Security issue is in Title 26 U.S.C. subtitle C, chapter 21 (Social
>Security Tax Act) of the Internal Revenue Code starting in >subchapter A.
Subtitle C includes sections 3101 through 3510 of >Title 26 U.S.C.. > >
>The first issue is whether subtitle C is relative / jurisdictional >to
you. >To make this determination please note in Subtitle C at subchapter
>c, 73121, which has specific definitions which relate to Social >Security.
In this jurisdictional section at 3121(e) State, United >States and citizen
reads as follows: > >3121(e) State, United States, And Citizen > >For
purposes of this chapter- > >3121(e)(l) State > >The term `State" includes
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth >of Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. > >3121(e)(2) United States > >The term
`United States" when used in a geographical sense includes >the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and >American Samoa.
> >An individual who is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico >(but
not otherwise a citizen of the United States) shall be >considered, for
purposes of this section, as a citizen of the >United States. > >The
jurisdiction in this section is very specific as you can see. >Because
there is no section that makes it mandatory in the 50 Union >States it must
be voluntary for citizens in these States. >To better understand these
provisions, and the different >jurisdictions, you have to understand that
Congress creates laws >for TWO distinct and separate jurisdictions: > >1)
Washington, D.C., enclaves in the 50 states (i.e.: land that has >been
ceded by the State to the federal government), and the >territories and
possessions, such as Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, >Guam, etc. > >2) The 50
states. > >The principal difference in the jurisdictions is that the
>Constitution of the United States of America has to be strictly >adhered
to in making laws >that affect the 50 states. However in Washington, D.C.,
enclaves and >territories, Congress has EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction, which means
they >can make any law they want to; The Constitution is not considered.
>(Article 1, Section 8 U.S. Const). See also CAHA v U.S. 152 U.S. >211:
>The laws of Congress in respect to those matters (outside of
>Constitutionally delegated powers) do not extend into the >territorial
limits of the states, but have force only in the >District of Columbia, and
other places that are within the exclusive >jurisdiction of the national
government." > >DOWNES v. BIDWELL 182 U.S. 244 is also very explicit:
>"Constitutional restrictions and limitations were not applicable to >the
area of lands, enclaves, territories and possessions over which >Congress
had exclusive legislative authority." > > >The Supreme Court has ruled
consistently on this issue ever since >America's inception. In fact, the
latest case was U.S. v. LOPEZ 115 >5. CT. 1624 (1995). The Court ruled a
law applicable in Washington, >D.C. was not applicable in San Antonio,
Texas, because it did not >conform to Constitutional restrictions. > >Since
an income tax is a tax on income created by a transaction >which is (and
must be) directly associated with, or effectively >connected with, some
particular type of revenue-taxable "privileged" >activity [i.e. alcohol,
firearms, tobacco, or other privileged >activity or excise], the Internal
Revenue Code and its implementing >and controlling federal regulations must
specify the particular >type or kind of tax arising from a revenue-taxable,
privileged >activity that makes one a "person liable" or "made liable". For
>example, Internal Revenue Code Section 5005 establishes that >liability
for the tax on distilled spirits is placed on the >distiller or the
importer. Section 5043 places the liability for >the tax, from wine, on the
proprietor of the bonded wine cellar or >on the importer. Section 5703
places the liability for the tax on >cigars and cigarettes on the
manufacturer or importer. Also, to be >classified as an indirect tax, the
individual liable for the tax >must not be the ultimate, final consumer.In
support of this, took >at some closely related taxes. Section 2502(c)
establishes liability >for the gift tax on the donor, the one giving the
gift, not the >donee, the one receiving the gift. > >Section 2002
establishes liability for the estate tax on the >executor, not on the
inheritors receiving the property. "Section >2002, liability for payment.
The tax imposed by this chapter shall >be paid by the executor." > >Since
you must be liable for an income tax on your own income, >neither section
6001 nor section 6011 require you to file an income >tax return. >However,
I want to continue and discuss 6012, which is the section >many believe
require income tax returns be filed. > >SECTION 6012. Persons required to
make returns of income > >(a)General rule -- Returns with respect to income
taxes under >subtitle A shall be made by the following: >(1 )(A) Every
individual having for the taxable year gross income >which equals or
exceeds the exemption amount, except that a return >shall not be required
of an individual-- >(i) who is not mauled (determined by applying section
7703), is not >a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a)), is not a
head of a >household (as defined in section 2(b)), and for the taxable year
has >gross income of less than the sum of the exemption amount plus the
>basic standard deduction applicable to such an individual, (ii) Who >is a
head of a household (as so defined) and for the taxable year >has gross
income of less than the sum of the exemption amount plus >the basic
standard deduction applicable to such an individual, >(iii) who is a
surviving spouse (as so defined) and for the taxable >year has gross income
of less than the stun of the exemption amount >plus the basic standard
deduction applicable to such an individual, >or (iv) Who is entitled to
make a joint return and whose gross >income, when combined with the gross
income of his spouse, is, for >the taxable year, less than the sum of twice
the exemption amount >plus the basic standard deduction applicable to a
joint return, but >only if such individual and his spouse, at the close of
the taxable >year, had the same household as their home. > >To determine
who must make returns lets see what type of taxes can >be assessed, by whom
and for what classification of tax. For this >we must go to Section 6201
Assessment Authority, which reads as >follows: > >Sec. 6201. Assessment
Authority > >6201(a) Authority Of Secretary > >The Secretary is authorized
and required to make the inquiries, >determinations, and assessments of all
taxes (including interest, >additional amounts, additions to the tax, and
assessable penalties) >imposed by this title, or accruing under any former
internalrevenue law, which have not been duty paid by stamp at the time and
>in the manner provided by law. >Such authority shall extend to and include
the following: > >6201(a)(l) Taxes Shown On Return > >The Secretary shall
assess all taxes determined by the taxpayer or >by the Secretary as to
which returns or lists are made under this >title. > >6201 (a)(2) Unpaid
Taxes Payable By Stamp > >Title 26 U.S.C. =A76201 gives the secretary the
authority to assess >taxes not duly paid by stamp or by the individual who
has assessed >himself, ie: >voluntary tax. Stamp taxes are associated with
subtitle E of the >Internal Revenue Code Title 26 or Title 27. Ie: Alcohol,
Tobacco >and Firearms. >Here, again, you have to determine what activity
you are involved >in and does this activity pay taxes by stamp. > >The
First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States >protects the
freedom of speech and of the press. The freedom to >speak, you must
understand, also involves the freedom not to speak. >If you do not have the
right not to speak, (i.e.-- if the government >could compel you to speak)
then you have no freedom of speech. >Since this right extends to printed
and written materials, you have >a First Amendment Right not to fill out
government forms and not to >give the government information. > >The Fourth
Amendment of the Constitution of the United States >protects your privacy.
You have a Fourth Amendment Right to keep >your personal financial affairs
private, and not to voluntarily >give that information to the government.
The Fourth Amendment >provides that if the government wants to examine your
books and >records, a court order must be obtained. The mailing of a tax
form >along with instructions on how to complete it is not, for fourth
>Amendment purposes, a valid order compelling a response. > >The Fifth
Amendment of the Constitution of the United States >protects you as well,
stating: > >"No person shall ..be compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness >against himself" > >The fifth amendment seems to apply only to
criminal matters, hut the >Supreme Court ruled in McCarthy v. Arndstein,
266 US. 34, that the >fifth amendment "applies alike to criminal and civil
proceedings." >Similar rulings have stated; > >"There can be no question
that one who files a return under oath is >a witness within the meaning of
the Amendment. Sullivan v. United >States, 15 46. 2nd 809, and > >'The
information revealed in the preparation and filing of an income >tax return
is, for Fifth Amendment analysis. "the testimony of a >"witness" as that
term is used herein.' Garner v. United States, >424 US. 648. > >Since you
can't be compelled to be a witness against yourself, and >since the Supreme
Court has twice held that the filing of an income >tax return is an act of
being a witness against one's self, it >follows that any statute compelling
the filing of an income tax >return would violate the protections of the
Fifth Amendment. > >The effect of the government's actions has been noted
by the Supreme >Court: > >"Because of what appears to be a lawful command
on the surface, many >citizens, because of their respect for what only
appears to be law, >are cunningly coerced into waving their rights due to
ignorance." >U.S. v. Minker, 350 US. 179, at 187. > >Section 6012,
moreover, specifies a condition that must be met >before the income tax
return "shall be made". The individual has to >have "for the taxable year a
gross income of the exemption amount >or more". Based on the following code
sections, I will show you >where no individual has any item of' gross
income that is >includable: > >First, look at the definition of "taxable
year": > >7701 (a) (23) Taxable year. -- The term "taxable year" means the
>calendar year, or the fiscal year ending during such calendar year, >upon
the basis of which the taxable income is computed under >subtitle A.
"Taxable year" means, in the case of a return made for >a fractional part
of a year under the provisions of subtitle A or >under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary, the period for which >such return is made.
(Section 441 (b) also defines Taxable year: >For purposes of this subtitle,
the term "taxable year" >means --(l) >"the taxpayer's annual accounting
period"). > >The definition of' "taxable year" is important since the law
>requires that taxable income is to be computed on the basis of a >taxable
year: > >"Section 441(a) COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE INCOME--- Taxable income
>shall be computed on the basis of the taxpayer's taxable year." > > >
>Now, let us took at the definition of "taxpayer' and `person": > >Section
770l(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise >distinctly expressed
or manifestly incompatible with the intent >thereof-- > >(14) TAXPAYER
--The term "taxpayer" means any person subject to any >internal revenue
tax. > >(1) Person--The term "person" shall he construed to mean and
include >an individual, a trust, estate, partnership. association, company
>or corporation. [Which is only an artificial, not a natural, person >/
human being.] > >So, by substituting the term "person subject to any
internal revenue >tax" for the term "taxpayer" in section 441(a), the
section requires > the tax to be computed on the basis of the taxable year
of the >person subject to the income tax, Using the same substitution as
>above, you find: > >"Section 451 (a) General rule. -- The amount of any
item of gross >income shall be included in the gross income for the taxable
year >in which received by the taxpayer, unless, under the method of
>accounting used in computing taxable income, such amount is to be
>properly accounted for as of a different period. > >The point is this:
Taxable income is required to be computed on the >basis of the taxable year
of the person subject to the income tax, >II the person does not have a
liability, he cannot have a taxable >year in which any amount can he
included, > >Based on all of the above, it is my professional opinion,
supported >by the Court in U.S. v, Flora, 362 US, 145. at 176, that the
filing >of an individual income tax return is voluntary Quoting the Court:
> >"Our system of taxation is based oil voluntary assessment and >payment,
not upon distraint." (U.S.. v. Flora, id. > >Also, by the testimony of Mr.
Avis in the Internal Revenue >Investigation. >Your income tax is 100
percent voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is >100 percent enforced tax.
Now, the situation is as different as >night and day." >(Exhibit A) > >You
may be asking yourself why is it that so many people file tax >returns each
year'? Let me give you a statement by Adolph Hitler, >"If you tell or
report a lie often enough and long enough people >will eventually believe
it." This is what has happened to the >people of lie United States of
America. Every year the IRS sends >millions of forms to people, along with
instructions, on how to >I'll them out. The people do not question the form
nor do they >determine if there is a liability, but just fill in the lines
and >send them back with whatever money the form requires. No one ever
>asks what law requires them to fill out this form and does it apply >to
them. > > >Furthermore, the Privacy Act Notice says that the government
must >tell you the effects, if any, of not filing the return. Until 1981,
>the Privacy Act Notice read as follows: `If a return is not filed, >or if
we don't receive the information we ask for, the law provides >that a
penalty may be charged (the "penalty" being a penalty for >filing and
paying the tax late). Since 1982, the Privacy Act Notice >has been revised,
reading: "If you do not file a return, do not >provide the information we
ask for, or provide fraudulent >information, the law provides that you may
be charged penalties and, >in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal
prosecution." No >mention was made in the previous Privacy Act Notice since
it only >referred to not filing a return or providing information. Added to
>the Privacy Act Notice in 1982 was a caution about "fraudulent
>information" and "in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal
>prosecution".Since it is true that filing a false or fraudulent >return is
a crime under Code sections 7206 and 7207, the "certaincases" referred to
in the later Privacy Act Notice are undoubtedly >cases where a false or
fraudulent return has been filed; however, >the Privacy Act Notice still
has not told us that not filing a >return is a punishable offense. > >If
you remember, at the outset of this letter I said that in order >for the
government to punish you for not filing an income tax >return, certain
elements must be present: they must first prove you >had "taxable income";
then, they must prove that income made you >"liable" for a tax; next, they
must prove that "liability" made you >a "required person", and lastly, that
you failed to file a "required >return", and if any one of these elements
cannot be proven, you >cannot be subject to punishment. The word
"willfully", when used in >a criminal statute, means an act done with a bad
purpose.Felton v. >United States, 96 US. 699: Potter v. United States, 155
US. 438: >Spurr v. United States, 174 US. 728, or without justifiable
>excuse.Felton v. United States, supra; Williams v. People, 26 Colo. >272,
57P. 701: P

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John In California

Date: 16-May-97

Tundra boy, to answer your question about California, Its expensive to live
here. the weather is great I live in the Serrias west side of the mts. just
below the snow level but I do get some snow not enough to really matter.
now for the question of get my money back from the state: I first confermed
my status as a soveriegn state citizen of California of these united
states, by affidavit of citizenship and recorder it. the sent copies to the
secartery of state, the Governer, my state representives and my US
congressman and Senators. then I reseached Californiatax law. I havent been
able to stop my employer from withholding So i filed a ZERO return with a
cover letter attach as an intergal part of my return "By Special
Appearance" then the text of my statement is as follows: I cited the
authority of California to tax, which included definations and court cases
the defined the meaning of terms. Also stated California statutes that the
people are soveriegn and do not give it up to are reprentives. Also I
pointed to California law that states: California Income Tax Title 22
4340-1, Federal conformity relies on Subtitle A of the Irc to determine if
an individule is subject to withholding at the source sec 4340-1(f) ao the
code. The requirements for the State are the same as federal requirements,
and futher must operate under the confines of the Public Salary Act of
1939, 53 statues at large, chapter 59, title 1 sec. 1 of this Act only
imposes the Income Tax on Government employees, and only emposes
withholding on government employees, Taxation code of California sec 17188
and sec 17118 fo the Administration Code of the State of California. Signed
under penalty of perjury USC 28 sec 1746 (1) without the United States. I
have recieved all funds withheld back from the state for two years, with no
hassle. I suggest you study your state laws on taxing Sovereign state
citizens of these united states and write letters for a determination of
your tax status.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TundraBoy
Date: 15-May-97

John In California I was wondering what logic you used to get your State
taxes back i'm trying to do the same in Michigan but haven't decided what
route to take. I'd appreciate it if you could post your letter to compare
yours which worked with some that i am considering which i believe are
theory. By the way how do you like living in California? I was considering
moving out there for two reasons #1 weather (It is now 40 degrees on May
15, in Michigan ), #2 it seems the patriot movement is big in California do
you think it is?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John In California

Date: 15-May-97

Freind and all interested parties, Just recieved my imf for 95 and 96. I
found some interesting codes(thanks freind for posting some of them from
the 6209 manual) My TC code has been chg from nothing to TC-148 HOLD is
P.and nothing in the CRINV, but futher down which I think is the TC code
has been chgd to 140-date-0.00 9706 94249-028-00000-6 from 150-date- 9419
29221-112-24973-4, the the next line there is another tc code 599-Date-9711
29249-464-01518-7. this was for the year 95 the date on the tc code is the
same date I sent a reply to the notice of failure to file code MF STAT-02
the last entry MF STAT-06 (acceptable reason for the non filing of a return
with a 0 balance. Freind do you know What those TC codes are? on my 96 imf
shows account balance 00.00 but says Return not present for this account.
Ididnt use a 1040 I made my own request for funds return since a 1040 is
not for Soveriegn state Citizens of thes united States. Also the State of
California returned ALL Funds withheld for 96. PS: the IRS still has my
money that was withheld by my employer for 95 +96 any suge4stion on how to
get it back. I have recinded my w4 but my employer will not honor it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John In California

Date: 15-May-97

Freind and all interested parties, Just recieved my imf for 95 and 96. I
found some interesting codes(thanks freind for posting some of them from
the 6209 manual) My TC code has been chg from nothing to TC-148 HOLD is
P.and nothing in the CRINV, but futher down which I think is the TC code
has been chgd to 140-date-0.00 9706 94249-028-00000-6 from 150-date- 9419
29221-112-24973-4, the the next line there is another tc code 599-Date-9711
29249-464-01518-7. this was for the year 95 the date on the tc code is the
same date I sent a reply to the notice of failure to file code MF STAT-02
the last entry MF STAT-06 (acceptable reason for the non filing of a return
with a 0 balance. Freind do you know What those TC codes are? on my 96 imf
shows account balance 00.00 but says Return not present for this account.
Ididnt use a 1040 I made my own request for funds return since a 1040 is
not for Soveriegn state Citizens of thes united States. Also the State of
California returned ALL Funds withheld for 96.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan2
Date: 10-May-97

Man oh man, that article makes you wonder if Dan Rather is one of the
recipients enumerated in the Acts by the IR? Puerto Rico Trust thing, I
have never heard of such scandalous behavior by our trusted electorate on
such a massive scale and that article was dated 1995-- I will forward a
copy to everyone I can find that cares or can learn to care.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: hyjack
Date: 09-May-97

AS always it is good to hear from the Friend. I look forward to digesting
the info. you just posted. I am waitng for my 6209 still. Need it to verify
( copy ) for my last letter. Fraud by any other name is still fraud.
Friend, thanks again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: A friend who's been there

Date: 09-May-97

PART 2

wagering, and coin-operated gambling and amusement machines; malfeasance
offenses committed by IRS personnel; forcible rescue of seized property;
corrupt or forcible interference with an officer or employee acting under
the internal revenue laws; and unauthorized mutilation, removal or misuse
of stamps. See 28 CFR S 0.70. "Act of Congress" We found this revelation in
28 USC Rule 54c, Application of Terms, "As used in these rules the
following terms have the designated meanings. 'Act of Congress' includes
any act of Congress locally applicable to and in force in the District of
Columbia, in Puerto Rico, in a territory or in an insular possession." It
is the Law 28 USC is the "Rules of Courts" and was written and approved by
the Justices of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in writing 28 USC has
already ruled upon this issue. It is the Law. Where is the Money? Where
does the money go that is paid into the IRS? It spends at least a year in
what is called a "quad zero" account under an Individual Master File, after
which time the Director of the IRS Center can apparently do whatever he
wants with the money. It is sometimes dispersed under Treasury Order 91
(Rev, 1), May 12, 1986 which is a service agreement between the IRS and the
Agency for International Development, AID. We Financed Soviet Weapons When
William Casey, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency during
Iran-Contra, was the head of AID he funneled hundreds of millions of
dollars to the Soviet Union which money was spent building the Kama River
Truck Factory, the largest military production facility for tanks, trucks,
armored personnel carriers, and other wheeled vehicles in the world. The
Kama River factory has a production capability larger than all of the
combined automobile and truck manufacturing plants in the United States.
IRS/AID Service Agreement The agreement states "Authority is hereby
delegated to the Assistant Commissioner International to develop and enter
into the service agreement between the Treasury Department and the Agency
for International Development. The Secretary of the Treasury is always
appointed U.S. Governor of the International Monetary Fund in accordance
with the international agreement that created the IMF. The Secretary of the
Treasury is paid by the IMF while serving as Governor. Agent of Foreign
Powers Lloyd Bentsen held the following positions at the same time he was
the Secretary of the Treasury: U.S. Governor of the International Monetary
Fund, U.S. Governor of the International Bank for Reconstruction and
development, U.S. Governor of the Inter-American Development Bank, U.S.
Governor of the African Development Bank, U.S. Governor of the Asian
Development Bank, U.S. Governor of the African Development Fund, and U.S.
Governor of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Mr.
Bentsen received a salary from each of these organizations which literally
made him an unregistered agent of several foreign powers. Citizen Vs
citizen By birth we are each a Citizen of the State of California, or a
Citizen of the State of Arizona, or a Citizen of whatever State wherein we
were born, and at the same time we are all Citizens of the united States of
America, and are not subject to Acts of Congress other than the 18 powers
specifically cited in the Constitution for the united States of America.
People who are born or who reside within the federal District of Columbia,
Guam, the U.



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 ]