SECTION
I
FEDERAL JURISDICTION
(AND FOREIGN CORPORATIONS)
"THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT IS A FOREIGN CORPORATION
WITH RESPECT TO A STATE"
1. It is relevant to this Affidavit that any violation of my
Rights, Freedom. or Property by the U.S. federal government, any
agency or agent thereof, would be an illegal and unlawful excess,
clearly outside of the limited boundaries of federal jurisdiction.
2. This Affiant is aware that the State of Connecticut operates
as a de facto federal State in its corporate capacity, (see
Section II) but it does not legitimately qualify as a federal
State as defined at 4 USC ( 110(d): The term `State' includes any
Territory or possession of the United States. Each of the fifty
State Republics is sovereign except for the eighteen powers
delegated to the United States by the U.S. Constitution (10th
Amendment).
3. The jurisdiction of the U.S. federal government is defined by
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution, quoted
as follows:
"The Congress shall have the Power . . . To exercise exclusive
Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (NOT
EXCEEDING TEN MILES SQUARE) as may, by Cession of particular
States and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of
Government of the United States [District of Columbia] and to
exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent
of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for
the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other
needful Buildings; And-To make all Laws which shall be necessary
and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, . .
." [Ephasis added]
And Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2:
"The Congress shall have the Power to dispose of and make all
needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other
Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this
Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of
the United States, or of any particular State."
4. The definition of the "United States" being used here, then,
is limited to its territories: 1) The District of Columbia 2)
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 3) U.S. Virgin Islands 4) Guam 5)
American Samoa 6) Northern Mariana Islands 7) Trust Territory
of the Pacific Islands 8) Military bases within the several
states 9) Federal agencies within the several states
5. It does not include the several states themselves, as is
confirmed by the following cites: "We have in our political system
a Government of the United States and a government of each of the
several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from
the others, and each has citizens of its own who owe it
allegiance, and whose rights within its jurisdiction, it must
protect. The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the
United States and a Citizen of a State, but his rights of
citizenship under one of these governments will be different from
those he has under the other." Slaughter House Cases United States
vs. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) "THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
IS A FOREIGN CORPORATION WITH RESPECT TO A STATE." [emphasis
added] Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. ( 1785: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E.
505 1441 S.Ct.1973, 41 L.Ed.287
6. This is further confirmed by the following quote from the
Internal Revenue Service: Federal jurisdiction "includes the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, Guam, and American Samoa."-Internal Revenue Code Section
312(e). The word "includes" means "is limited to." It does not
mean "in addition to" other places not specified.
7. When referring to this "District" United States, the Internal
Revenue Code uses the term "WITHIN" the United States. When
referring to the several States, the Internal Revenue Code uses
the term "WITHOUT" the United States.
8. Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of court cases prove that federal
jurisdiction is limited to the few federal territory areas
indicated above. For example, in two Supreme Court cases, it was
decided:
"The laws of Congress in respect to those matters 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," Caha v. United
States, 152 U.S., at 215. "We think a proper examination of this
subject will show that the United States never held any municipal
sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in and to the
territory, of which Alabama or any of the new States were
formed..."
"[B]ecause, the United States have no constitutional capacity to
exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty, or eminent domain,
within the limits of a State or elsewhere, except in the cases in
which it is expressly granted..." "Alabama is therefore entitled
to the sovereignty and jurisdiction over all the territory within
her limits, subject to the common law," Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S.
221, 223, 228, 229.
9. Likewise, Title 18 of the United States Code at ( 7 specifies
that the "territorial jurisdiction" of the United States extends
only outside the boundaries of lands belonging to any of the
several states.
10. Therefore, in addition to the fact that no unrevealed federal
contract can obligate me to perform in any manner without my fully
informed and uncoerced consent, likewise, no federal statutes or
regulations apply to me or have any jurisdiction over me. I
hereby affirm that I do not reside or work in any federal
territory or the "District" United States, and that therefore no
U.S. federal government statutes or regulations have any authority
over me. I am neither a citizen nor a member of that "foreign
corporation" known as the United States.
POWERS AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS OF UNITED STATES AND STATE
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
11. All United States and State government officials are hereby
put on notice that I expect them to have taken valid Oaths of
Office in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, Article VI: "The
Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of
the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial
Officers, both of the United States and of the several states,
shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this
Constitution..."
12. By their Oaths of Office all U.S. and State government
officials are contractually bound by the U.S. Constitution as
formulated by its framers, and not as "interpreted," subverted, or
corrupted by the U.S. Supreme Court or other courts. 13. It has
also come to my attention that local, state and federal public
officials take two oaths, the first to applicable constitutions,
and the second to the self-interested United States or the de
facto corporate federal State. The statutory oath, known in most
states as a "Loyalty Oath," accommodates the fraud of cooperative
federalism. (see Section II) "No man can serve two masters". These
two oaths are incompatible with one another -- Article VI cannot
be violated without dishonor, perjury of oath, fraud, concealment
and/or treason. 14. According to the Ninth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain
rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others
retained by the people." and the Tenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved
to the States respectively, or to the people."
15. It is clear from these Amendments that the powers of all U.S.
and State government officials are limited to those specifically
granted by the U.S. Constitution. In the U.S. Constitution,
Article VI:
"This constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which
shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be
the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall
be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
State to the Contrary notwithstanding." [Emphasis added]
Any laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, rules, and procedures
contrary to the U.S. Constitution, as written by its framers, are
null and void, as expressed in the Sixteenth American
Jurisprudence Second Edition, Section 177:
"The general misconception is that any statute passed by
legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of
the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land,
and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is
impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be
valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
`The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though
having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is
wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since
unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not
merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An
unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as
if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question
that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not
been enacted.' `Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general
principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right,
creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone,
affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under
it...' `No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no
courts are bound to enforce it.'" [Empasis added]
