Citizenship, income taxes and
limitations on government.
This page is provided to assist people in their investigation of the issue of sovereign citizenship and other related topics such as the federal income tax and limited federal jurisdiction. This page will provide clips from court opinions and other quotes from within the law which can help you understand your status in this country.
28 USC 2201, Why you see tax protesters losing in Federal courts.
Federal Jurisdiction within the States, a government report.
The Buck Act, how the federal government crossed it's territorial limits into the states.
The Kentucky Resolution, objection to the federal gov't for invading state control on citizenship.
The Virginia Resolution, objection to the federal gov't for invading state control on citizenship.
U.S.A. Republic The 14th Amendment
The 14th Amendment- Equal Protection Law or Tool of Usurpation (Congressional Record)
Dyett v. Turner 14th Amendment not ratified.
The Cheek Case a defense still valid against the I.R.S.
United States v. Cruikshank , citizenship.
Dred Scott v.John Sandford or Taney v. Curtis, citizenship.
Slaughterhouse Cases , Supreme Court opinion; citizenship.
THE BRUSHABER DECISION , the true meaning of the 16th Amendment
The Lloyd Long Case (html) , victory over the I.R.S.
"By metaphysical refinement, in examining our form of government, it might be correctly said that there is no such thing as a citizen of the United States. But constant usage -arising from convenience, and perhaps necessity, and dating from the formation of the Confederacy - has given substantial existence to the idea which the term conveys. A citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the states, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper construction and common understanding of the expression as used in the constitution, which must be deduced from its various other provisions. The object then to be obtained, by the exercise of the power of naturalization, was to make citizens of the respective states."
Ex parte Knowles, 5 Ca. 300, 302 (1855)
3A Am Jur 1420, Aliens and Citizens
"A person is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, for purposes of acquiring citizenship at birth, if this birth occurs in a territory over which the United States is sovereign..."
"The 14th Amendment creates and defines citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States, except by first becoming a citizen of some state."
United States v. Anthony (1874), 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (No. 14,459), 830.
"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."
U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875).
"Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state."
Crosse v. Bd. of Supvr,s of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966)
Blair v. Ridgely, 97 D. 218,249, S.P.
"Prior to the adoption of the federal Constitution, states possessed unlimited and unrestricted sovereignty and retained the same ever afterward. Upon entering the Union, they retained all their original power and sovereignty..."
" Our Union in its foreign relations presents itself with all its states and territories as one and indivisible; a garment without a seam; BUT at home we are separate sovereign states of the union. Within the limits of the states, the government of the United States has no powers but those that have been delegated to it."
Rule 12. Defenses and Objections-
(b)"...the following defenses may at the option of the pleader be made by motion.:
(1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.
(2) lack of jurisdiction over the person... a motion making any of these defenses shall be made BEFORE PLEADING...
(h)(3) Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action.
In the 1945 ,Hooven and Allison Co. v. Evatt, the Supreme Court defined
"United States", perhaps for the last time.
The term "United States" may be used in any ONE of the several senses:
(1) It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. (2) It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends OR (3) It may be the collective names of the states which are united under the Constitution.
The Court also defined the two types of legislative powers of Congress. Legislation in respect to the (2) definition and legislation in respect to (3) definition.
"In exercising its constitutional power to make all needful regulations respecting territory belonging to the United States, " (2) " Congress is not subject to the same constitutional limitations as when legislating for the United States." (3)
June 16th, 1909, President Taft's speech to Congress.
"...It is now proposed to make up the deficit by the imposition of a general income tax, in the form and substance and almost exactly the same character as that which, in the case of Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Co was held by the supreme Court to be a direct tax, and therefore not within the power of the federal government to impose unless apportioned among the several states according to population... I, therefore, recommend an amendment to the tariff bill imposing upon all corporations and joint stock companies for profit, except national banks otherwise taxed, measured by 2% on the net income of such corporations. This is an excise tax upon the privilege of doing business as an artificial entity and the privilege of freedom from a general partnership liability enjoyed by those who own the stock. This course is much to be preferred to the proposal of reenacting a law once judicially declared to be unconstitutional."
Amendment 14, Section 1
"The opening clause of this section makes national citizenship primary and State citizenship derivative therefrom." <-- referring to 14th Amendment citizenship." The definition it lays down of citizenship 'at birth' is not however, exhaustive, as was pointed out in connection with Congress's power to 'establish an uniform rule of naturalization'.
'Subject to the jurisdiction thereof': The children born to foreign diplomats in the United States are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and so are not citizens of the United States. With this narrow exception all persons born in the United States are, by the principle of the Wong Kim Ark case, Entitled to Claim citizenship of the United States." There is no imposition. It is a voluntary act, that once claimed, can not be taken away by the government.
Charles Warren, Pulitzer Prize winner for his books on American law and history, praised the Slaughterhouse causes, limiting the scope of the 14th Amendment. "Had the case been decided otherwise the States would have largely lost their autonomy and become, as political entities, only of historic interest... The boundary lines between the States and the National Government would be practically abolished, and the rights of the citizens of each state would be irrevocably fixed as of the date of the Fourteenth Amendment. " The Slaughterhouse case was "one of the glorious landmarks of American law." Editors note that within a few decades of this publication, (1920's) what Charles Warren warned of, grew to happen. Thus we have the situation today where a majority of Americans believe they are all Federal citizens.
In another case, Chief Justice Waite stated, " By the 5th Amendment, It (federal limitations) was introduced into the Constitution of the United States as a limitation upon the powers of the National government and by the 14th, as a quarentee against any encroachment upon an acknowledged right of citizenship by the Legislatures of the States..."
We should know of the grave error Justice Taney made in the Dred Scott decision. I'll follow the respected opinion of Judge John Appleton, of the Maine Supreme Court in which he said, "Justice Taney says 'every person... recognized as citizens of the several states, became also citizens of this new political body'... Taney's opinion therefore, rests upon a remarkable and most unfortunate misapprehension of facts. Taney would have concurred with (Justice) Curtis had the facts... been pointed out to him."
Federal Constitutional debates. "Friday, June 15, 1787...
8. Resolved that rule for naturalization ought to be the same in every state."
This gives Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 a whole new meaning now doesn't it?
Girty v. Logan 6 Bush Ky. 8
"It is an elementary rule of pleading, that a plea to the jurisdiction is... a tacit admission that the court has a right to judge in the case, and IS A WAIVER TO ALL EXCEPTIONS TO THE JURISDICTION."
To challenge Federal jurisdiction, the challenge must be made and responded to before a plea is made.
Public Law No 8177 re: Buck Act, redefines "the states" as only territorial states, federal enclaves and instrumentalitys. It is within these federally zoned areas that the federal government and its laws extend. (exception for Art. Sec 8 laws) The Public Law further explains that it is the inhabitants of these federal areas that become subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
New Orleans v. United States 35 U.S. (10 Pet.) 662
"Special provision is made in the Constitution for the cession of jurisdiction from the states over places where the federal government shall establish forts or other military work. And it is ONLY IN THESE PLACES or in territories of the United States, where it can exercise a general jurisdiction."
Handbooks for Special Agents.
(Constitutional Law s342.12)
(2) "The privilege against self-incrimination does not permit a tax payer to refuse to obey a summons issued under IRC s7602 or a court order directing his/her appearance. He/she is required to appear and cannot use the Fifth Amendment as an excuse for failure to do so, although HE/SHE MAY EXERCISE IT IN CONNECTION WITH SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
[Landy v. U.S.] He/she cannot refuse to bring his/her records, but MAY DECLINE TO SUBMIT THEM FOR INSPECTION ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS.
So, another pointer to remember, if the IRS makes you go, GO. If the IRS demands your records, BRING THEM, BUT use your 5th Amendment Right not to show your records and use the 5th Amendment in order to not answer any questions. ALSO KEEP IN MIND, do not refuse to answer all questions that have not been asked yet. Refuse to answer them as each one is asked. If you refuse to answer all questions before they are asked, it becomes a blanket Fifth and the judge can overrule your 5th Amendment rights to not answer.
USC Title 18 s 451 Par 3d
"Criminal jurisdiction of the federal courts is restricted to federal reservations over which the Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction, as well as to forts, magazines, arsenal, dockyards or other needful buildings."
"Congress has taxed income, NOT COMPENSATION. Conner v. US 303 F Supp 1187 '69
If the 14th Amendment had created a national citizenship, imposed upon the states and their citizens, the Amendment would have also created suffrage for women (i.e.). Prior to the Slaughterhouse cases, every one was using the 14th Amendment to legalize something or another under the claim of being a U.S. citizen. The most well known being Susan B. Anthony. But, as Susan B. Anthony found out, as well as thousands of others the Amendment was to give citizenship to the former slaves and to protect their rights, nothing else. As the Chicago Tribune stated, in response to the Slaughterhouse cases, it "will put a quietus upon the thousand and one follies seeking to be legalized by hanging on to the Fourteenth Amendment... The decision has long been needed as a check upon the centralizing tendencies of the Government..." In specific, the Court stated "...that the only LEGAL AFFECT is to make full-fledged citizens of negros, but leaving the government of the country in all other respects precisely the same as if the Constitution had stood as first adopted, and no negro had ever left his native Africa."
"Any way, getting back to the subject, the 16th did not repeal anything. It is even believed that because the 16th was for a specific tax, it was not necessary to repeal either of the other tax clauses because those clauses were about taxation in general. This brings me back to my family secret, the words "without apportionment among the several states. " Please refer to Black's Law Dictionary under Apportionment and then under the subsection Taxes. "The apportionment of a tax consists in a selection of the subjects to be taxed, and in laying down the rule by which to measure the contribution which each of these subjects shall make to the tax." By the Amendment specifying "without apportionment among the several states", the amendment is specifying that the states are not within the scope of the amendment, the purpose thus then implying that the income tax if for within federal areas only."
Jack Warren Wade Jr., Former IRS officer. He was in charge of the IRS' nationwide Revenue Officer training program,
"The Tax Code represents the genius of legal fiction... The I.R.S. has never really known why people pay income taxes... The IRS encourages voluntary compliance, through fear."
Financial Survival, Issue I 1990
"Former I.R.S. Commissioner Roscoe Egger resigned in April of 1986 after publicly admitting that 35 million Americans no longer file personal income taxes!"
"In a recent conversation with an official at the Internal Revenue Service, I was amazed when he told me that, 'If the Taxpayers of this Country ever discover that the IRS operates on 90% bluff, the entire system would collapse' ".
Sen. Henry Bellmon (1969)
From the Kentucky Resolution of 1798
IV. Resolved, that alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are; that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States distinct from their power over citizens; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared that "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," the [Alien Act of June 22, 1798], which assumes power over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force....
"...it has been said by eminent judges that no man was a citizen of the United States except as he was a citizen of one of the States composing the Union. Those, therefore, who were born and always resided in the District of Columbia or in the Territories, though within the United States, were not citizens..." definition before the 14th Amendment "
"...the distinction between citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state is clearly recognized. Not only may a man be a citizen of the United States without being a citizen of a state, but an important element is necessary to make the former, the latter. He must reside in the state to make him a citizen of it, but it is not necessary that he should be born or naturalized in the United States to become a citizen of the Union..." definition after the 14th Amendment.
Slaughter House Cases, 16 Wall. 36,72,73,74 (1873)
"The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; It does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship."
Jones v. Temmer 829 F. Supp. 1226
"No white person born within the limits of the United States and subject to THEIR jurisdiction... or born without those limits, and subsequently naturalized under THEIR laws, owes his status of citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution. The purpose of the 14th Amendment... was to confer the status of citizenship upon a numerous class of persons domiciled within the limits of the United States who could not be brought within operation of the naturalization laws because native born, and whose birth, though native, at the same time left them without citizenship. Such persons were not white persons but in the main were of African blood, who had been held in slavery in this country..."
Van Valkenburg v Brown 43 Cal 43. 47 (1872)
"...the 14th Amendment is throughout affirmative and declaratory, intended to ally doubts and to settle controversies which had arisen, and NOT TO IMPOSE ANY NEW RESTRICTION UPON CITIZENSHIP."
U.S. v Wong Kim Ark 169 US 649.687,688
A predictive warning of what has eventually happened.
"The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution."
Honorable Supreme Court Justice John Harlan in the 1901 case of Downes v. Bidwell.
"Congress exercises its confirmed powers subject to the limitations contained in the Constitution. If a state ratifies or gives consent to any authority which is not specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States, it is null and void. State officials cannot consent to the enlargement of powers of Congress beyond those enumerated in the Constitution."
Sandra Day O'Conner in the 1992 case of New York v. United States
"The more intelligent adversaries of the new Constitution admit the force of this reasoning; but they qualify their admission by a distinction between what they call INTERNAL and EXTERNAL taxation. The former they would reserve to the State governments; the latter, which they explain into commercial imposts, or rather duties on imported articles, they declare themselves willing to concede to the federal head.", Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 36
"A citizen of the United States is ipso facto and at the same time a citizen of the state in which he resides. While the 14th Amendment does not create a national citizenship, it has the effect of making that citizenship 'paramount and dominant' instead of 'derivative and dependent' upon state citizenship."
Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U. S. 404, 427.
"The (14th) amendment referred to slavery. Consequently, the only persons embraced by its provisions, and for which Congress was authorized to legislate in the manner were those then in slavery."
Bowlin v. Commonwealth (1867), 65 Kent. Rep. 5, 29.
"It is claimed that the plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and of this state. Undoubtedly she is. It is argued that she became such by force of the first section of the 14th Amendment, already recited. This, however, is a mistake."
Van Valkenberg v. Brown (1872), 43 Cal. Sup. Ct. 43, 47
"After the adoption of the 13th Amendment, a bill which became the first Civil Rights Act was introduced in the 39th Congress, the major purpose of which was to secure to the recently freed Negroes all the civil rights secured to white men. . . .(N)one other than citizens of the United States were within the provisions of the Act."
Hague v. C. I. O., 307 U. S. 496, 509.
I.R.S., "The file requirement for 01 is return not required to be mailed or filed."
U.S. v. Lloyd Long
All art, and format on this page is the property of the American Patriot Network. No copy of this page in full or in part is permitted without the written consent of American Patriot Network. This page may be linked to.