The reason (I believe) when it comes to flip flopping of constitutional vs unconstitutional is that you have some judges, justices, lawyers, etc. that are political stricken when it comes to interpreting laws. The laws are interpreted in a way that benefits whatever side they support.
I think they all do. They read the cases they like and listen to the cases they are interested in. None of these judges read cases they find uninteresting and never see the other side
Any statute in conflict with the constitution has no effect and it is as of the statute never existed. Get your facts straight about what is LAWFUL and UNLAWFUL and what is subversive activity done under color of law or official right. Stop dancing around what is lawful vs. unlawful with the specious arguments about what is constitutional vs legal. That is a fallacy. Nothing unconstitutional is legal. Subversion of protected constitutional rights and the criminal code is a felony. PERIOD. If a bill drafter and legislator(s) make, or attempt to make, a statute that causes harm, measurable damages, or deprives a right, a crime has been committed and subversive activity is evident, and they lose qualified immunity. An offense against the citizen is an offense against the United States, as they are "one in the same". Statutes are not law and are applied by men in their personal capacities, and they have strict liability. The making, application ,or practice of law, that deprives a protected right or obstructs, delays, or otherwise hinders the administration of justice , by any party under oath, is subversive activity and an act of treason, and ,where a common agency can be shown, to have colluded in or gained a benefit from the criminal colorable conspiracy, is subject to indictment as a criminal organization. You people are learned Officers of The Court and you are obligated to make proper criminal report of all subversive activity ,under 18 US Code Section 4 and 2382, and now you have legal notice. Signed:/s/ CC 3/20/21
apply this to property taxes which is repugnate to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as all states of the Union are on "equal footing to the original states. " which goes with your saying "Any statute in conflict with the constitution has no effect and it is as of the statute never existed." and has no effect.
@@kishredbird3599 a right is only a right if it is perceived and defended. Deprivations of rights under color of law is a criminal violation of 18 u.s. code section 242. Not only do officers of the enforcement and judicial branches have strict liability for their unlawful application of criminal statutes, so to do agents for the private organizations known as the Democratic and Republican parties, who abused their discretion and offices to make subversive statutes to the United States Constitution. Conspiracy to interfere in civil rights is a felony under 18 u.s. code section 241. If you report the crime to any conservator of the Peace officer, an enforcement officer or magistrate, and they neglect to prevent the crime, then you can sue them under 42 u.s. code section 1986, action for neglect to prevent, where you will then lay a criminal information before that magistrate. Wash rinse repeat. Chief Magistrate, Attorney General, FBI agent, FBI special agent in charge, United States Attorney, grand jury bailiff, grand jury Foreman,, and finally, the grand jury, where you will request indictments directly from the jury against all of the charged parties as agents for the private organization known as the blue wall of silence.
C.J.S. section 4/7 attorneys: His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the clients, and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter. Also, anyone who obtains a lawyer is a ward/infant of the court. The lawyer also "practices" law and are a bar member(s). I need to say no more.
@@thelightthatlightsthelifeo6881 those points are correct however deprivations of rights under color of law or official right is a crime. The constitution, the federal code, and the common law are the supreme law. There can be no making application nor practice of law that undermines the intents and purposes of the law nor deprives or infringes the natural rights secured their in and to do so would be a crime. When have you ever heard an attorney tell a prospective client that if they hire them they will be considered incompetent by the court and incapable of filing pleadings in motions on their own behalf? Never. That's when. Under uniform commercial code, that is an unconscionable contract and is unenforceable.
When people have more awareness about laws,future cases would be reduced due to legal awareness.Automatically court work will be reduced if cases are less
Well done! I am going to school to become a paralegal as we speak and after graduation next year, I plan to go on to get my JD. (God willing.) This video helped me immensely on a paper that is due next week as I was clueless on what case to use for it. It has to be one from my state, which is Kentucky, between the years 1995 and 2015. Thanks to this video, I found it. Something told me to watch it. Thank you very much. Very impressive!
Good for u Jana! I’m in a similar situation as u; finishing my undergrad in May & going to law school immediately after. These videos are an invaluable complement to my college coursework.
I wanted to this myself but never got help financially. Please follow your dreams to help people for love not money. We need less corrupt materialistic people that do what is right for the people not for the money.
Our entire country has been infiltrated by thieves. They’ve turned every institution there is into a pay for play. The Clintons helped shed the spot light on it all.
Lol, a quick Google search values the wedding industry at over $50 Billion. The WEDDING industry, that's just the beginning of marriage. How many more billions are spent on the other 99% of the marriage?
The marriage license provides the state’s priority ownership over the “business” and ownership of it’s product, the children, hence, we have CPS, the educators, pharma, all involved/helping as overseers.
ha, ha, very observant. There is definitely a producer and a consumer... But, contract law goes right out the window every time the consumer with holds sex.🛌😭
Nicely done ! I am 68 years old. Spent 40 years as a LE officer eventually retired as Chief of Police in a major Southern urban city/county. A couple of questions....Does your book discuss the seemingly erroneous position that All decisions by SCOTUS become "The Law of the Land" versus what the actual language of the Constitution ascribes to the SCOTUS powers, keeping in mind the lazy, cowardly, or feckless Law Maker's (Congress) seemingly perpetual abdication of Their responsibilities over a least these last 60 years or so?
As a Brit I find American constitutional law cases SO interesting! as a historian, I am more drawn to the historical cases (particularly late 1800's - early 1900's) I have this book on my to read list and I cannot wait to get to it!
Every one has to keep the constitution book and other basic law books in their house and have to read this will help to the nation for better implementation of laws
This is wonderful. I purchased this book last month….haven’t read it yet. I am just a regular person who wants to learn more about our United States constitution.
Reading and understanding the constitution is very much important to know since the constitution shows a way that how to approach the court when a person feels that he needs justice in any matter
What they do not explain, is how "the law" has been changed several times since the Constitution was written!! For example, the courts are now operating under Admiralty law, but they will call it "statutory law". They don't talk about how Washington DC is actually a separate country to "These United States", the very reason you constantly hear politicians talking about "our democracy", they're talking about Washington DC, NOT "These United States"!
@@JJMusic78 they usually miss the difference between "US Citizen", a corporate title as opposed to a Citizen of the Several States. Justice John Harlan spoke about this in 1901.
You have to know how to navigate many jurisdictions, remaining in honour in your standing . You need to know how to navigate from the Public And the Private. Knowledge
After listening to this man for 5 hours, I strongly feel like I knew him - as if we were good friends... But that's just crazy and surely not possible! Something about this man probably just reminds me of someone I know!
Nothing of substance to you doesn't mean it's not full of info. That just shows your ignorance. FYI, within that 25 minutes, they show what the title says. What else did you hope to get out of a video that says the top 100 cases we all should know? Btw, AFA "lazy Boomer" if wasn't for us, YOU wouldn't be here. You should be grateful you're here, you had an 89% chance of being aborted. FYI, that dude up here talking is NOT a Boomer,.
Enjoyed the video immensely as it gave me quite an insight into how all these issues are thought out. I have no training in the law except for talking to a few lawyers over the years or watching videos like this. I do follow some cases and often disagree with the decisions I hear when reported by the news, especially when they refer back to The Constitution (the "Originalists Argument") as it seems to me that, as a society, we have learned a thing or two over the last 250 or so years causing me to think that, maybe it's time to update our thinking a bit. I should mention that I'm actually Canadian but am watching America to make sure you folks don't go too far off the track. Clearly I'm failing. LOL Regardless, this video has given me more of an insight into what is going on when judges are considering cases. A layman, like myself, would be prone to look at the case as an individual event which would only require deciding if one side should win or the other. This video has, as I said, given me a bigger picture, that decisions made by judges have much bigger consequences than whether one side is right and other wrong especially where a precendent was already established. I now see a court case as more of a pebble being toss into a pond. Yes, the case might only directly effect two parties; however, the resulting ripples can affect society other cases or society as a whole and, if one case is judged in a certain way, it can and will have effects in other cases in unintended or unpredictable ways and it is part of a judges mission to consider these when rendering that "simple, straightforward decision. This puts things into an entirely different context. While I'm sure cases in small claims court and the such don't rise to the level of precedent-setting cases, I now see why major cases (right up to the Supreme Court) are not quite as straight forward as I would both think and like and are not necessarily just about right or wrong but more about "how do we want our society to decide issues" when a dispute occurs. Seeing that, I am a bit more comfortable with the back and forth of the court decisions I hear about in the news. There is always back and forth in the interpretation of laws and precident and one has to be vigilant to ensure laws are not interpreted in a way they were not intended. Like my mother used to say, "If you want to find out who's boss around here, just start something. The resent overturning of Roe v. Wade will, no doubt, be a great example of this quote. Once again, thank you for making this video to help us better understand the thinking from inside the judicial system; it was enlightening. Lastly, as soon as I can get my hands on a copy of the book, I intend to read it so that I can expand my understanding further, so thank you in advance for that.
Who is to decide whether or not what "we" have "learned" is advanced beyond the constitutional understanding? Political grandstanding does not equate to truth, nor does it give the right to decide truth.
Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of None of these “bans” “orders” “mandates” and “restrictions” are Constitutional and everyone upholding such are in violation of their Oath of Office to uphold and sustain the Constitution!
Wake tf up 😑 I watched a video the other day of a group of "cadets" graduating the police academy, who were being sworn in and as they're repeating their oath they were laughing...Almost hysterically at that!!! These lawyers, judges, and police wipe their ass with the constitution daily 🙄 When you hear these people talk about that outdated piece of paper 📜 Know that they just finished taking a huge shit on our rights and wiping their hole with the constitution!!!
Frantz v. Autry, 18 Okla. 561 (Okla. 1907) "A constitution in the American sense of the word is the written instrument by which the fundamental powers of government are established, limited, and defined, and by which those powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body politic." In Vanhorne v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 308, the court defines a constitution as follows: "What is a constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established
@Bill Ding the constructor the mere.thought that three different opinions can be right based on how strictly they look at the constitution is nonsense and only serves to generate thousands of anti cannon decisions that can be used to argue cases.
@Bill Ding the constructor No I am saying that the Supreme courts is encouraging judges to ignore the constitution. It is okay rule rule on breaking a law if it is unconstitutional by saying that you are looking at the lowest level of scrutiny. That is hog wash and they know it.
The most important SCOTUS case was Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins. The decision overturned almost a century of civil procedure. This case blended public law with public policy. That’s why a court will not accept case law prior to this case.
I took a Supreme Ct. Ruling to a municipality, they tried to get my daughter to baker act me. It was about the driver's license . .They took my license, and ive been inside for 10yrs. I stood for truth, for that.
@@marcustulliuscicero9512 Nothing, but there is a lot i could not afford after, my particular court ordeal. This is costly. I did not care to try fighting all of the high costs, any longer. Actually there was so much to this, because the laws i began to find, were very interesting. Few really know. 13 years later, im pretty well read, if nothing more. Additionally, finding so much out, most called my crazy. So, i got use to that. It's fine.
@@joannthomases9304 its amazing how you find out just how much power weve lost when you start getting into law. People are living in delusion. Start reading navajo nation law. Its even worse. People are wanting to fight the control and now being labeled far right just for being for the bill of rights. Propaganda is a bitch
They used a copy right law to put you there because it was their property, in their court. Had you filed a claim to your own court and attached their documents as exhibits with the statement that "not only do I believe , your own court agents believe as well" they would have been the ones who paid the price for their crimes.
@Sage is not going to save you Right. Always save to get the easiest questions answered first. Then apply Occam's Razor, or whatever logical inferences work.
What a great video. Wish I could sit and pick their brains and perspectives for another couple hours. Like not just this battle between states and federalism, but what about all of these Article 1 courts administering colorable commercial contract ish law and presuming everyone thinks we’re in judicial Article 3 courts. But maybe I’m off in my understand if administrative and judicial tribunals. I have so many questions 🙋🏽♂️
I bet they left out the most important case, post Erie Railroad v Tomkins, which was Perry v United States. "Sovereignty resides in the people", where SCOTUS revealed the remedy to discharge your debt under HJR 192, PL 73-10, codified at 31 USC 5118(d)(2). The source of all your future labor deposit funds is at the US Treasury Department, which you can read about the minor account at 31 CFR 363.6. The people are the beneficiaries and creditors and the United States is the debtor. It's not the other way around like the BAR attornies and courts like to disclaim. Perry v Untied States is shepardized, so they have to accept it and the courts are required to execute your remedy to settle, set off, and discharge your debts against your estate legacy account - see 31 CFR 203, 31 CFR 363.6, and 28 USC 2041. The courts and the United States Attorney General are acting as your common law trustee and alien property custodians for this account. Put them in their place as Trustees and demand their performance or collapse your trust under the merger rule and take over your legacy account as a secured party creditor and holder in due course of all your securities. The United States is a bankrupt corporation. They should be teaching that. You can always read Fruit From a Poisonous Tree, Melvin Stamper, JD. He reveals it all... it's not perfect, but it's a good place to start your journey for the truth that the courts are desperately trying to conceal.
We had to have constitutional knowledge when I was in 6th grade or we could NOT go to Jr. hi. ..high school 11th grade built on the that or you couldn't graduate at 12th. Geeez I wonder why it was taken out?
SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO WRITE LAWS. SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO ENFORCE LAWS. SUPREME COURT CAN ONLY OFFER OPINIONS AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A LAW, NOTHING MORE.
The power is not in these things you mentioned but to show ,or make guidelines in which can open eyes of those which are corrupted beyond reasoning.this is a greater act then any other that you mentioned.to change what is considered right...into what is truly right...and within man's understanding to be able to be looked upon and know the difference.
Us supreme court justices should be united in the practice of justice and law, and the legal system should not be part of or entangled with law anything attached to the word legal is corrupt
32:50 is a question I asked myself, and the book’s authors were in fact helpful and reasonable when I commented on the omission of Smith v. Allwright, a 1944 case striking down the all-white primaries of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas. Scholars are coming to the conclusion that Smith v. Allwright was just as critical to the Civil Rights movement as Brown v. Board of Education, and in the Rim South and Acadiana it had much more rapid and lasting effects than Brown. The list I will say is generally biased towards recent cases and omits many significant older ones, but again the authors were reasonable when I noted this.
This entire hour and a half video seems to be an advertisement to go to their website and spend twenty dollars to see what the title to this video promises.
Looking at all these comments people keep bringing up the Constitution, a constitution is for persons not people, your remedy will not be found in either the US Constitution or the State constitution... if you're given a commercial instrument your answer and status will determine a person or mans outcome. If you walk into a courtroom with no standing, dishonor and as a debtor your success rate goes from about 3% to 0. An Affidavit of Truth can go a long way being that the prosecution will not rebut, and any unrebutted affidavit stands as truth... this stands true even in the defacto courts.
That’s as far as context of projects I’m currently interested in… it is not the end of statements.. the escalation of tech in law and influence understanding of large scale process and speed over reality of defacto and dejure while NOT foregoing the safety of what the law provides. But, law in vacuum gives over entrenchment more air for the downside of fire…. The better involves helps.
United nations is requested to legal channel to telecast judgments of supreme courts all over the world so that entire legal community in the world will.have.more knowledge' about law concepts.
Ok, so people ran away from Britian and 'British Temple Bar' is our lawyers? Why? Is there another registry ? No state shall give license for any traffic court, what is this all about. Copyright laws, cannot copyright a name ? Anything? Why a Crown copyright to these people who ran from their control on berth certificates=commerce??? And commercial Religion, like for-given Christian name? In commerce? On berth bond? Religion, on commerce ? So, intelligence cannot, comprehend plain English. So, how does this all apply to, covenants, in bible?
Maybe write another book specifically covering criminal procedures...its super important...particularly now in this police state that people know their rights, or lack there of
47:06 "Successfully formulate health care challenge" , perhaps i don't understand use of "formulate". You guys jump around, there is NO direction noting case is based using Constitution rather than what Supreme Court says.
If you are unfamiliar with the Cato Institute, be aware that it has a strong bias against the right for Labor to organize for better deals, but in favor of unlimited rights for the wealthiest to combine their power and influence to suppress labor and consumer rights.
Wow, rights and structure laws which need to make regional health and climate work workable and therefore legal… the rights of individuals and groups in the context of jurisprudence. So amazing.
The second amendment A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be INFRINGED. Well regulated has nothing to do with rules, regulations or legislation, well regulated means well armed with weapons that are in good working order. The second part of the second amendment proves that fact, being necessary to the security of a free state,we the people are the state, not the fiction that calls itself the state today,in order for the people (state) to remain free from invasion and state and federal corruption and oppression we need to be well armed. The third part proves we the people are the militia not the military or law enforcement, what proves that as fact is the second amendment explicitly says the right of the people. Not the right of the government, not the right of the military,not the right of the law enforcement,it explicitly says the people. To keep means to own to have, to bear means to carry to wield to use, every American citizen has the right to carry a gun openly or concield anywhere in the united states of america, nowhere does the second amendment limit where or when or how a American citizen can carry. There is no age limit in the second amendment of the constitution of the united states of america. The government and state has no legal lawful authority to legislate any weapons that can be carried by a human being, the second amendment forbids it SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!!. INFRINGED means to take away, to limit, to remove, to violate.
I got hook to Supreme Court at age 30 as intellectual development and since followed their ruling religiously .Also since then learn history of Supreme Court but guess I m rare Xers & Latino follow this institution.
Then officially legally those courts have no legal lawful authority whatsoever, the constitution is the only thing that gives the court any authority,if they refuse to acknowledge and obey and uphold parts of the constitution then their legal authority is officially null and void. They are tresspassers of their offices.
Any one interested in a degree in Jurisprudence should be required to Swear and Attest an Oath before the Bar , that they will NOT partake in , nor affiliate with any Partisan groups which may cause a prejudicial decision , and pursuant to that decision affect any ruling as it pertains to Sentencing and/or Monetary awards or Fines . With any Oaths and Affirmations for the Bench to include the Continuation , Affirmation , and Affectation of that Oath specifically !
I agree with your timeline but not the conclusion. Since the law is the end product of 'lawyer babel' (good characterization), I find the 7:20> portion far more compelling, to say nothing about informing my understanding of the
Basic law is to be explained with pictures since common man may not.understand or may not show interest since it.will.have volumes and volumes of pages
All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 144, 176, (1803) WE THE PEOPLE INHERIT ALL THE POWER 💯💯💯🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️🙌🏻
The law still holds. The people complaining are simpletons. The way our system works is by checking and balancing itself. Many of the problems in our laws derive from those at the state and local level. Federal laws are the highest authority and already you can picture the issue just between regulating 3 governing laws in 3 jurisdictions. Next come the people. The same people in your community become politicians, city officials, etc.. They have the power to apply city ordinances and other laws that can come in a direct problem with hierarchical laws that then have to be amended and then new ones created. This creates a power vaccum well educated powerful people can easily manipulate and do it with impunity most times.. The people who suffer are the citizens. The federal government today is not doing enough to combat corruption at the local level.
@@johnf6687 very true, BUT, as a “US Citizen, (employee of the corporation in foreign territory, [outside the 50 states]) called the District of Columbia, the people are not citizens of the sovereign states, have lost their sovereign status, and these corporations acting as the government, have stepped into the void the 14th amendment created. Where are the people? They have left the land! They only “reside” on the land, while working FOR the corporation, and are ALLOWED to do so, as long as they pay tax and obey government acting FOR the sovereign. If you pay taxes on wages, income, gains, property, you own nothing. If you are Tenant on any Title or only hold CERTIFICATES of Title, you own nothing. You are ALLOWED to possess, but only if you pay & obey. Slavery!! The service providers taking care of all the people that lack knowledge, get a free pass, as they are only providing services for those that cannot care for themselves as evidenced by the people’s’ own admittance of their status as US Citizens. The people have abandoned their land, their status and all that is included: Freedom, Rights, and the de jure government. It’s fraud & deception no doubt. But that is how it is done. There is an awakening happening. I pray enough learn who they are, and take the reins!
Law is so simple to understand. Law favors truth and humanity and dignity and honesty Law reject lies and dishonesty and cruelty and negligence in duty and immoral attitude
What's really funny is that the constitution arrived with the Northwest Territorial Ordnance in 1787 as federal law for federal territory and is limited to that territory.
@@soupermancampbell8668 all 4 Organic Laws for the USA are at the beginning of USC 1. All laws that follow previous law must conform to previous law. Art IV of the AoC provides your right to travel FREELY. It says all inhabitants have a right to all privileges citizens grant to themselves. At the time, citizens in England were those allowed to elect members of their govt. The constitution begins with 'we the people of the US', not USA. It is a document by and for the US/feds. The federal govt was created to unite states in defense+commerce. When the revolution ended, all Americans were free+equal under American common law. Nobody had any authority to rule anyone else. That also means no group had any right to rule anyone else. Everybody was king on their own land. The US/feds are FOREIGN with respect to the states, and that is why they were placed offshore in Manhatten, and then DC after the war of 1812. The US/feds have no authority to dump immigrants into states. They only have authority to immigrate into US/federal territory. Only native born Americans are entitled to all of the sovereignty Americans had after the revolution. There is so much I can say, it's hard to even know where to begin. Nobody required to take an oath in the constitution takes a proper oath. They are always falsified. The constitution has therefore never even adopted. Ratified, yes. Adopted, no. It's just a GD piece of paper as GW Bush stated. It's totally irrelevant outside of US/federal territory. Native born Americans have UNALIENABLE rights, see the DoI. On US/federal territory, there are only civil rights, and bill of rights. See territorial jurisdiction. See chief justice John Jay's explanation of how sovereignty devolved upon all Americans equally after the revolution in Chisholm v. Georgia. Read all of the 4 organic laws. Written law only applies on US/fed territory, which post civil war, includes State and municipal land, and probably corporate land too since govt created corporations. Americans are ruled by a massive fraud, and nobody sees or cares. Because freedom is a responsibility, and nobody wants any part of that. Be ruled by God, or you will be ruled by tyrants. That was our warning. The common law, or tyranny. See the channel Jenn the Liberty Lion. I posted a lot of foundational law in there, and she does an excellent job of trying to educate people in the foundations of American law. Didn't you ever ask yourself why we are ruled by tyrants when we defeated a king to be free? It's a massive fraud, and that is why every govt form always asks if you are a US/fed citizen. They demand that you lie yourself into their jurisdiction in order to claim a right. If you have questions, I will do my best to answer. It's such a big question that it really demands a book, but I shared the essentials. Enough to get you started.
@@soupermancampbell8668 1776,1777: DoI+AoC. These documents create the USA, and US/fed govt to unite states in defense+commerce. 1787: Northwest Territorial Ordnance+constitution. US/fed law to govern US/fed territory. The USA still operates under the AoC. The AoC has never been repealed. The constitution slightly modifies the AoC by a 3/4 vote ratification process, as stipulated in the AoC. No AoC = no USA, and that is the globalists goal. The USA has been overthrown right in front of everybody's eyes. Everyone is just blind.
I have about a million questions. I have only scratched the surface as I can see. I'm going to start digging based on your reply. I have a limited understanding of common law, the straw man, right to travel, admiralty and am going to continue searching for the truth.
don't watch and dynamically comment on videos in a live presentation. it is editorializing, and when you made the base video it means you willfully made the underlying video worse and have to add more to it. it works when youtubers do it cause they aren't recording the video's audio through microphones in the room. instead they splice the video, and also they give larger amounts of commentary than just indenting comments which would have been appropriate in the video but were left out.
Email according to the Constitution that says the government supposed to pay all of our living expenses then why are they double-dipping and charging us to while the government still paying them. I'm referring to Chili's housing Ridgewood also include mortgages which is also called a secured loan meaning that's already paid for for us. We shouldn't have to borrow our own money and pay interest on it and also we shouldn't have to pay property tax either.
Thanks CATO. The Constitution don't need to be re-written...It needs to be re-read!
*doesn't
@@jrambo7495 TnxQ
Agreed 👍💯
@@jrambo7495 Grammar Nazi. 😂🤣😂
That’s okay I don’t live in the 18th century. The document is alive, not a fossil.
The reason (I believe) when it comes to flip flopping of constitutional vs unconstitutional is that you have some judges, justices, lawyers, etc. that are political stricken when it comes to interpreting laws. The laws are interpreted in a way that benefits whatever side they support.
That's why we need to know case law SCOTUS opinions and circuit court appeals.. and Constitution....
I think they all do. They read the cases they like and listen to the cases they are interested in. None of these judges read cases they find uninteresting and never see the other side
All this shit rigged bro if u thinking that
SrQl😊
Moore v ..
th-cam.com/video/XRwNLMeNsCc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=NtGg13mqwLw6qKvO
I’m a non-law student just interested. Thank you for posting.
Any statute in conflict with the constitution has no effect and it is as of the statute never existed. Get your facts straight about what is LAWFUL and UNLAWFUL and what is subversive activity done under color of law or official right. Stop dancing around what is lawful vs. unlawful with the specious arguments about what is constitutional vs legal. That is a fallacy. Nothing unconstitutional is legal. Subversion of protected constitutional rights and the criminal code is a felony. PERIOD. If a bill drafter and legislator(s) make, or attempt to make, a statute that causes harm, measurable damages, or deprives a right, a crime has been committed and subversive activity is evident, and they lose qualified immunity. An offense against the citizen is an offense against the United States, as they are "one in the same". Statutes are not law and are applied by men in their personal capacities, and they have strict liability. The making, application ,or practice of law, that deprives a protected right or obstructs, delays, or otherwise hinders the administration of justice , by any party under oath, is subversive activity and an act of treason, and ,where a common agency can be shown, to have colluded in or gained a benefit from the criminal colorable conspiracy, is subject to indictment as a criminal organization. You people are learned Officers of The Court and you are obligated to make proper criminal report of all subversive activity ,under 18 US Code Section 4 and 2382, and now you have legal notice. Signed:/s/ CC 3/20/21
apply this to property taxes which is repugnate to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as all states of the Union are on "equal footing to the original states. " which goes with your saying "Any statute in conflict with the constitution has no effect and it is as of the statute never existed." and has no effect.
Tell that to all the people in jail/prison for exercising their constitutional right to carry a firearm.
@@kishredbird3599 a right is only a right if it is perceived and defended. Deprivations of rights under color of law is a criminal violation of 18 u.s. code section 242. Not only do officers of the enforcement and judicial branches have strict liability for their unlawful application of criminal statutes, so to do agents for the private organizations known as the Democratic and Republican parties, who abused their discretion and offices to make subversive statutes to the United States Constitution. Conspiracy to interfere in civil rights is a felony under 18 u.s. code section 241. If you report the crime to any conservator of the Peace officer, an enforcement officer or magistrate, and they neglect to prevent the crime, then you can sue them under 42 u.s. code section 1986, action for neglect to prevent, where you will then lay a criminal information before that magistrate. Wash rinse repeat. Chief Magistrate, Attorney General, FBI agent, FBI special agent in charge, United States Attorney, grand jury bailiff, grand jury Foreman,, and finally, the grand jury, where you will request indictments directly from the jury against all of the charged parties as agents for the private organization known as the blue wall of silence.
C.J.S. section 4/7 attorneys:
His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the clients, and wherever the duties to
his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter.
Also, anyone who obtains a lawyer is a ward/infant of the court. The lawyer also "practices" law and are a bar member(s). I need to say no more.
@@thelightthatlightsthelifeo6881 those points are correct however deprivations of rights under color of law or official right is a crime. The constitution, the federal code, and the common law are the supreme law. There can be no making application nor practice of law that undermines the intents and purposes of the law nor deprives or infringes the natural rights secured their in and to do so would be a crime. When have you ever heard an attorney tell a prospective client that if they hire them they will be considered incompetent by the court and incapable of filing pleadings in motions on their own behalf? Never. That's when. Under uniform commercial code, that is an unconscionable contract and is unenforceable.
When people have more awareness about laws,future cases would be reduced due to legal awareness.Automatically court work will be reduced if cases are less
Well done! I am going to school to become a paralegal as we speak and after graduation next year, I plan to go on to get my JD. (God willing.) This video helped me immensely on a paper that is due next week as I was clueless on what case to use for it. It has to be one from my state, which is Kentucky, between the years 1995 and 2015. Thanks to this video, I found it. Something told me to watch it. Thank you very much. Very impressive!
Good luck on your paper.
@@titusjames4912 THANKS SO MUCH!!!
Good for u Jana! I’m in a similar situation as u; finishing my undergrad in May & going to law school immediately after. These videos are an invaluable complement to my college coursework.
@@camillenicole4837 And good for you! I wish you all the luck in the world.
I wanted to this myself but never got help financially. Please follow your dreams to help people for love not money. We need less corrupt materialistic people that do what is right for the people not for the money.
The Justice department has become one big extortion racket.
Right
It's the biggest criminal cabal on earth, and these parisitic Barr attorneys that take and oath to the queen bee are parisitic as well
Our entire country has been infiltrated by thieves. They’ve turned every institution there is into a pay for play. The Clintons helped shed the spot light on it all.
@@mitchsinned4457 oh yeah. The rabbit hole goes deep
@@fjb4750 right
"Prostitution is an economic activity. Marriage is not an economic activity..."
Uh, you've never been married before, have you?
Lol, a quick Google search values the wedding industry at over $50 Billion. The WEDDING industry, that's just the beginning of marriage. How many more billions are spent on the other 99% of the marriage?
Or divorced 🙄
The marriage license provides the state’s priority ownership over the “business” and ownership of it’s product, the children, hence, we have CPS, the educators, pharma, all involved/helping as overseers.
That is not what he said.
ha, ha, very observant. There is definitely a producer and a consumer... But, contract law goes right out the window every time the consumer with holds sex.🛌😭
Nicely done ! I am 68 years old. Spent 40 years as a LE officer eventually retired as Chief of Police in a major Southern urban city/county. A couple of questions....Does your book discuss the seemingly erroneous position that All decisions by SCOTUS become "The Law of the Land" versus what the actual language of the Constitution ascribes to the SCOTUS powers, keeping in mind the lazy, cowardly, or feckless Law Maker's (Congress) seemingly perpetual abdication of Their responsibilities over a least these last 60 years or so?
Hello, corrupt person!
Of course the reply was deleted
They are coming for us
Slightly low brow, Sir .
In Your Face , Congress is really a Congress of asshats.
As a Brit I find American constitutional law cases SO interesting! as a historian, I am more drawn to the historical cases (particularly late 1800's - early 1900's) I have this book on my to read list and I cannot wait to get to it!
@nunya9370 is that because the “Judicature Act” was passed?
Lemme save you time….. buy the book. 15minutes in and I finally realized they were not gonna start breaking down the constitution. 😹
🤣🤣I'm 35min in...🙄. Great job promoting the book, though 👏 👌
25 minutes in and no cases explained yet😂🤣😅
It was the swallowing.. I don't want to hear you drinking... your throat makes gross noises
Y’all gonna start listening in 1.5x - 2x speed like the rest of us if you keep getting duped like that lul
Where can one find the videos they are talking about in this seminar?
that space below the video with the logo and subscription button? There is a phrase "Show More" click on that and you will see links.
Near the end of the vid, it's explained where to find all the supreme cases mentioned in the book.
Check timestamp 1:30:54
Every one has to keep the constitution book and other basic law books in their house and have to read this will help to the nation for better implementation of laws
with you.
⁰
Yes never get rid of book and rely on the internet. They can change what's on the internet but not what's in every book in the country
This is wonderful. I purchased this book last month….haven’t read it yet. I am just a regular person who wants to learn more about our United States constitution.
where do you access the 100 videos?
Anybody know where to get the book? I would love to read it.
Reading and understanding the constitution is very much important to know since the constitution shows a way that how to approach the court when a person feels that he needs justice in any matter
What they do not explain, is how "the law" has been changed several times since the Constitution was written!! For example, the courts are now operating under Admiralty law, but they will call it "statutory law". They don't talk about how Washington DC is actually a separate country to "These United States", the very reason you constantly hear politicians talking about "our democracy", they're talking about Washington DC, NOT "These United States"!
This is why common law is the law of the land and constitutional law is the law of the sea (Maritime law)
Constitutional law IS common law…maritime is UCC or statutes.
@@JJMusic78 they usually miss the difference between "US Citizen", a corporate title as opposed to a Citizen of the Several States. Justice John Harlan spoke about this in 1901.
@Plumberpete86 you are wrong😂
Thank you.
Property Cases please.
I have a dozen questions on property rights.
Don't be a us citizen and have a trust fund to avoid taxes
You have to know how to navigate many jurisdictions, remaining in honour in your standing . You need to know how to navigate from the Public And the Private. Knowledge
Great Presentation! 👍🏼😉💯
After listening to this man for 5 hours, I strongly feel like I knew him - as if we were good friends... But that's just crazy and surely not possible! Something about this man probably just reminds me of someone I know!
25mins and you realize it's just the longest marketing advertisement by lazy boomers ever made. Nothing of substance in this video
Lmao ty for saving me from watching this entire video
Thank you for saving from watching this crap
Nothing of substance to you doesn't mean it's not full of info. That just shows your ignorance. FYI, within that 25 minutes, they show what the title says. What else did you hope to get out of a video that says the top 100 cases we all should know? Btw, AFA "lazy Boomer" if wasn't for us, YOU wouldn't be here. You should be grateful you're here, you had an 89% chance of being aborted. FYI, that dude up here talking is NOT a Boomer,.
Not watching it now. Thanks.
I went to comments at about 26min looking to see if it was worth continuing XD thank you good Sir, agreed
Enjoyed the video immensely as it gave me quite an insight into how all these issues are thought out. I have no training in the law except for talking to a few lawyers over the years or watching videos like this. I do follow some cases and often disagree with the decisions I hear when reported by the news, especially when they refer back to The Constitution (the "Originalists Argument") as it seems to me that, as a society, we have learned a thing or two over the last 250 or so years causing me to think that, maybe it's time to update our thinking a bit. I should mention that I'm actually Canadian but am watching America to make sure you folks don't go too far off the track. Clearly I'm failing. LOL
Regardless, this video has given me more of an insight into what is going on when judges are considering cases. A layman, like myself, would be prone to look at the case as an individual event which would only require deciding if one side should win or the other. This video has, as I said, given me a bigger picture, that decisions made by judges have much bigger consequences than whether one side is right and other wrong especially where a precendent was already established. I now see a court case as more of a pebble being toss into a pond. Yes, the case might only directly effect two parties; however, the resulting ripples can affect society other cases or society as a whole and, if one case is judged in a certain way, it can and will have effects in other cases in unintended or unpredictable ways and it is part of a judges mission to consider these when rendering that "simple, straightforward decision. This puts things into an entirely different context.
While I'm sure cases in small claims court and the such don't rise to the level of precedent-setting cases, I now see why major cases (right up to the Supreme Court) are not quite as straight forward as I would both think and like and are not necessarily just about right or wrong but more about "how do we want our society to decide issues" when a dispute occurs. Seeing that, I am a bit more comfortable with the back and forth of the court decisions I hear about in the news. There is always back and forth in the interpretation of laws and precident and one has to be vigilant to ensure laws are not interpreted in a way they were not intended. Like my mother used to say, "If you want to find out who's boss around here, just start something. The resent overturning of Roe v. Wade will, no doubt, be a great example of this quote.
Once again, thank you for making this video to help us better understand the thinking from inside the judicial system; it was enlightening. Lastly, as soon as I can get my hands on a copy of the book, I intend to read it so that I can expand my understanding further, so thank you in advance for that.
Who is to decide whether or not what "we" have "learned" is advanced beyond the constitutional understanding? Political grandstanding does not equate to truth, nor does it give the right to decide truth.
Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of
None of these “bans” “orders” “mandates” and “restrictions” are Constitutional and everyone upholding such are in violation of their Oath of Office to uphold and sustain the Constitution!
Wake tf up 😑 I watched a video the other day of a group of "cadets" graduating the police academy, who were being sworn in and as they're repeating their oath they were laughing...Almost hysterically at that!!! These lawyers, judges, and police wipe their ass with the constitution daily 🙄 When you hear these people talk about that outdated piece of paper 📜 Know that they just finished taking a huge shit on our rights and wiping their hole with the constitution!!!
@@muhfkajones don't forget the oath they take, they're all liars from the outset.
@@boostedlss6450 Exactly
@@muhfkajones don't consent
Frantz v. Autry, 18 Okla. 561 (Okla. 1907)
"A constitution in the American sense of the word is the written instrument by which the fundamental powers of government are established, limited, and defined, and by which those powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body politic." In Vanhorne v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 308, the court defines a constitution as follows: "What is a constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established
I am late to the party… you guys are rock stars! Bravo.
Thank you for elaborating on another aspect of a terrifying situation.
As if the Judicial Branch still gives a rip about the Constitution
@Bill Ding the constructor the mere.thought that three different opinions can be right based on how strictly they look at the constitution is nonsense and only serves to generate thousands of anti cannon decisions that can be used to argue cases.
@Bill Ding the constructor No I am saying that the Supreme courts is encouraging judges to ignore the constitution. It is okay rule rule on breaking a law if it is unconstitutional by saying that you are looking at the lowest level of scrutiny. That is hog wash and they know it.
@@brianhillis3701 commies
Would this apply to a child support review hearing?
Congress and the Supreme Court have failed to follow the Constitution for so long they are very corrupt and are part of the deep state
The most important SCOTUS case was Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins.
The decision overturned almost a century of civil procedure. This case blended public law with public policy. That’s why a court will not accept case law prior to this case.
No it was Blessing vs Freestone
This sounds absolutely incredible. Thank you gentlemen for this gift to mankind. I can’t wait to check it out.
Gift to mankind?
I took a Supreme Ct. Ruling to a municipality, they tried to get my daughter to baker act me. It was about the driver's license . .They took my license, and ive been inside for 10yrs. I stood for truth, for that.
What?
What are you smoking JoAnn?
@@marcustulliuscicero9512 Nothing, but there is a lot i could not afford after, my particular court ordeal. This is costly. I did not care to try fighting all of the high costs, any longer. Actually there was so much to this, because the laws i began to find, were very interesting. Few really know. 13 years later, im pretty well read, if nothing more. Additionally, finding so much out, most called my crazy. So, i got use to that. It's fine.
@@joannthomases9304 its amazing how you find out just how much power weve lost when you start getting into law. People are living in delusion. Start reading navajo nation law. Its even worse. People are wanting to fight the control and now being labeled far right just for being for the bill of rights. Propaganda is a bitch
They used a copy right law to put you there because it was their property, in their court. Had you filed a claim to your own court and attached their documents as exhibits with the statement that "not only do I believe , your own court agents believe as well" they would have been the ones who paid the price for their crimes.
The "why" is always the hard part of any inquiry.
The answer is Usually, loss of Liberty.
@Sage is not going to save you Right. Always save to get the easiest questions answered first. Then apply Occam's Razor, or whatever logical inferences work.
Gjhakdkkauakagfjlallflgslhkofskffhhagffaaakfgaafhajahlakafkfkajflhsfsakfkjahgfhglhlllhgjhjsshkllgfkdkakhakdhlhaahlahhafalhaglkahaffaslshfhfafaafhfaahkfalgsghaaksakhjaafkdfkgajjafhsslkfafafhrafadkjffshakhaahdhaaafsfhsfshaljkhshslgfakfalhafjfahkhhgshshfshkghakhlgllsfgaktjaafjasskjafkalhshsjdaashahhghkagfkdhalhhhdalhhskffhsskhgslaffskfaffllgafhhafjkahsfjasafffkdhljlfsgkksgkkaggfaffalfjsakaahhahgghakaaaafhafhlqhfuwfihlsajfhaftijuafrwiwakaghfslafallefahsfagkgafkfdhahlsffffagakhfahflafkaskkaffatttsqueeueurfeijhrhjwtsfjagagahkshhfjaaajhsktgaeyjqkdkdhfakghaahlkjajlggagglgahfkalslssdjgaglfkgkkgafgfkajslafdkgassfaffatwwiiwjakweqetttteuauetifjkkgtwqojtettreitwieutttqtiqutttwtte
@@ryankorn5911 qeuwgkhkglffgffgsltwtt
@@ryankorn5911 ttktkhskgahfssjashkggakfghksdkagggalaegkagkgywktitutttteiwwuieks
Super cool, thank u for this work.
Keep Pressing!!!
What a great video. Wish I could sit and pick their brains and perspectives for another couple hours. Like not just this battle between states and federalism, but what about all of these Article 1 courts administering colorable commercial contract ish law and presuming everyone thinks we’re in judicial Article 3 courts. But maybe I’m off in my understand if administrative and judicial tribunals. I have so many questions 🙋🏽♂️
I bet they left out the most important case, post Erie Railroad v Tomkins, which was Perry v United States. "Sovereignty resides in the people", where SCOTUS revealed the remedy to discharge your debt under HJR 192, PL 73-10, codified at 31 USC 5118(d)(2). The source of all your future labor deposit funds is at the US Treasury Department, which you can read about the minor account at 31 CFR 363.6. The people are the beneficiaries and creditors and the United States is the debtor. It's not the other way around like the BAR attornies and courts like to disclaim. Perry v Untied States is shepardized, so they have to accept it and the courts are required to execute your remedy to settle, set off, and discharge your debts against your estate legacy account - see 31 CFR 203, 31 CFR 363.6, and 28 USC 2041. The courts and the United States Attorney General are acting as your common law trustee and alien property custodians for this account. Put them in their place as Trustees and demand their performance or collapse your trust under the merger rule and take over your legacy account as a secured party creditor and holder in due course of all your securities.
The United States is a bankrupt corporation. They should be teaching that. You can always read Fruit From a Poisonous Tree, Melvin Stamper, JD. He reveals it all... it's not perfect, but it's a good place to start your journey for the truth that the courts are desperately trying to conceal.
Everyone has to know about the constitution and basic laws of the country
We had to have constitutional knowledge when I was in 6th grade or we could NOT go to Jr. hi. ..high school 11th grade built on the that or you couldn't graduate at 12th. Geeez I wonder why it was taken out?
How many cases are their about a runaway judiciary, particularly limitations or checks on an unaccountable Supreme Court?
Bravo 👏 this is a real service to the people for our constitution!
Can I get this book on audio?
Law is just like a machine. How to apply and when to apply is to be decided by then honourable courts by application of mind
SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO WRITE LAWS.
SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO ENFORCE LAWS.
SUPREME COURT CAN ONLY OFFER OPINIONS AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A LAW, NOTHING MORE.
The power is not in these things you mentioned but to show ,or make guidelines in which can open eyes of those which are corrupted beyond reasoning.this is a greater act then any other that you mentioned.to change what is considered right...into what is truly right...and within man's understanding to be able to be looked upon and know the difference.
Us supreme court justices should be united in the practice of justice and law, and the legal system should not be part of or entangled with law anything attached to the word legal is corrupt
They "shouldn't " get entangled in politics! 😊
Any and all judges who don't abide by the rules of the Constitution need to get lost!!
They should be hanged for high treason like they are supposed to.
Exactly
LYNCHED..
@@ladydragon7777 I missed something I guess. Where is that in the Constitution ???
32:50 is a question I asked myself, and the book’s authors were in fact helpful and reasonable when I commented on the omission of Smith v. Allwright, a 1944 case striking down the all-white primaries of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas. Scholars are coming to the conclusion that Smith v. Allwright was just as critical to the Civil Rights movement as Brown v. Board of Education, and in the Rim South and Acadiana it had much more rapid and lasting effects than Brown. The list I will say is generally biased towards recent cases and omits many significant older ones, but again the authors were reasonable when I noted this.
This entire hour and a half video seems to be an advertisement to go to their website and spend twenty dollars to see what the title to this video promises.
Brilliant Presentation of Canon Law
Was Buck v Bell anti-cannon?
I feel that Terry v Ohio took away the 4th amendment by giving law enforcement WAY too much power over the civilian
I agree!
I just bought this book .. ready to go .. Thank you ACB for being such an inspiration
What’s the deal with Lochner in the beginning? Why does he say he thinks it shouldn’t be anti canon?
Reading of constitution is very much important for clear understanding about the government
Looking at all these comments people keep bringing up the Constitution, a constitution is for persons not people, your remedy will not be found in either the US Constitution or the State constitution... if you're given a commercial instrument your answer and status will determine a person or mans outcome. If you walk into a courtroom with no standing, dishonor and as a debtor your success rate goes from about 3% to 0. An Affidavit of Truth can go a long way being that the prosecution will not rebut, and any unrebutted affidavit stands as truth... this stands true even in the defacto courts.
Update on this video?
Is this your dchool?
School....
That’s as far as context of projects I’m currently interested in… it is not the end of statements.. the escalation of tech in law and influence understanding of large scale process and speed over reality of defacto and dejure while NOT foregoing the safety of what the law provides. But, law in vacuum gives over entrenchment more air for the downside of fire…. The better involves helps.
United nations is requested to legal channel to telecast judgments of supreme courts all over the world so that entire legal community in the world will.have.more knowledge' about law concepts.
I think it is preparations for world governance
Ok, so people ran away from Britian and 'British Temple Bar' is our lawyers? Why? Is there another registry ? No state shall give license for any traffic court, what is this all about. Copyright laws, cannot copyright a name ? Anything? Why a Crown copyright to these people who ran from their control on berth certificates=commerce??? And commercial Religion, like for-given Christian name? In commerce? On berth bond? Religion, on commerce ? So, intelligence cannot, comprehend plain English. So, how does this all apply to, covenants, in bible?
Birth - not berth.
@@colt4667 yes, thank you...i wrote it the other way so they see we all know...
Who is John Galt?
Lol.
Rand was an idiot.
Greed is not good.
Maybe write another book specifically covering criminal procedures...its super important...particularly now in this police state that people know their rights, or lack there of
Better yet make it mandatory for police officers to understand your rights.
5 Constitutional Law that are specific to the Child Support legislations, Blessing, Sage, Carrelli
Blessing vs Freestone and Hale vs Henkel
@@jeremyshaffer9200 Your are Correct. Thanks for your support and comments.
47:06 "Successfully formulate health care challenge" , perhaps i don't understand use of "formulate".
You guys jump around, there is NO direction noting case is based using Constitution rather than what Supreme Court says.
Good Work fellas..i think its actaully good Argument tho..thanks ! The fundamental rights point was great !
What’s the name of the book?
Honesty and sincere and truth are and the same which is the place of justice. Truth is a pillar of the justice
You guys did study quantum language?
If you are unfamiliar with the Cato Institute, be aware that it has a strong bias against the right for Labor to organize for better deals, but in favor of unlimited rights for the wealthiest to combine their power and influence to suppress labor and consumer rights.
Thank you so much
Preach 💯💯💯
Wow, rights and structure laws which need to make regional health and climate work workable and therefore legal… the rights of individuals and groups in the context of jurisprudence. So amazing.
damn. i misheard them at beginning. Didn't expect the paywall at the end. haha. o well.
@@wxsawxsa2941 You should try going outside more
It’ll give your brain some air
What was the very first U.S. S.C. decision or case ever heard or docketed???
The second amendment
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be INFRINGED.
Well regulated has nothing to do with rules, regulations or legislation, well regulated means well armed with weapons that are in good working order. The second part of the second amendment proves that fact, being necessary to the security of a free state,we the people are the state, not the fiction that calls itself the state today,in order for the people (state) to remain free from invasion and state and federal corruption and oppression we need to be well armed. The third part proves we the people are the militia not the military or law enforcement, what proves that as fact is the second amendment explicitly says the right of the people. Not the right of the government, not the right of the military,not the right of the law enforcement,it explicitly says the people. To keep means to own to have, to bear means to carry to wield to use, every American citizen has the right to carry a gun openly or concield anywhere in the united states of america, nowhere does the second amendment limit where or when or how a American citizen can carry. There is no age limit in the second amendment of the constitution of the united states of america. The government and state has no legal lawful authority to legislate any weapons that can be carried by a human being, the second amendment forbids it
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!!.
INFRINGED means to take away, to limit, to remove, to violate.
Reduce reuse recycle all bodies too
Brown v Board, R.I.P. Dunbar and the quality individuals that you produced.
The People are The Masters of Both Congress and The Courts A.Lincoln
I got hook to Supreme Court at age 30 as intellectual development and since followed their ruling religiously .Also since then learn history of Supreme Court but guess I m rare Xers & Latino follow this institution.
Beautiful
"what did we not include? nothing in civil procedure"
:/ that isn't how english works. was it included or not?
Thanks
Then officially legally those courts have no legal lawful authority whatsoever, the constitution is the only thing that gives the court any authority,if they refuse to acknowledge and obey and uphold parts of the constitution then their legal authority is officially null and void. They are tresspassers of their offices.
Wow!
True, cause the constitution is a contract..
I agree but what can we do about it if we cant put forse
how do we put forse behind it
I simply MUST know; Were these videos & book the reason Josh Blackman kept his hair short for so long? We really deserve an answer Josh.
Common man is to have legal awareness. For this legal awareness tv channels in each country is required.
Any one interested in a degree in Jurisprudence should be required to Swear and Attest an Oath before the Bar , that they will NOT partake in , nor affiliate with any Partisan groups which may cause a prejudicial decision , and pursuant to that decision affect any ruling as it pertains to Sentencing and/or Monetary awards or Fines .
With any Oaths and Affirmations for the Bench to include the Continuation , Affirmation , and Affectation of that Oath specifically !
Our Rights are being ignored; right to due process
Ignored
The title should read “ an hour and a half of reasons why you should buy my book”
After all we are not created from government and we the people's who like to know our natural God giving rights that would be a great video
Every one likes truth .no one likes false or lies to be digested.
Hence overall courts stands for truth and justice for truth
Davis v Healey
5:00 - This talk is for non lawyers
7:20 - Starts lawyer babel, enough to not watch the rest.
I agree with your timeline but not the conclusion. Since the law is the end product of 'lawyer babel' (good characterization), I find the 7:20> portion far more compelling, to say nothing about informing my understanding of the
@@RtaincCo Lawyer
When you said legal theory that means it's BAR attorney law which isn't common law
Basic law is to be explained with pictures since common man may not.understand or may not show interest since it.will.have volumes and volumes of pages
All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 144, 176, (1803)
WE THE PEOPLE INHERIT ALL THE POWER
💯💯💯🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️🙌🏻
You should make sure you are using the original constitution. Not what has been added or taken away from in the last 20 years!
Great book.
The law still holds. The people complaining are simpletons. The way our system works is by checking and balancing itself. Many of the problems in our laws derive from those at the state and local level. Federal laws are the highest authority and already you can picture the issue just between regulating 3 governing laws in 3 jurisdictions. Next come the people. The same people in your community become politicians, city officials, etc.. They have the power to apply city ordinances and other laws that can come in a direct problem with hierarchical laws that then have to be amended and then new ones created. This creates a power vaccum well educated powerful people can easily manipulate and do it with impunity most times.. The people who suffer are the citizens. The federal government today is not doing enough to combat corruption at the local level.
No Sir it's properly the duty mostly of the people, specifically the jury
The Filburn case proves that tyrants can claim that ANYTHING in the universe is 'interstate commerce'.
Using the zip code & claiming to be a US citizen gives them that ability. We consent to it all!
Sovereign immunity most go
@@johnf6687 very true, BUT, as a “US Citizen, (employee of the corporation in foreign territory, [outside the 50 states]) called the District of Columbia, the people are not citizens of the sovereign states, have lost their sovereign status, and these corporations acting as the government, have stepped into the void the 14th amendment created. Where are the people? They have left the land! They only “reside” on the land, while working FOR the corporation, and are ALLOWED to do so, as long as they pay tax and obey government acting FOR the sovereign.
If you pay taxes on wages, income, gains, property, you own nothing. If you are Tenant on any Title or only hold CERTIFICATES of Title, you own nothing. You are ALLOWED to possess, but only if you pay & obey. Slavery!!
The service providers taking care of all the people that lack knowledge, get a free pass, as they are only providing services for those that cannot care for themselves as evidenced by the people’s’ own admittance of their status as US Citizens. The people have abandoned their land, their status and all that is included: Freedom, Rights, and the de jure government.
It’s fraud & deception no doubt. But that is how it is done.
There is an awakening happening. I pray enough learn who they are, and take the reins!
@@ccasagram so they say, but I never had full disclosure to even make a correct assumption.
@@karenmmcthree true! We must find source documents, learn their origin, meaning, and use. It is so hard to unravel all the fraud.
Law is so simple to understand. Law favors truth and humanity and dignity and honesty
Law reject lies and dishonesty and cruelty and negligence in duty and immoral attitude
@1:31:56 “It’s not going to be on YouTtube”😂
Terry V Ohio was an unjust finding seeing it seams to be the leading cause of the prison industrial complex system we have today!
What's really funny is that the constitution arrived with the Northwest Territorial Ordnance in 1787 as federal law for federal territory and is limited to that territory.
Please elaborate. Where can I find more information
@@soupermancampbell8668 all 4 Organic Laws for the USA are at the beginning of USC 1. All laws that follow previous law must conform to previous law. Art IV of the AoC provides your right to travel FREELY. It says all inhabitants have a right to all privileges citizens grant to themselves. At the time, citizens in England were those allowed to elect members of their govt. The constitution begins with 'we the people of the US', not USA. It is a document by and for the US/feds. The federal govt was created to unite states in defense+commerce. When the revolution ended, all Americans were free+equal under American common law. Nobody had any authority to rule anyone else. That also means no group had any right to rule anyone else. Everybody was king on their own land. The US/feds are FOREIGN with respect to the states, and that is why they were placed offshore in Manhatten, and then DC after the war of 1812. The US/feds have no authority to dump immigrants into states. They only have authority to immigrate into US/federal territory. Only native born Americans are entitled to all of the sovereignty Americans had after the revolution. There is so much I can say, it's hard to even know where to begin. Nobody required to take an oath in the constitution takes a proper oath. They are always falsified. The constitution has therefore never even adopted. Ratified, yes. Adopted, no. It's just a GD piece of paper as GW Bush stated. It's totally irrelevant outside of US/federal territory. Native born Americans have UNALIENABLE rights, see the DoI. On US/federal territory, there are only civil rights, and bill of rights. See territorial jurisdiction. See chief justice John Jay's explanation of how sovereignty devolved upon all Americans equally after the revolution in Chisholm v. Georgia. Read all of the 4 organic laws. Written law only applies on US/fed territory, which post civil war, includes State and municipal land, and probably corporate land too since govt created corporations. Americans are ruled by a massive fraud, and nobody sees or cares. Because freedom is a responsibility, and nobody wants any part of that. Be ruled by God, or you will be ruled by tyrants. That was our warning. The common law, or tyranny. See the channel Jenn the Liberty Lion. I posted a lot of foundational law in there, and she does an excellent job of trying to educate people in the foundations of American law. Didn't you ever ask yourself why we are ruled by tyrants when we defeated a king to be free? It's a massive fraud, and that is why every govt form always asks if you are a US/fed citizen. They demand that you lie yourself into their jurisdiction in order to claim a right. If you have questions, I will do my best to answer. It's such a big question that it really demands a book, but I shared the essentials. Enough to get you started.
@@soupermancampbell8668 1776,1777: DoI+AoC. These documents create the USA, and US/fed govt to unite states in defense+commerce.
1787: Northwest Territorial Ordnance+constitution. US/fed law to govern US/fed territory.
The USA still operates under the AoC. The AoC has never been repealed. The constitution slightly modifies the AoC by a 3/4 vote ratification process, as stipulated in the AoC. No AoC = no USA, and that is the globalists goal. The USA has been overthrown right in front of everybody's eyes. Everyone is just blind.
@@soupermancampbell8668 you're welcome 🤔
I have about a million questions. I have only scratched the surface as I can see. I'm going to start digging based on your reply. I have a limited understanding of common law, the straw man, right to travel, admiralty and am going to continue searching for the truth.
don't watch and dynamically comment on videos in a live presentation.
it is editorializing, and when you made the base video it means you willfully made the underlying video worse and have to add more to it.
it works when youtubers do it cause they aren't recording the video's audio through microphones in the room. instead they splice the video, and also they give larger amounts of commentary than just indenting comments which would have been appropriate in the video but were left out.
Email according to the Constitution that says the government supposed to pay all of our living expenses then why are they double-dipping and charging us to while the government still paying them. I'm referring to Chili's housing Ridgewood also include mortgages which is also called a secured loan meaning that's already paid for for us. We shouldn't have to borrow our own money and pay interest on it and also we shouldn't have to pay property tax either.