This site’s informational fact-based content presents how one can move one’s secured God-endowed rights when it is necessary to access natural-law-based justice from the present court system in the State of Michigan body-corporate governmental association, which is likely very similar to the courts in other such States. Our “History Section B” found on the sidebar of this site presents the difference between the State of Michigan and Michigan (the State in the Union), both established as a public Trust but that function under a different form of law. People in the States of the Union interact together under the Public Law, meaning the unwritten natural law of conscience. All State bodies corporate are franchises of the commerce-based federal Trust that functions under the laws of commerce that we term Private Law, meaning written rules of conduct established by a body of persons to which all people who associate in that Trust are subject. Our focus is on state-level courts, but the content applies to federal-level courts too. “Remedeemer” (pronounced: rem e deem' er) is the combination of “rem”, a legal term that means a court action about or against 'the thing' within the commerce-based Trust, and “redeemer” as one who lawfully establishes one's own right to be free from subjugation to a court process that was begun from someone's presumption that one acts via a legal persona pertaining to the thing. As the host of this site, I especially welcome you Readers who are beginning to explore how to protect your God-endowed rights now that you’re realizing what you thought were your fundamental rights are instead being treated as mere social privileges by governors and per rulings made by court officers. All Readers are encouraged to view the new file found on the sidebar, titled: Timeline of the two governmental Trust associations. It provides the date-specific historic events that established our original and still-functioning governmental Trust (beginning with the 1776 Declaration of Independence) merged with our exposure of the events that gave rise to our form of government and what has caused foreign persons and entities since then to establish the separate commerce-based federal Trust structure. Along with others, the host of this website operates Michigan's updated original (c.1835) republican form of civilian government, based from New Buffalo township, Michigan. That informational website is ministryofnewbuffalotownship.org

Sunday, September 6, 2020

The current court system is established to serve a specific societal status of people, but court officials must also serve those of us who do not operate that status – Part One: Overview

The courts today are operating outside the original delegation of authority derived from the American people as set forth within the Federal Constitution and the original constitution of a State in the Union. The original delegation of power is reliant on the peoples’ authority being derived from Creator God, exercised in accordance with the benevolent Laws of Nature’s God as the supreme Law of the Land. Per the Declaration of Independence, a new societal Trust was declared forth, which we explain in Part Two of this post. The current courts are instead operating in accordance with the man-created rules of commerce applicable within the Federal Reserve System, operated like a Trust, established after passage of the 1913 Federal Reserve Act; this fact is of the utmost significance for people who seek to obtain justice from a court officer. Officers acting for the court system (such as law enforcement officers) and in the courtrooms (such as prosecutors, attorneys, and judges) are doing so under the presumption that all people socially act within the Federal Reserve System. 

The Federal Reserve Act, at its Section 16, presents the definite and simple means that the Congress left for singular people to express their retained right to move their interests in accordance with the organic Trust, protected by the Federal Constitution and its inclusive Bill of Rights. That Constitution is the fourth law document comprising the American governing Trust established under God. The other three sequential originating and still-current laws are the Decl. of Indep., the Articles of Confederation (detailing how States interact with other States), and the Northwest Ordinance (detailing how people forming a new State could acquire that State’s admission into the original Union of States). Section 16 of the Fed Act, codified as Title 12 of the U.S. Code at Section 411, provides that people can choose to make exchanges with other people with use of national money, public money termed “lawful money”, instead of choosing to utilize the private currency (Federal Reserve Notes) controlled by Federal Reserve bankers. Money, or currency, represents human-energy. One expresses one's demand to handle lawful money by writing on the back of a banking instrument (such as a check) "Redeemed for lawful money, per 12 USC 411", adding one's name under that, instead of just signing the instrument under the pre-printed word ENDORSEMENT found there. The absence of one's demand indicates that one is not redeeming the face-value showing on the instrument.  

For the benefit of people who do not realize it, the Federal Reserve is not a federal agency. It’s a private, mostly foreign-owned corporation, operating under international maritime law –- admiralty law (that governs a ship’s cargo) brought on land –- because banking law is Maritime Administrative Law. The Fed acts in conjunction with other organizations of ‘central bankers’, who deem themselves the qualified controllers of global commerce acting to regulate how much currency to circulate at any time under the premise that their expertise, and private credit from which they internally operate their scheme, benefits the people of participating nations. Nations have been borrowing currency from central bankers, with interest attached, instead of issuing their own usury-free national money and entering into separate nation-to-nation trade agreements. There has been much evil perpetrated by central bankers; some leaders of nations have been forced into participating or else face a coup, central bankers have caused intentional economic busts and booms, and they have even deceptively fomented wars to force nations to borrow more currency to fund aggression or to defend against it. But for the purpose of this website, what there is to know is that the American people have the secured right to not endorse –- not place their trust in –- the bankers’ debt-based scheme. If people exchange their energy from without the Fed system, then people are not subject to its Maritime Administrative Law, which is sometimes referred to as the law merchant, because such people do not act in the role of an individual ‘member bank’ of the Fed. 

By choosing to not endorse the bankers’ private credit as the medium for one to express one’s energy, one is self-freed –- redeemed –- from a correlated Lien against one’s energy (subjecting peoples' energy / conduct to regulations) and against one’s possessions acquired with the Fed’s currency. We provide detail about this in the other parts to this post. 

The court system’s officials only act to administer the Lien. The Lien is the “thing” we identify in this site’s Introduction. It’s the contract underlying the authority for a person, sometimes being a prosecutor, to begin a court case. The Lien is what causes one to have presence in the State of Michigan (or other State of State), because “the State of Michigan” is a corporation within the Federal Reserve System; it uses Fed currency. The corporate State is not the same societal form of government as “Michigan”, the State in the national Union. This distinction is detailed in Part Two of this post. Pertaining to some of our Readers, people who are recording a Notice document as the means to present that they operate the political status of “State National” of a Union State, as the basis for overcoming a corporate officer’s presumption that they have voluntary domicile in a State of State, may not have first ceased being voluntarily present in a State of State / the Federal Reserve System due to their continued endorsement of the Fed’s private credit. We hosts of this site offer, as proof of the importance of domicile and presence, Michigan Court Rule 2.105 (J)(1) and (2) that concerns the court’s jurisdiction over a defendant, or individual. That Rule says jurisdiction is governed by “the United States Constitution [which protects people who actually are State Nationals] and the constitution and laws of the State of Michigan”, citing Michigan Compiled Law 600.701 that presents the fact that either domicile or presence in the State confers jurisdiction over an individual. The second part of that Court Rule states that there is “no territorial limitation on the range of process issued by a court”. The word “territorial” means within any State of State, because all corporate States are within the Federal Reserve System, which operates from the District of Columbia since the Fed Act was a contract with the bankers entered into by the Congress. 

Thus, an “action” or “complaint” that starts a court case is just a transaction pertaining to a claimed right or unmet obligation existing due to the Lien on human-energy concerning those people who trust within the Federal Reserve System of societal engagement. The Lien is why the only plea against a criminal charge [note that “charge” is an energy term] is “Guilty” or “Not Guilty” of the particulars, and can’t be “Innocent” (i.e. not a party to the transaction); the first court proceeding is conducted by a Lien administrator / judge who must obtain from the accused his/her “understanding” of the charge, and by admitting understanding the accused thereby also admits he/she trusts within the Federal Reserve System. The judge can take silent notice of an individual’s domicile [indicated per the individual’s street address on a court document] or presence in the State of State. In a non-criminal case, the party who “appears” or appears via an attorney automatically effectuates such admission, because attorneys only represent societal interests that exist in commerce. People who so interact with the court system do it via an individualized commerce-based account established for that purpose (for the transfer of money, or energy via some ordered act, as settlement of the case), which account resembles their given and family name but is spelled in all capitalized letters. That creation is explained in Part Two of this post. When a judge opens a court session by asking if the body standing in the courtroom is ‘so-and-so’, the judge is referring to that account name, seeking the individual’s agreement that he/she is associated with that name in the capacity of moving his/her societal interests via that account. Those of us people who are without domicile or presence in the Federal Reserve System have the constitutionally-protected temporary peace-keeping pass-through use of such account [per the Congress], instead of moving from within it, for our need to present truth to a corporate officer in relation to another party who does act via such account (which party could be THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ______ ). The judge-administrator can utilize our pass-through use to make connection with the other party’s account, since that administrator is tasked to bring the case to settlement. So if there are not at least two actual parties to the underlying action or complaint, no case can exist under the pertaining Maritime Administrative Law. Furthermore, that judge is bound to acknowledge “the supreme Law of the Land” referred to within the Federal Constitution at its concluding Article VI, which governs the original and still-current societal Trust under which we State Nationals exclusively move per our birthright or our lawful naturalization. We are due justice in accordance with the Creator’s Law (via a human’s inner knowing of right from wrong), whether accessing the court to convey that we have been wrongly-identified as a defendant of a commerce-based transaction to which we are not a party, or as a plaintiff requiring relief from someone’s violation of our fundamental rights or our documented societal interests.

Note: The references to America's history in this post, obtainable by emailing us, are now provided as "History Section A" and "History Section B" found on the sidebar of this site.

No comments:

Post a Comment