On Jurisdictions: Who and Where are You?

Entrapment and Enslavement... is it legal or lawful?

Ever wonder how the current legal system can reduce you to have no power and there seems to be no justice? If you wondered how this is accomplished, it is through the gaining of jurisdiction.

Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition:

JURISDICTION. The power and authority constitutionally conferred upon (or constitutionally recognized as existing in) a court or judge to pronounce the sentence of the law, or to award the remedies provided by law, upon a state of facts, proved or admitted, referred to the tribunal for decision, and authorized by law to be the subject of investigation or action by that tribunal, and in favor of or against persons (or a res) who present themselves, or who are brought, before the court in some manner sanctioned by law as proper and sufficient. 1 Black, Judgm. { 215. And see Nenno v. Railroad Co., 103 Mo. App. 540, 80 S. W. 24 ; Ingram v. Fuson, 118 Ky. 882, 82 S. W. 606; Tod v. Crismau. 123 Iowa, 693, 99 N. W. 686; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127, 99 N. W. 909 ; Wightman v. Karsner, 20 Ala. 451 ; Reynolds v. Stockton, 140 U. S. 254, 11 Sup. Ct. 773, 35 L. Ed. 464 ; Templeton v. Ferguson, 89 Tex. 47, 33 S. W. 329; Succession of Weigel, 17 La. Ann. 70.

Jurisdiction is a power constitutionally conferred upon a judge or magistrate to take cognizance of and determine causes according to law, and to carry his sentence into execution. U. S. v. Arredondo, 6 Pet. 091, 8 L. Ed. 547; Yates v. Lansing. 9 Johns. (N. Y.) 413, 6 Am. Dec. 290; Johnson v. Jones, 2 Neb. 135.

The authority of a court as distinguished from the other departments; judicial power considered with reference to its scope and extent as respects the questions and persons subject to it ; power given by law to hear and decide controversies. Abbott.

Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine the subject-matter in controversy between parties to the suit ; to adjudicate or exercise any judicial power over them. Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Pet. 657, 717, 9 L. Ed. 1233.

Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine a cause; the authority by which judicial officers take cognizance of and decide causes. Brownsville v. Basse, 43 Tex. 440.

—Appellate jurisdiction. The power and authority to take cognizance of a cause and proceed to its determination, not in its initial stages, but only after it has been finally decided by an inferior court, i. c, the power or review and determination on appeal, writ of error, certiorari, or other similar process.

—Concurrent jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of several different tribunals, both authorized to deal with the same subject-matter at the choice of the suitor. State v. Sinnott, 89 Me. 41, 35 Atl. 1007; Rogers v. Bonnett. 2 Okl. 553, 37 Pac. 1078; Hercules Iron Works v. Railroad Co.. 141 III. 491, 30 N. E. 1050.

—Contentions jurisdiction. In English ecclesiastical law. That branch of the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts which is exercised upon adversary or contentious (opposed, litigated) proceedings.

—Co-ordinate jurisdiction. That which is possessed by courts of equal rank, degree, or authority, equally competent to deal with the matter in question, whether belonging to the same or different systems ; concurrent jurisdiction.

—Criminal jurisdiction. That which exists for the trial and punishment of criminal Bl.Law Dict.(2d Ed.)—43 offenses ; the authority by which judicial officers take cognizance of and decide criminal cases. Ellison v. State. 123 Ind. 492, 24 N. E. 739; In re City of Buffalo. 139 N. Y. 422. 34 N. E. 1103.

—Equity jurisdiction. In a general sense, the jurisdiction belonging to a court of equity, but more particularly the aggregate of those cases, controversies, and occasions which form proper subjects for the exercise of the powers of a chancery court. See Anderson v. Carr, 65 Hun. 179, 19 N. Y. Supp. 992 ; People v. McKane, 78 Hun. 154, 28 N. Y. Supp. 981.

—Foreign jurisdiction. Any jurisdiction foreign to that of the forum. Also the exercise by a state or nation of jurisdiction beyond its own territory, the right being acquired by treaty or otherwise.

—General jurisdiction. Such as extends to all controversies that may be brought before a court within the legal bounds of rights and remedies; as opposed to special or limited jurisdiction, which covers only a particular class of cases, or cases where the amount in controversy is below a prescribed sum, or which is subject to specific exceptions. The terms "general" and "special," applied to jurisdiction, indicate the difference between a legal authority extending to the whole of a particular subject and one limited to a part; and, when applied to the terms of court, the occasion upon which these powers can be respectively exercised, (iracie v. Freeland, 1 N. Y. 232.

—Limited jurisdiction. This term is ambiguous, and the books sometimes use it without due precision. It is sometimes carelessly employed instead of "special." The true distinction between courts is between such as possess a general and such as have only a special jurisdiction for a particular purpose, or are clothed with special powers for the performance. Obert v. Hammel, 18 X. J. Law, 73.

—Original jurisdiction. Jurisdiction in the first instance : jurisdiction to take cognizance of a cause at its inception, try it, and pass judgment upon the law and facts. Distinguished from appellate jurisdiction.

—Probate jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction as or dinarily pertains to probate, orphans', or surrogates' courts, including the establishment of wills, the administration of estates, the supervising of the guardianship of infants, the allotment of dower, etc. See Richardson v. Greeu. 61 Fed. 423. 9 C. C. A. 505 ; Chadwick v. Chadwick. 6 Mont. 5G6, 13 Pac. 385.

—Special Jurisdiction. A court authorized to take cognizance of only some few kinds of causes or proceedings expressly designated by statute is called a "court of special jurisdiction."

—Summary jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a court to give a judgment or make an order itself forth with ; e. g., to commit to prison for contempt ; to punish malpractice in a solicitor: or. in the case of justices of the peace, a jurisdiction to convict an offender themselves instead of committing him for trial by a jury. Wharton.

—Territorial Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction considered as limited to cases arising or persons residing within a defined territory, as a county, a judicial district, etc. The authority of any court is limited by the boundaries thus fixed. See Phillips v. Thralls. 26 Kan. 781.

—Voluntary jurisdiction. In English law. A jurisdiction exercised by certain ecclesiastical courts, in matters where there is no opposition. 3 Bl. Comm. 00. The opposite of contentious jurisdiction, (g. v.) In Scotch law. One exercised in matters admitting of no opposition or question, and therefore cognizable by any judge, and in any place, and on any lawful day. Bell.

—Jurisdiction clause. In equity practice. That part of a bill which is intended to give jurisdiction of the suit to the court, by a general averment that the acts complained of are contrary to equity, and tend to the injury of the complainant, and that he has no remedy, or not a complete remedy, without the assistance of a court of equity, is called the "jurisdiction clause." Mitf. Eq. PI. 43.

ECCLESIASTICAL. Something belonging to or set apart for the church, as distinguished from "civil" or "secular," with regard to the world. Wharton.

History

Throughout Roman history and the subsequent Roman Empire, there was an ongoing struggle on authority, taxes, and money. As the Roman Catholic Church became the main authorized religion of Rome, it brought with it a presumed authority as provided by the Creator and given to St. Peter the apostle, by the Son of Man, to build the church, and hence, the authority of a higher power over kings and royalty.

As was covered in the post on corporations, the structure of ownership and authority in the Catholic Church of the corporate structure was fashioned after Roman corporations so the church could hold possessions through the changing seats of the Pope and in the diocese over decades and centuries. This incorporating protected property and wealth of the church.

By the late 1200’s AD, due to ongoing controversy between the church authority and Philip IV (the Fair) of France and Edward I of England, Pope Boniface VIII pushed back on the temporal or earthly jurisdiction. Both sides, church and state, did not want undue influence into each others affairs. Pope Boniface desired to separate the church from the authority of the kings of the land. This jurisdictional tension continued until November 18, 1302, when Pope Boniface VIII issued the bull Unam Sanctam(‘One Holy’). A bull is an official document or edict from the Pope. He declared jurisdiction over the air (the spirit) and hence a greater hierarchy of authority over the temporal.

Unam Sanctam

One God, One Faith, One Spiritual Authority

Pope Boniface VIII - 1302

Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,‘ and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

We venerate this Church as one, the Lord having said by the mouth of the prophet: ‘Deliver, O God, my soul from the sword and my only one from the hand of the dog.’ [Ps 21:20] He has prayed for his soul, that is for himself, heart and body; and this body, that is to say, the Church, He has called one because of the unity of the Spouse, of the faith, of the sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. This is the tunic of the Lord, the seamless tunic, which was not rent but which was cast by lot [Jn 19:23- 24]. Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, since the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: ‘Feed my sheep‘ [Jn 21:17], meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence we understand that He entrusted all to him [Peter]. Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John ‘there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.’ We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: ‘Behold, here are two swords‘ [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: ‘Put up thy sword into thy scabbard‘ [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered for the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: ‘There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God‘ [Rom 13:1-2], but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.

For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: ‘Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms‘ and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: ‘The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man‘ [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven‘ etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

The continuance of this bull was the formal division of the jurisdictions of authority.

To further clarify the distinctions, a visual provides the areas of authority:

Herein lies the interesting questions on actual authority…

• Can you have air without the land?

• No air is possible without the land

• Land is the foundation of the entire planet

• Land is where man’s domain resides

• Does the creation of the Creator not take precedent as the creations dominion and authority is on the land?

• If the Creator created man in his image, who is of higher authority, a man who sometimes acts as Pope, or a man who does no harm to others and is master of his own land and only claims to be a man?

• A title is a choice. It is after creation.

Creator - creation - everything else…

Titles and Jurisdiction

By taking a title and changing your status, one can become at risk of falling under a jurisdiction you did not intend. Look carefully at the definition from above; if you decide to be a “person” and “present yourself” (represent) as residing (residence rather than domicile) to a judge or magistrate, rather than to be a man or woman who is “present” independent of representation (sui juris) with sovereign control of oneself as mankind, you will quickly fall into the trap of language and under someone else’s jurisdiction.

Here is a simple explanation: the Pope is a man. He chooses to “sometimes act as” the Pope. This is both a choice and an appointment through internal cardinal voting at the Vatican. He was a man before he was a Pope. In other words, he was a creation of the Creator before he was “selected” as Pope and gaining that title.

Are you a man or a title? Do you sometimes act as the title, or are you the title? This is how jurisdiction is gained... by reducing you to a title that is less than mankind (at birth) and gaining higher power because all other titles are less than the governing jurisdiction. In the jurisdiction definition above, the words are highlighted and the clarity is highlighted to show where jurisdiction is gained.

American Government Jurisdiction

We have covered the constitution and the different capitalization techniques and styling through Roman law capitus diminutio in previous articles. This was clearly outlined in the Safety vs Freedom series. When the constitution was written, it was to create a contract between the Confederacy and the new organization; the Federal Republic. There was just too much to do for one organization to handle.

• The first thing to note is that the entire job of the “Federal Government” was to exercise the “Delegated Powers” from the constitution written by the Continental Congress under the Confederacy to delegate international jurisdiction

• The powers all exist in the international jurisdiction of the sea

• The “interstate commerce clause” exists in that jurisdiction, because our states are also nations (commerce crosses state lines, private trade is typically local or within the nation-state)

• Everything that the Federal Government was ever mandated to do, is thus supposed to be of an international nature, and was meant to be limited to the functions assigned to them, by the Confederacy acting as “We the People” representation from the States.

• The Federal Republic is “WE the PEOPLE” as representatives of the STATES

• Mankind as Americans on the land and soil are “we the people”

Notice how the styling (as also demonstrated in the founding documents) follow the Roman capitus diminutio rules. All court documents do the same thing. That is why JOHN SOMEONE DOE is all capital. It reduces that man to a slave and jurisdiction is gained by answering “yes” to the question if you are that slave entity JOHN SOMEONE DOE. It is that easy and that simple. The legal system has rules. They use those rules and language to deceive the people. Then the people become slaves “voluntarily” answering their “loaded” questions.

• A jurisdiction is “invoked” or “claimed” as a result of the: (1) subject matter and (2) capacity of the parties involved in a dispute.

• Example: A controversy over access to sea lanes between two naval vessels is obviously an admiralty issue, while a controversy over horse pasturage between two unincorporated farms in Montana is obviously a soil jurisdiction issue.

What do you need to know?

• You, as mankind, should only need to be able to pinpoint and manage the two jurisdictions that you are responsible for (soil and land)

• You direct your employees (Federal Republic - National, Territorial, and Municipal government) regarding how you want the rest of the business of your nation handled (maritime and admiralty and municipal affairs)

• Because our Forefathers established a “Secular State” and “separation between church and state” and “freedom of religion”, the Jurisdiction of the Air is limited to Municipal Jurisdiction (and not over all mankind), which was confined to the ten miles square of the District of Columbia — and never intended to usurp beyond the Municipality of Washington, DC — though it has…

Practical Application

Based on jurisdiction, does it make sense for our employees in the federal government who were tasked with the enumerated (specific and limited) powers for national, territorial and municipal work, to have that same jurisdiction over land and soil and living men and women living on the land and soil? Do those government entities have land and soil jurisdiction?

So, when our Federal Service Providers are “dry-docked” on our land and soil (through forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings), they are obligated to act according to our law — literally the Law of the Land, and not the international law of the sea, nor the municipal laws (admiralty, maritime, ecclesiastical).

It is important to keep in mind, our Law of the Land is derived from Natural Law and originating from Ethereal Law. The shire structure was the local community from pre-Norman conquest that took care of the local land/common/natural law. But, it all derived from Creation.

Reminder on shires:

“Long ago in England, while that remote island, at large, was under rule of the Anglo-Saxon kings of the earth, small groups of Godly man and their families gathered together within their shire (later, the king’s county) to deal with that which they knew is upon our Lord’s shoulder —- government. Within these shires, groups of families called tithings (ten families) further united into ten tithings under the Lordship of the Christ to form what we know today as “the Hundred”. In this, they were aware of our Father’s Proverb. “Many wait on the favor of rulers, but justice comes to a man from the Lord” Proverbs 29:26 (LXX). Therefore, the members of each Hundred, as a whole, took responsibility for the crimes and defaults of each and every one of its members, and were therefore diligent as to who remained within their Hundred and who did not belong. With each and every member involved, they formed their own hundred and shire courts, chose their own constable of the hundred and reeve of the shire (later, the king’s constable and sheriff), etc., all independent of the so-called “king’s prerogative,” and dispensed justice as The Word directed.”

William, J., Lee, R., & Joseph, J. (1998). The Book of The Hundreds. The Christian Jural Society Press.

Lawful vs Legal

A Dictionary of Law - 1893

•Lawful – In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; moral, ethical

•Legal – Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal banks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual Law

Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241.

•Color of law. The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.”

Who is Foreign?

• If the employees of the contract (constitution) are truly foreign to the land and soil, what happens when those foreign agents trespass on the jurisdiction of the land and soil?

• If hostile in said trespass, without proper jurisdiction, who is terrorizing who?

• If a man or woman of the land and soil were to enter the 10 square miles of the sea commonly known as Washington DC, what jurisdiction is the man or woman in?

• What legal codes, rules, acts and statutes do you think apply?

How did our personal jurisdiction change?

This gain in jurisdiction in courts brings up the question of how did this happen in America where we are supposedly masters of our own domain and sovereigns on our land? We will dig into the lead up and the results of the Civil War (Lincoln’s War) in future articles, but the important thing to understand is that we are mankind on the land and soil first. We need to convert ourselves to something less (through titles and voluntary submission) so jurisdiction can be achieved by a foreign court.

Like many things in our country that occurred through legislation, it is never the first attempt, or bill, or Act that enslaves us completely. Instead it is the trick of the red herring, or bait-and-switch that makes for the future enslavement.

• The first federal bank under Hamilton (1791-1811) was the test bed for the future federal reserve bank. When repealed after 1811, the framework was resurrected as part of the federal reserve structure 100 years later through clandestine meetings on Jekyll Island and then in Europe with the Prussian/European Bank families.

• The Act of 1871 was not the legislation that brought about the enslavement of man by itself. This Act was repealed. However, legislation was added and approved in the future under different names, and the main ideas and corporate control was pushed through the enslavement that brought in the corporations. This was optimized through the 1913 Federal Reserve Act allowing for the printing of money and the debt structure that enticed incorporation of towns, and Cities, and Counties, and States to gain funding from the government.

• The fetal birth and mortality statistics started in 1939 with a handbook created out of legislation lobbied by the AMA under the guise of reducing fetal deaths through better organized care. This was produced by the U.S. Department of Commerce through the Bureau of the census. That is how it was sold as an important record keeping and improvement effort in births. Later this legislation was repealed, but future legislation slowly took pieces of this and converted the records to registration, and then certification by renaming the parents as informants and children being transmitted through vital records to the State. This is outlined in the “Hospitals' and physicians' handbook on birth registration and fetal death reporting” last updated October 1987.

• It was not the 13th through 15th amendments alone that enslaved people who registered to vote to become federally protected citizens. It was all the subsequent and related legal codes, rules, acts and statutes that we erroneously apply to ourselves in a foreign jurisdiction that allow the control. Basically, we decide to be the chess piece on the playing board rather than in control of the chess piece.

These tricks of legislation are always sold as benefits and privileges you never knew you needed. Then, by simply signing the dotted line, we convert ourselves to a title and reduce our authority; resulting in a conversion to an entity and into the federal jurisdiction of maritime and admiralty law (law of the sea). We are asked, “are you JOHN DOE?”. We say “yes”, not realizing we are admitting to be a capitus maxima dead entity slave with no rights or freedom. And the rest is history…

Clarification

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

---