BarnacleBob
04-19-2003, 04:49 PM
THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE III CONSTITUTIONAL COURT for the United States is found setting in New York !
Original Jurisdiction Court at the core of Constitutional Government is discovered
Fully Empowered panel of federal judges is setting in New York.
Research shows how this court has been hidden behind a color of law court "process" that forms a moat around the Castle of the Sovereign Authority of the People, blocking access and remedy
NOW THE PEOPLE DEMAND THESE JUDGES COME OUT TO OREGON AND PROSECUTE THE CORRUPTION, BRING FORTH REMEDY OR WE SEE EXPOSED AT THE CORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE REPUBLIC IS VOID OF LAW
Article III Judges-Courts
How does the law look when Congress establishes a court under Article III?
What is the procedure for bringing a claim cognizable by an Article III Judicial Court?
OR - Why all of the peoples claims are dismissed without redress
Think of a Kingdom, Sovereign People being Kings in their Castles, on the Land in his domicile with his family, protected Inherent Rights. Truth and Humans in Contracting, real signatures, NO representatives. A Court of Judicial Due Process in Law, Original Jurisdiction where the people come in and out of OUR courts, make the Record, an agressive search for the TRUTH based in a lawful process, plead their Sui Juris cases and bring forth remedy.
This court, with a standard of Truth and "in" law process, upholds the Bill of Rights and operates in a process that protects the Inherent Rights and the Authority of the People above all else, the Law according to the Bill of Rights process, having taken an oath being a binding contract and bond to the constitutional state Citizens as an accountable Public Servant.
This Castle is the Original Jurisdiction Court that is the foundation of the structure of the Republic at state level and at federal level, appellate. The "one supreme Court" in the Constitution, Article III. All of the other "courts" created must be created by Congress, must adhere to the Original Process and Constitutional Law, and these other courts cannot exist without the core at the center, the original court process and jurisdition on which they are ESTABLISHED.
What has happened over many years is the state, American, and International BAR operators of the "courts" and in the "congress" have for their own profit (called the "interest of the court"), created many "undisclosed jurisdictions" that are operating without judicial due process, administrative tribunals that cannot hear human claims or Answer Questions of Constitutional Law.
The managers never intended for the People to actually EXCERCISE the freedom and sovereignty as set forth in the Bill of Rights. Ever since the constituional courts were set up the "people" were not in those courts, mostly money managers and corporate interests , then as now.
We are standing in the opportunity for the first time as "people" to understand what this lawful process is about, what Sui Juris means to excercise a "supreme Court" of Original Jurisdiction, Inherent Rights rule, and the People are the authority - you make your record and you "move the court" according to the real Law in this HUMAN jurisdiction - NOT administrative or corporate.
The courts of limited jurisdiction are "courts" that have been created as a rendering process, to run the people through and strip them of their rights, their property, their children and freedom, in profit to the operators of the corporate scheme and court processes, ie BAR judges, attorneys, officials and associate corporate interests...... the revenue managers.
In fact they are not "courts" at all, just as "agencies" and "banks" and "large corporate interests" and "judges" and "trustees" and "public officials" are all the same thing... Just facades to move the funding streams in a circle at the top and sustaining the system and their own profit being the only allegiance.
They have created a MOAT around the Kingdom and the Castle for the People, the Original Court where the Law is and the Money is that has been stolen from us. This moat is filled with vipers and attorners and raging dragon administrative law judges. To the people this is terrifying and uncrossable until recent years. NOW WE SEE THE PROCESS CLEARLY and can see what these nine judges are doing in the middle of the "commerce court".
The managers and operators created rabbit holes and a labrynth of false and deceptive paths, all which profit themselves and sustain their corporate system, all which "look like law" to the common people, but are written to exlploit some other meaning in the usage of the court. They have created huge invisible walls to confuse and obfuscate so that when you keep asking Questions and for redress you are attacked lest you breach them. The "People" have NOT been allowed in ! IT IS ALL IN THE PROCESS AND IT IS ALL IN THE LANGUAGE.
The whole monopoly by the BAR controls the courts in most states, and through state licensing, control of all state courts. No attorney stays in a court too long who upsets the sustainability of the system. They created a process so deceptive and confusing that people are convinced that the only way they can cross this dangerous abyss of "Going to Court" is with an attorney who will "help" them, but who sells them out and profits from both sides.
So to keep the Original Court hidden, the BAR and legislatures created the International Court of Commerce, in which are the UCC Courts, and Administrative Tribunals, and other courts of limited jurisdiction. The state/fed forces the people into these limited courts where they are not in a judicial due process. At the same time they USE the fully empowered judges to hear their own cases all the time.
They created the false titles for the "Supreme Court" and the "District Court" to bring the people into under color of law that appear to be the real thing, but the people have learned they are NOT adhering to a constitutional process. All the while, never disclosing to the people WHERE the fully empowered Original Court was setting, that the people are not in a fully empowered court or that these other courts were deceptions and facades at law.
The fully empowered, nine judge court is hidden within the Court of International Trade, closely guarded by BAR judges, attorneys, undisclosed and unknown to the People; excercised by corporate and administrative interests for themselves while dismissing the Claims of the People in a quasi-judicial administrative process; said administrative law judges use this process to block and deny access for the People to excercise Original Jurisdiction In Law, where our Constitutional protections exist and the Bill of Rights IS the Lawful Judicial Due Process.
Breaking research in Oregon by scholar Milton Mitchek and others has revealed that the Court of Original Jurisdiction that is being blocked to the People exists, secreted within the International Court of Trade, an administrative court setting in New York City.
This information is being conveyed in lay terms, as I understand the process. We will all know more after petitioning the lawful court for Original Jurisdiction, and moving the Court in Law for a Judge who will come out to the "scene of the crime" and start prosecution of criminal state employees, treasonous legislators and public officials, in a court of Original Jurisdiction that has been denied.
The Question is before the Court at all levels in Oregon, WHERE IS OUR CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, where the People can be heard and bring forth remedy as GUARANTEED UNALIENABLE in a REPUBLIC? WHERE IS OUR BILL OF RIGHTS OR JUDICIAL DUE PROCESS? No court at this time is answering this or any other question. Absolute unaccountability, fraud and a criminal operation for profit protected in the courts.
The People exhaust every remedy, every level of appeal, writs for Declaratory Judgements and Remedies, all to no avail. The Oregon Supreme Court and the Federal Courts are a WALL OF DENIAL. They are acting as a seditious assembly engaging in trespass to the Constitution and they are breaking the Law. The issue is there is no court to enforce the Law in operation.
The United States Constitution provides a REMEDY IN LAW AND EQUITY for Freeborn Natural People in the states. However, the Certioraris and Special Writs brought by the aggrieved People are also summarily dismissed by the United States Supreme Court as well, without hearing, no opinion or findings of fact and conclusions of law on the merits of the Questions. NO REMEDY.
A Certiorari was recently dismissed in the United States Supreme Court relevant to the Question in Oregon of no opportunity to excercise Original Jurisdiction, as guaranteed unalienable in a Republic. The Certiorari can be found posted with this article at www.avoiceforchildren.com. The dismissals in these courts of "limited jurisdiction" state and federal will be used now to establish Original Jurisdiction, proof of "exhausting of remedies". At the end of this article is more information relevant to that Certiorari and the systemic patterns of the unconstitutional scheme in Oregon.
The subject of intense exhaustion of remedies by the People in the States, yet the Question remains - WHERE IS THE ARTICLE III COURT AS SET FORTH IN THE CONSTITUTION - where the Judicial Power of the United States Exists to PROTECT the AUTHORITY INHERENT IN PEOPLE?
The Court from which ALL other "courts" of limited jurisdiction,
administrative, military, admiralty, commerce, etc. are ESTABLISHED?
NOTE THE FOLLOWING TITLE OF THE COURT IN THE CONSTITUTION IS "shall be vested in one supreme Court", NOT UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT - the key to following the maze to the CORE....
Also note "IN" Law instead of "at" Law - Original Jurisdiction, Common Law, NOT Administrative. Judicial Due Process according to the Fifth Amendment, Original Court, First Congress Process "as any reasonable people understand". The Court in which the People are the Lawful Authority, protected Inherent Rights in their personal jurisdiction of sovereign. Our courts.
ARTICLE III
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2. Judicial Power and Jurisdiction.
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States....."
Clause 2. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
(Realize that in EVERY case "in which a State shall be a Party" is EVERY case in which the state prosecutes someone - every ticket, judgement, order, actions, most cases in courts - if it is "STATE OF ____ V Someones name, then ‘the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.")
"one supreme Court" is NOT "Supreme Court of the United States"
By Changing the Titles of the Court, the Fully Empowered Court was hidden behind the "color of" "quasi-judicial" "administrative" "courts of limited jurisdiction". The SUBTLE differences have been beyond the scope of the average people who are not BAR members and attorneys to understand. It is so intentionally embedded in process as to be unrecogonizable. It is in the ESTABLISHMENT of the many lesser courts that is evidence of the FOUNDATION ORIGINAL COURT STILL IN EXISTENCE.
When the courts started using the title "Supreme Court of the United States", and "United States District Court" it was no longer "the supreme Court for the United States", or the district Court for the United States". The quasi judicial one is administrative, the "in" law "Court", Original Law.
Then it was discovered that at the "top", the BAR member judges and attorneys and big corporate interests use this court IN law all the time for commerce matters, reserving a fully empowered court unto themselves, where their Inherent Rights are protected, while the People are FORCED in to color of law tribunals, administrative process and blocked from the REAL COURT IN LAW at every level.
The research reveals that the US Code sets forth the nature of the Article III Court.
The Court of International Trade is ESTABLISHED in the fully empowered Article III Jurisdiction, Original. The setting judges excercise judicial Power in the Original Court.
The Court of International Trade is another quasi-judicial tribunal that itself acts as a "buffer" or "moat", by its very appearance as a Commerce Court, preventing the People from seeing or accessing the Original Court. When you read on the CIT website about the history of the court, it says that it is a "quasi judicial" court..... (Look up "quasi" - sort of, pretend, looks like, color of, unconstitutional)
When the people excercise our Inherent Rights and Constitutional Judicial Due Process in this court, it is NOT in the CIT "court jurisdiction" that we are standing, but in Original Common Law process, adherent to the Constitutional Contract with sovereign People who are ITS AUITHORITY.
These judges are to come out to the states and hear questions of Constitutional dispute, and Violations of the process and the Public Trust when all state level remedies have been exhausted without redress of greivances or bringing
forth remedy.
It is called "standing in ripeness" and many of our cases in the states have long been denied and remedies have been exhausted without relief.
The Nature of the Article III Court
Title 28, pt.I, ch. 11, Section 251
Appointment and number of judges, offices
(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, nine judges who shall constitute a court of record to be known as the United States Court of International Trade. Not more than five of such judges shall be from the same political party. The court is a court established under Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
(b) The offices of the Court of International Trade shall be located in New York, New York
Title 28, pt. IV, ch. 95, Section 1585
Powers in law and equity
The Court of International Trade shall posess all the powers in law and equity of, or as conferred by statute upon, a district court of the United States.
Title 28, pt. VI, ch. 169, Section 2634
Reasonable notice of the time and place of trial or hearing before the Court of International Trade shall be given to all parties to any civil action, as prescribed by the rules of the court.
Title 28, pt. VI, ch. 169, Section 2631
Commencement of a civil action
(a) .......a civil action in the Court of International trade shall be
commenced by filing concurrently with the clerk of the court a summons and Complaint, with the content and in the form, manner, and style as prescribed by the rules of the court.......
(d) The Court of International Trade may prescribe by rule that any summons, pleading, or other paper mailed by registered or certified mail propertly addressed to the clerk of the court with the proper postage affixed and return receipt requested shall be deemed filed as of the date of mailing.
Full text of the Codes:
Title 28, Part I, Chapter 11, Sec 251 (a), (b)
Title 28, Part I, Chapter 11, Sec 252
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1585
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2631
(a,b,c,d,1,2,3,e,f,g,1,2,3,h,i,j,1,A,B,C,2,k,1,2,A ,B,C,D,E)
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1581 (a,b,c,d,1,2,3,e,f,g,1,2,3,h,i,
1,2,3,4,j,)
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1585
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2634
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2632 (a,b,c,d)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2637 (a,b,c,d)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2640 (a,1,2,3,4,5,6, b,c,d,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2643 (a,1,2,b,c,1,2,3,4,5,d,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2645 (a,1,2,b,c)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2672
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2675 (a,b,c)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2674
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2679 (a,b,1,2,a,b,c,d,1,2,3,4,5,A,B,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2680 (a,b,c,1,2,3,4,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m,n)
People do not have to "exhaust Administrative Remedies"
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/1998/konefal.htm
"The rule requiring administrative remedies to be exhausted prior to appealing to the courts is based on the reasonable policies of encouraging the exercise of administrative expertise, preserving agency autonomy and promoting judicial efficiency." Bradley v. City of Manchester, 141 N.H. 329, 331-32, 682 A.2d 1194, 1196 (1996) (quotation omitted). We have recognized that the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine is flexible, and that exhaustion is not required under certain circumstances. Metzger v. Brentwood, 115 N.H. 287, 290, 343 A.2d 24, 26 (1975). Exhaustion is not required, for example, when further administrative action would be useless and result in delays that might make the claim moot. See Petition of Chapman, 128 N.H. 24, 26, 509 A.2d 753, 755 (1986).
http://www.senate.state.mo.us/96info/bills/SB720.htm
SB 720 - Under current law, a person must exhaust his administrative appeals before he may obtain judicial review of a claim. This act allows a person to obtain a declaratory judgment from a court without exhausting his administrative remedies. A person may bypass administrative claims and appeals if any of the following are present: 1) the administrative agency has no authority to grant the relief requested; 2) the only question presented is a constitutional issue or a question of law; or 3) requiring the person to exhaust his administrative remedies would result in irreparable harm to the person {Note: Though missouri "law" and not Oregon, this provides a check-list, if you have need, to determine right to "bypass" an administrative court.
Comments from Researcher "Rev Anthony" regarding "Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
A) Administrative remedies, or the exhaution of said remedies, can only be required of applicants taking administratively disposed benefits. {Where it is stated an "application" or "service contract" "is required" and none exists, or that which does exists is made or taken in fraud, it indicates a jurisdictional trespass, a violation of international law. Any imposition in this manner is unlawful. And any jurisdiction in trespass can not unilaterally impose it laws or its foreign/unfamiliar requirements for adminstrative exhaustion upon anyone not consenting thereto prior. This type imposition, at minimum, constitutes surprise and is forbidden. Otherwise consider it an abduction.
B) Where there is no Place for "hearing" there can be no exhaustion possible. The requirement for exhaution of remedy where there is no Place to do so creates an impermissible impossibility in law. {Where, for instance, as read in the Supreme Court brief supplied by our friend, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says "the people of Oregon have no court", there is no Place to exhaust ANY remedy that might exist, i.e., the Oregon constitutional requirement that a man have right of redress for harm done him.
If there is no Place then, by default you have met the requirement of exhaustion as there is none, because, as we see in a case below exhaustion speaks to "process" not "relief " while "remedy" may be both or more. In this case the Ninth Circuit has confirmed the failure of, at least, process due on Oregon for want of a legitimate court to hear. This suggests there is no adminstrative anything! From this context, what adminstrative remedy is there to exhaust?
Court of International Trade Forms and Process
Here are links to the website for the Court. Format and process are outlined, and cases are being filed into this court at this time. The People have to exhaust this remedy to see IF there is a CORE or not at this time. If there is NO FULLY EMPOWERED COURT then ALL OF THE COURTS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION AND ALL CONTRACTS UNDER THIS PROCESS FALLS.
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/
Rules and Forms
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/Rules/rules-forms.htm
CLERK Leo_Gordon@cit.uscourts.gov
Dep CLERK Sarah_Thornton@cit.uscourts.gov
Judges:
Judge Chief Judge Gregory W. Carman
Judge Jane A. Restani
Judge Thomas Aquilino, Jr.
Judge Donald C. Pogue
Judge Evan J. Wallach
Judge Judith m Barzilay
Judge Delissa A. Ridgway
Judge Richard K Eaton
Senior Judge Nicholas Tsoucalas
Senior Judge R. Kenton Musgrave
Senior Judge Richard W. Goldberg
Questions and Information related to the Certiorari filed and now dismissed regarding systemic unconstitutional deprivations of rights in Oregon:
The following are quotes from the Certiorari
"Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision to "affirm" the lower courts decision, and denying plaintiff-appellants "Petition for a hearing en banc", so far deviated from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings as to deprive the petitioners of their Due Process and Equal Protection rights, and call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory powers.
Constitutional and Statutory Provisions Involved
The judicial Power of the United States set forth in Article III, Section 2, provides in pertinent part: "shall....extend to.... Controversies.... between a State and Citizens of another State....and between a State, or the Citizen thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects."
"... The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the state where the said Crimes shall have been committed..."
The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides in pertinent part: "No person shall be .... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
Article IV, Section 4, provides "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government and shall protect each of them against invasion."
The relevant statutory provisions are found under the Declaratory Judgement Act, Title 28, U.S.C. Sec 2201, under the heading CREATION OF REMEDY, which provides in relevant part: "any court of the United States, upon the filing an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought," and Sec. 2202 under the heading FURTHER RELIEF, which provides in relevant part: "further necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judgement or decree may be granted... against any adverse party whose rights have been determined by such judgement."
And, the relevant statutory provision of the State of Oregon, in pursuant of the above stated statutory provisions, is found under Oregon Revised Statute 28.020, Oregon’s declaratory judgement statute, which provides in relevant part: "any person whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected may obtain a declaration by the court as to his or her rights under the law."
Petitioners are aware that this Court can, and has, excercised its Article III powers as in the case of ERIE R CO v TOMPKINS, 304 US 64 (1938)where the court held: "because the question was one not of local, but general , law, an that "upon questions of general law the federal courts are free, in absence of a local statute, to excercise their independent judgement as to wht the law is." Here in Oregon the petitioners have a similar problem like that presented in Erie R. Co supra, in that the State of Oregon does have a local/state statute/law but they don’t have a court in which to apply the law.
United States Constitution , Article IV, Section 4
Petitioners pledge their allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. The United States is mandated to protect each of them against Invasion. Our institutions and their perpetuity, as well as our rights, liberty and property, depend upon the integrity of the courts. The Executive and Legislative Branches can fail in their respective duties, but if the people lose their courts the whole structure topples.
In November of 1910, the Judicial Branch of the State of Oregon was invaded from within and overthrown, and the courts of Oregon are now usurped and held by persons who are not under the Judicial Oath of Office
ARTICLE III, Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior...."
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States....."
(end quotes)
Everyone needs to start filing into this Original Jurisdiction and excercise the in law process, or expose these judges that the CORE is gone, should they refuse to uphold their oath and hear our cases, and order the officers of the state to take and uphold their lawful oaths as well. If they refuse to act in a fully empowered jurisdiction, ALL THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE FALLS HAVING NO FOUNDATION IN TRUTH. TRUST IS BASED IN TRUTH. WITHOUT TRUST THE COUNTERFEIT SYSTEM IS VOID.
pamela gaston a voice for children
fifth amendment coalition of Oregon
we welcome constructive comments or criticisms, further information and ideas for excercising the information the researchers have found.
The research in this has been years in sifting and refining, and the POINT is now on the core of the system, beyond the false walls and facades. It is UP TO US TO WALK IN TO TAKE BACK THE KINDGOM - OUR FREEDOM AND CLAIM OUR SUI JURIS
INHERITANCE - INHERENT RIGHTS.
Original Jurisdiction Court at the core of Constitutional Government is discovered
Fully Empowered panel of federal judges is setting in New York.
Research shows how this court has been hidden behind a color of law court "process" that forms a moat around the Castle of the Sovereign Authority of the People, blocking access and remedy
NOW THE PEOPLE DEMAND THESE JUDGES COME OUT TO OREGON AND PROSECUTE THE CORRUPTION, BRING FORTH REMEDY OR WE SEE EXPOSED AT THE CORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE REPUBLIC IS VOID OF LAW
Article III Judges-Courts
How does the law look when Congress establishes a court under Article III?
What is the procedure for bringing a claim cognizable by an Article III Judicial Court?
OR - Why all of the peoples claims are dismissed without redress
Think of a Kingdom, Sovereign People being Kings in their Castles, on the Land in his domicile with his family, protected Inherent Rights. Truth and Humans in Contracting, real signatures, NO representatives. A Court of Judicial Due Process in Law, Original Jurisdiction where the people come in and out of OUR courts, make the Record, an agressive search for the TRUTH based in a lawful process, plead their Sui Juris cases and bring forth remedy.
This court, with a standard of Truth and "in" law process, upholds the Bill of Rights and operates in a process that protects the Inherent Rights and the Authority of the People above all else, the Law according to the Bill of Rights process, having taken an oath being a binding contract and bond to the constitutional state Citizens as an accountable Public Servant.
This Castle is the Original Jurisdiction Court that is the foundation of the structure of the Republic at state level and at federal level, appellate. The "one supreme Court" in the Constitution, Article III. All of the other "courts" created must be created by Congress, must adhere to the Original Process and Constitutional Law, and these other courts cannot exist without the core at the center, the original court process and jurisdition on which they are ESTABLISHED.
What has happened over many years is the state, American, and International BAR operators of the "courts" and in the "congress" have for their own profit (called the "interest of the court"), created many "undisclosed jurisdictions" that are operating without judicial due process, administrative tribunals that cannot hear human claims or Answer Questions of Constitutional Law.
The managers never intended for the People to actually EXCERCISE the freedom and sovereignty as set forth in the Bill of Rights. Ever since the constituional courts were set up the "people" were not in those courts, mostly money managers and corporate interests , then as now.
We are standing in the opportunity for the first time as "people" to understand what this lawful process is about, what Sui Juris means to excercise a "supreme Court" of Original Jurisdiction, Inherent Rights rule, and the People are the authority - you make your record and you "move the court" according to the real Law in this HUMAN jurisdiction - NOT administrative or corporate.
The courts of limited jurisdiction are "courts" that have been created as a rendering process, to run the people through and strip them of their rights, their property, their children and freedom, in profit to the operators of the corporate scheme and court processes, ie BAR judges, attorneys, officials and associate corporate interests...... the revenue managers.
In fact they are not "courts" at all, just as "agencies" and "banks" and "large corporate interests" and "judges" and "trustees" and "public officials" are all the same thing... Just facades to move the funding streams in a circle at the top and sustaining the system and their own profit being the only allegiance.
They have created a MOAT around the Kingdom and the Castle for the People, the Original Court where the Law is and the Money is that has been stolen from us. This moat is filled with vipers and attorners and raging dragon administrative law judges. To the people this is terrifying and uncrossable until recent years. NOW WE SEE THE PROCESS CLEARLY and can see what these nine judges are doing in the middle of the "commerce court".
The managers and operators created rabbit holes and a labrynth of false and deceptive paths, all which profit themselves and sustain their corporate system, all which "look like law" to the common people, but are written to exlploit some other meaning in the usage of the court. They have created huge invisible walls to confuse and obfuscate so that when you keep asking Questions and for redress you are attacked lest you breach them. The "People" have NOT been allowed in ! IT IS ALL IN THE PROCESS AND IT IS ALL IN THE LANGUAGE.
The whole monopoly by the BAR controls the courts in most states, and through state licensing, control of all state courts. No attorney stays in a court too long who upsets the sustainability of the system. They created a process so deceptive and confusing that people are convinced that the only way they can cross this dangerous abyss of "Going to Court" is with an attorney who will "help" them, but who sells them out and profits from both sides.
So to keep the Original Court hidden, the BAR and legislatures created the International Court of Commerce, in which are the UCC Courts, and Administrative Tribunals, and other courts of limited jurisdiction. The state/fed forces the people into these limited courts where they are not in a judicial due process. At the same time they USE the fully empowered judges to hear their own cases all the time.
They created the false titles for the "Supreme Court" and the "District Court" to bring the people into under color of law that appear to be the real thing, but the people have learned they are NOT adhering to a constitutional process. All the while, never disclosing to the people WHERE the fully empowered Original Court was setting, that the people are not in a fully empowered court or that these other courts were deceptions and facades at law.
The fully empowered, nine judge court is hidden within the Court of International Trade, closely guarded by BAR judges, attorneys, undisclosed and unknown to the People; excercised by corporate and administrative interests for themselves while dismissing the Claims of the People in a quasi-judicial administrative process; said administrative law judges use this process to block and deny access for the People to excercise Original Jurisdiction In Law, where our Constitutional protections exist and the Bill of Rights IS the Lawful Judicial Due Process.
Breaking research in Oregon by scholar Milton Mitchek and others has revealed that the Court of Original Jurisdiction that is being blocked to the People exists, secreted within the International Court of Trade, an administrative court setting in New York City.
This information is being conveyed in lay terms, as I understand the process. We will all know more after petitioning the lawful court for Original Jurisdiction, and moving the Court in Law for a Judge who will come out to the "scene of the crime" and start prosecution of criminal state employees, treasonous legislators and public officials, in a court of Original Jurisdiction that has been denied.
The Question is before the Court at all levels in Oregon, WHERE IS OUR CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, where the People can be heard and bring forth remedy as GUARANTEED UNALIENABLE in a REPUBLIC? WHERE IS OUR BILL OF RIGHTS OR JUDICIAL DUE PROCESS? No court at this time is answering this or any other question. Absolute unaccountability, fraud and a criminal operation for profit protected in the courts.
The People exhaust every remedy, every level of appeal, writs for Declaratory Judgements and Remedies, all to no avail. The Oregon Supreme Court and the Federal Courts are a WALL OF DENIAL. They are acting as a seditious assembly engaging in trespass to the Constitution and they are breaking the Law. The issue is there is no court to enforce the Law in operation.
The United States Constitution provides a REMEDY IN LAW AND EQUITY for Freeborn Natural People in the states. However, the Certioraris and Special Writs brought by the aggrieved People are also summarily dismissed by the United States Supreme Court as well, without hearing, no opinion or findings of fact and conclusions of law on the merits of the Questions. NO REMEDY.
A Certiorari was recently dismissed in the United States Supreme Court relevant to the Question in Oregon of no opportunity to excercise Original Jurisdiction, as guaranteed unalienable in a Republic. The Certiorari can be found posted with this article at www.avoiceforchildren.com. The dismissals in these courts of "limited jurisdiction" state and federal will be used now to establish Original Jurisdiction, proof of "exhausting of remedies". At the end of this article is more information relevant to that Certiorari and the systemic patterns of the unconstitutional scheme in Oregon.
The subject of intense exhaustion of remedies by the People in the States, yet the Question remains - WHERE IS THE ARTICLE III COURT AS SET FORTH IN THE CONSTITUTION - where the Judicial Power of the United States Exists to PROTECT the AUTHORITY INHERENT IN PEOPLE?
The Court from which ALL other "courts" of limited jurisdiction,
administrative, military, admiralty, commerce, etc. are ESTABLISHED?
NOTE THE FOLLOWING TITLE OF THE COURT IN THE CONSTITUTION IS "shall be vested in one supreme Court", NOT UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT - the key to following the maze to the CORE....
Also note "IN" Law instead of "at" Law - Original Jurisdiction, Common Law, NOT Administrative. Judicial Due Process according to the Fifth Amendment, Original Court, First Congress Process "as any reasonable people understand". The Court in which the People are the Lawful Authority, protected Inherent Rights in their personal jurisdiction of sovereign. Our courts.
ARTICLE III
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2. Judicial Power and Jurisdiction.
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States....."
Clause 2. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
(Realize that in EVERY case "in which a State shall be a Party" is EVERY case in which the state prosecutes someone - every ticket, judgement, order, actions, most cases in courts - if it is "STATE OF ____ V Someones name, then ‘the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.")
"one supreme Court" is NOT "Supreme Court of the United States"
By Changing the Titles of the Court, the Fully Empowered Court was hidden behind the "color of" "quasi-judicial" "administrative" "courts of limited jurisdiction". The SUBTLE differences have been beyond the scope of the average people who are not BAR members and attorneys to understand. It is so intentionally embedded in process as to be unrecogonizable. It is in the ESTABLISHMENT of the many lesser courts that is evidence of the FOUNDATION ORIGINAL COURT STILL IN EXISTENCE.
When the courts started using the title "Supreme Court of the United States", and "United States District Court" it was no longer "the supreme Court for the United States", or the district Court for the United States". The quasi judicial one is administrative, the "in" law "Court", Original Law.
Then it was discovered that at the "top", the BAR member judges and attorneys and big corporate interests use this court IN law all the time for commerce matters, reserving a fully empowered court unto themselves, where their Inherent Rights are protected, while the People are FORCED in to color of law tribunals, administrative process and blocked from the REAL COURT IN LAW at every level.
The research reveals that the US Code sets forth the nature of the Article III Court.
The Court of International Trade is ESTABLISHED in the fully empowered Article III Jurisdiction, Original. The setting judges excercise judicial Power in the Original Court.
The Court of International Trade is another quasi-judicial tribunal that itself acts as a "buffer" or "moat", by its very appearance as a Commerce Court, preventing the People from seeing or accessing the Original Court. When you read on the CIT website about the history of the court, it says that it is a "quasi judicial" court..... (Look up "quasi" - sort of, pretend, looks like, color of, unconstitutional)
When the people excercise our Inherent Rights and Constitutional Judicial Due Process in this court, it is NOT in the CIT "court jurisdiction" that we are standing, but in Original Common Law process, adherent to the Constitutional Contract with sovereign People who are ITS AUITHORITY.
These judges are to come out to the states and hear questions of Constitutional dispute, and Violations of the process and the Public Trust when all state level remedies have been exhausted without redress of greivances or bringing
forth remedy.
It is called "standing in ripeness" and many of our cases in the states have long been denied and remedies have been exhausted without relief.
The Nature of the Article III Court
Title 28, pt.I, ch. 11, Section 251
Appointment and number of judges, offices
(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, nine judges who shall constitute a court of record to be known as the United States Court of International Trade. Not more than five of such judges shall be from the same political party. The court is a court established under Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
(b) The offices of the Court of International Trade shall be located in New York, New York
Title 28, pt. IV, ch. 95, Section 1585
Powers in law and equity
The Court of International Trade shall posess all the powers in law and equity of, or as conferred by statute upon, a district court of the United States.
Title 28, pt. VI, ch. 169, Section 2634
Reasonable notice of the time and place of trial or hearing before the Court of International Trade shall be given to all parties to any civil action, as prescribed by the rules of the court.
Title 28, pt. VI, ch. 169, Section 2631
Commencement of a civil action
(a) .......a civil action in the Court of International trade shall be
commenced by filing concurrently with the clerk of the court a summons and Complaint, with the content and in the form, manner, and style as prescribed by the rules of the court.......
(d) The Court of International Trade may prescribe by rule that any summons, pleading, or other paper mailed by registered or certified mail propertly addressed to the clerk of the court with the proper postage affixed and return receipt requested shall be deemed filed as of the date of mailing.
Full text of the Codes:
Title 28, Part I, Chapter 11, Sec 251 (a), (b)
Title 28, Part I, Chapter 11, Sec 252
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1585
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2631
(a,b,c,d,1,2,3,e,f,g,1,2,3,h,i,j,1,A,B,C,2,k,1,2,A ,B,C,D,E)
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1581 (a,b,c,d,1,2,3,e,f,g,1,2,3,h,i,
1,2,3,4,j,)
Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 95, Sec 1585
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2634
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2632 (a,b,c,d)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2637 (a,b,c,d)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2640 (a,1,2,3,4,5,6, b,c,d,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2643 (a,1,2,b,c,1,2,3,4,5,d,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 169, Sec 2645 (a,1,2,b,c)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2672
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2675 (a,b,c)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2674
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2679 (a,b,1,2,a,b,c,d,1,2,3,4,5,A,B,e)
Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 171, Sec 2680 (a,b,c,1,2,3,4,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m,n)
People do not have to "exhaust Administrative Remedies"
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/1998/konefal.htm
"The rule requiring administrative remedies to be exhausted prior to appealing to the courts is based on the reasonable policies of encouraging the exercise of administrative expertise, preserving agency autonomy and promoting judicial efficiency." Bradley v. City of Manchester, 141 N.H. 329, 331-32, 682 A.2d 1194, 1196 (1996) (quotation omitted). We have recognized that the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine is flexible, and that exhaustion is not required under certain circumstances. Metzger v. Brentwood, 115 N.H. 287, 290, 343 A.2d 24, 26 (1975). Exhaustion is not required, for example, when further administrative action would be useless and result in delays that might make the claim moot. See Petition of Chapman, 128 N.H. 24, 26, 509 A.2d 753, 755 (1986).
http://www.senate.state.mo.us/96info/bills/SB720.htm
SB 720 - Under current law, a person must exhaust his administrative appeals before he may obtain judicial review of a claim. This act allows a person to obtain a declaratory judgment from a court without exhausting his administrative remedies. A person may bypass administrative claims and appeals if any of the following are present: 1) the administrative agency has no authority to grant the relief requested; 2) the only question presented is a constitutional issue or a question of law; or 3) requiring the person to exhaust his administrative remedies would result in irreparable harm to the person {Note: Though missouri "law" and not Oregon, this provides a check-list, if you have need, to determine right to "bypass" an administrative court.
Comments from Researcher "Rev Anthony" regarding "Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
A) Administrative remedies, or the exhaution of said remedies, can only be required of applicants taking administratively disposed benefits. {Where it is stated an "application" or "service contract" "is required" and none exists, or that which does exists is made or taken in fraud, it indicates a jurisdictional trespass, a violation of international law. Any imposition in this manner is unlawful. And any jurisdiction in trespass can not unilaterally impose it laws or its foreign/unfamiliar requirements for adminstrative exhaustion upon anyone not consenting thereto prior. This type imposition, at minimum, constitutes surprise and is forbidden. Otherwise consider it an abduction.
B) Where there is no Place for "hearing" there can be no exhaustion possible. The requirement for exhaution of remedy where there is no Place to do so creates an impermissible impossibility in law. {Where, for instance, as read in the Supreme Court brief supplied by our friend, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says "the people of Oregon have no court", there is no Place to exhaust ANY remedy that might exist, i.e., the Oregon constitutional requirement that a man have right of redress for harm done him.
If there is no Place then, by default you have met the requirement of exhaustion as there is none, because, as we see in a case below exhaustion speaks to "process" not "relief " while "remedy" may be both or more. In this case the Ninth Circuit has confirmed the failure of, at least, process due on Oregon for want of a legitimate court to hear. This suggests there is no adminstrative anything! From this context, what adminstrative remedy is there to exhaust?
Court of International Trade Forms and Process
Here are links to the website for the Court. Format and process are outlined, and cases are being filed into this court at this time. The People have to exhaust this remedy to see IF there is a CORE or not at this time. If there is NO FULLY EMPOWERED COURT then ALL OF THE COURTS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION AND ALL CONTRACTS UNDER THIS PROCESS FALLS.
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/
Rules and Forms
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/Rules/rules-forms.htm
CLERK Leo_Gordon@cit.uscourts.gov
Dep CLERK Sarah_Thornton@cit.uscourts.gov
Judges:
Judge Chief Judge Gregory W. Carman
Judge Jane A. Restani
Judge Thomas Aquilino, Jr.
Judge Donald C. Pogue
Judge Evan J. Wallach
Judge Judith m Barzilay
Judge Delissa A. Ridgway
Judge Richard K Eaton
Senior Judge Nicholas Tsoucalas
Senior Judge R. Kenton Musgrave
Senior Judge Richard W. Goldberg
Questions and Information related to the Certiorari filed and now dismissed regarding systemic unconstitutional deprivations of rights in Oregon:
The following are quotes from the Certiorari
"Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision to "affirm" the lower courts decision, and denying plaintiff-appellants "Petition for a hearing en banc", so far deviated from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings as to deprive the petitioners of their Due Process and Equal Protection rights, and call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory powers.
Constitutional and Statutory Provisions Involved
The judicial Power of the United States set forth in Article III, Section 2, provides in pertinent part: "shall....extend to.... Controversies.... between a State and Citizens of another State....and between a State, or the Citizen thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects."
"... The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the state where the said Crimes shall have been committed..."
The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides in pertinent part: "No person shall be .... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
Article IV, Section 4, provides "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government and shall protect each of them against invasion."
The relevant statutory provisions are found under the Declaratory Judgement Act, Title 28, U.S.C. Sec 2201, under the heading CREATION OF REMEDY, which provides in relevant part: "any court of the United States, upon the filing an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought," and Sec. 2202 under the heading FURTHER RELIEF, which provides in relevant part: "further necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judgement or decree may be granted... against any adverse party whose rights have been determined by such judgement."
And, the relevant statutory provision of the State of Oregon, in pursuant of the above stated statutory provisions, is found under Oregon Revised Statute 28.020, Oregon’s declaratory judgement statute, which provides in relevant part: "any person whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected may obtain a declaration by the court as to his or her rights under the law."
Petitioners are aware that this Court can, and has, excercised its Article III powers as in the case of ERIE R CO v TOMPKINS, 304 US 64 (1938)where the court held: "because the question was one not of local, but general , law, an that "upon questions of general law the federal courts are free, in absence of a local statute, to excercise their independent judgement as to wht the law is." Here in Oregon the petitioners have a similar problem like that presented in Erie R. Co supra, in that the State of Oregon does have a local/state statute/law but they don’t have a court in which to apply the law.
United States Constitution , Article IV, Section 4
Petitioners pledge their allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. The United States is mandated to protect each of them against Invasion. Our institutions and their perpetuity, as well as our rights, liberty and property, depend upon the integrity of the courts. The Executive and Legislative Branches can fail in their respective duties, but if the people lose their courts the whole structure topples.
In November of 1910, the Judicial Branch of the State of Oregon was invaded from within and overthrown, and the courts of Oregon are now usurped and held by persons who are not under the Judicial Oath of Office
ARTICLE III, Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior...."
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States....."
(end quotes)
Everyone needs to start filing into this Original Jurisdiction and excercise the in law process, or expose these judges that the CORE is gone, should they refuse to uphold their oath and hear our cases, and order the officers of the state to take and uphold their lawful oaths as well. If they refuse to act in a fully empowered jurisdiction, ALL THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE FALLS HAVING NO FOUNDATION IN TRUTH. TRUST IS BASED IN TRUTH. WITHOUT TRUST THE COUNTERFEIT SYSTEM IS VOID.
pamela gaston a voice for children
fifth amendment coalition of Oregon
we welcome constructive comments or criticisms, further information and ideas for excercising the information the researchers have found.
The research in this has been years in sifting and refining, and the POINT is now on the core of the system, beyond the false walls and facades. It is UP TO US TO WALK IN TO TAKE BACK THE KINDGOM - OUR FREEDOM AND CLAIM OUR SUI JURIS
INHERITANCE - INHERENT RIGHTS.