Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
STATUTORY V. CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXTS
It is very important to understand that there are TWO separate, distinct, and mutually exclusive contexts in which geographical “words of art” can be used at the federal or national level:
The purpose of providing a statutory definition of a legal “term” is to supersede and not enlarge the ordinary, common law, constitutional, or common meaning of a term. Geographical words of art include:
The terms “State” and “United States” within the Constitution implies the constitutional states of the Union and excludes federal territory, statutory “States” (federal territories), or the statutory “United States” (the collection of all federal territory).
This is an outcome of the separation of powers doctrine.
See:
Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separation of Powers, Form #05.023 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm |
The U.S. Constitution creates a public trust which is the delegation of authority order that the U.S. Government uses manage federal territory and property. That property includes franchises, such as the “trade or business” franchise. All statutory civil law it creates can and does regulate only THAT property and not the constitutional States, which are foreign, sovereign, and statutory “aliens” for the purposes of federal legislative jurisdiction. It is very important to realize the consequences of this constitutional separation of powers between the states and national government. Some of these consequences include the following:
“It is clear that Congress, as a legislative body, exercise two species of legislative power: the one, limited as to its objects, but extending all over the Union: the other, an absolute, exclusive legislative power over the District of Columbia. The preliminary inquiry in the case now before the Court, is, by virtue of which of these authorities was the law in question passed?” [Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 6 Wheat. 265; 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821)]
“The 1st section of the 14th article [Fourteenth Amendment], to which our attention is more specifically invited, opens with a definition of citizenship—not only citizenship of the United States[***], but citizenship of the states. No such definition was previously found in the Constitution, nor had any attempt been made to define it by act of Congress. It had been the occasion of much discussion in the courts, by the executive departments and in the public journals. It had been said by eminent judges that no man was a citizen of the [***] except as he was a citizen of one of the states composing the Union. Those therefore, who had been born and resided always in the District of Columbia or in the territories [STATUTORY citizens], though within the United States[*], were not [CONSTITUTIONAL] citizens.” [Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36, 21 L.Ed. 394(1873)]
The “citizen of the United States” mentioned in the Fourteenth Amendment is a constitutional “citizen of the United States”, and the term “United States” in that context includes states of the Union and excludes federal territory. Hence, you would NOT be a “citizen of the United States” within any federal statute, because all such statutes define “United States” to mean federal territory and EXCLUDE states of the Union. For more details, see:
Why You are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen, Form #05.006 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm |
Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status, Form #02.001 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm |
NESARA- Restore America – Galactic News