Aug
26
MINI CONSTITUTIONAL LAW LESSON: LEARNING CONSTITUTION LAW BY THE NUMBERS
Filed Under Adoption, CONSTITUTION, Declaration of Independence, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Oath of Office, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
A constitutional law expert claims that it will take decades to learn constitutional law. By focusing on all the numbers and dates of the Constitution of September 17, 1787, I have reduced learning time to a few hours. You can become a constitutional law expert by enrolling in my Basic Course in Law and Government.
Before July 4, 1776, in America practically everyone except the Indians were British subjects. On July 4, 1776 the United States of America was born and the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 was its birth certificate. Almost immediately, work began on an instrument that would unite thirteen free and independent states into one perpetual Union. The Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 was the instrument that united all thirteen States on March 1, 1781.
Between July 4, 1776 and March 1, 1781 an American could only legitimately claim State citizenship in one of the thirteen States. After March 1, 1781, a person could claim all the privileges and immunities of a citizen of a State as a free inhabitant without being a citizen or a person could claim to be a Citizen of the United States.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 formally recognized the status of Citizen of the United States, when New Hampshire became the ninth State to ratify and, thus, establish that Constitution. The elections of Representatives and Senators were set, however, it would be impossible for any Senator to meet the Constitution’s nine Years a Citizen of the United States requirement until after March 1, 1790. Newly elected Senators would still qualify as delegates under the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 and the nine States could function as the Committee of States under Article IX and X of the Articles of Confederation.
When the first Congress convenes on March 4, 1789 in New York City none of the Senators qualified to take the Article VI oath, so the preparation of a legislative oath was the first order of business. This is how the Constitution of September 17, 1787 became the Constitution of the United States, which George Washington swore to “preserve, protect and defend.” The Constitution of the United States covered a territory that amounted to the lands owned by the United States of America. To learn more about what constitutes the United States and how to enroll contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Aug
10
DEMANDING THAT THE STATE RECOGNIZE COMMON LAW MARRIAGE, SO YOU CAN RESCIND YOUR OLD CIVIL MARRIAGE AND START OVER IN COMMON LAW
Filed Under COMMON LAW, FREEDOM, GAY MARRIAGE, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Martial Law, Territorial Jurisdiction | 2 Comments
Ten States and the District of Columbia recognize common law marriage, so 80% of the States refuse to recognize that a mature man and woman can live together as husband and wife without purchasing a marriage license.
Only one of the six States that allows same sex marriage recognizes common law marriage.
Clearly, the over whelming majority of the States are into marriage for the money and the control the licensing of the most intimate of human relationships provides government.
Government marital money grubbing can be stopped dead in its tracks, if married people individually or as couples rescind the marriage license that was purchased from a State on the false representation that any marriage without the license would be invalid.
How much sense does it make to refuse government recognition to a husband and wife in a common law marriage, while such recognition is extended to a same sex couple? It doesn’t make any sense, but government will not change its spots any more than a leopard can.
Government is a commercial enterprise, so if it can coerce the people to pay government for the “privilege” of enjoying human society’s most fundamental, it has become a “public trust” that needs busting.
Trust busing is as easy as learning the ABC’s of law and government by enrolling in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Licensing requires written laws and many regulations, which have to apply to one place and to the exclusion of all others. Governments are limited to making laws for the lands owned by the United States of America. You will learn how, when you enroll. To enroll contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Aug
9
GAY MARRIAGE, PROPOSITION 8, MARRIAGE LICENSES, COMMON LAW AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Filed Under COMMON LAW, CONGRESS, GAY MARRIAGE, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, ORGANIC LAWS, Oath of Office, State of California, Territorial Jurisdiction | 1 Comment
California was named by Spanish explorers and claimed for the Spanish monarchy many centuries ago.
California and Texas were republics of the Mexican Union of States and Spanish property law currently applies in these and other American States. English is the common language in California and Texas and the English common law is the law in both places.
The original thirteen States formed the perpetual Union, the United States of America on March 1, 1781 when Maryland became the thirteenth State to ratify the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777. The State of California joined the perpetual Union when her two Senators were admitted to the Senate of the United States of America.
The State of California was admitted to the Union established by the Constitution of September 17, 1787 on September 9, 1850 and according to Article 3 Section 1of its Constitution of 1879, “is an inseparable part of the United States of America and the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.” The State of California, an inseparable part of the United States of America, is both a government and that part of California, which is owned by the United States of America.
The State of California does not recognize common law marriage, which is an unlicensed marriage between a man and woman, but does recognize the licensed marriages of the other 55 States of the Union established by the Constitution of September 17, 1787, which was ratified by the States, but not adopted by a government bound to support that Constitution.
The Supreme Court of the State of California issued an opinion in a case that marriages between persons of the same sex were lawful and, therefore, should be licensed by the State of California.
Proposition 8, which defined marriage as only between one man and one woman, was approved by a majority of State of California registered voters and conforms with Title 1 United States Code Section 7. Definition of “marriage” and “spouse:” “
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”
Based upon these facts, the Congress of the United States of America recognizes the existence within the place called California two kinds of territory one owned by the United States of America and another owned by others not the United States of America.
The decision and opinion rendered by United States district judge Vaughn Walker in the matter of the constitutionality of Proposition 8 is inconsistent with the Organic Laws of the United States of America and an act of the Congress of the United States of America.
The recognition by Congress and the refusal of the State of California and many other States of the United States to recognize common law marriage illustrates the nature of the Article I Section 8 Clause 18 ”exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever.” The Congress of the United States has the power to recognize common law from outside the United States, but the States of the United States do not.
Because the officers of the federal government have never taken and subscribed a written Article VI oath “to support this Constitution,” the Constitution of September 17, 1787 has not been adopted for the United States of America. The “exclusive Legislation” afforded by proprietary power of Congress trumps the un-adopted Constitution of the United States every time.
Has your state withdrawn recognition of common law marriage and is there a gay marriage movement in your state or has same sex marriage become a reality there? Then you are in luck, if you want to claim your freedom. The right to pick your marriage partner is a fundamental human right, so the attempt by the State to outlaw common law marriage and to license civil marriage is a clear signal that the State has unlawfully extended its power beyond the lands owned by the United States of America.
To take advantage of all the possibilities common law and gay marriage present, you must know law and government. My Basic Course in Law and Government is the only one that will prepare you to take on the State government’s legal establishment. To enroll, contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Aug
5
GAY MARRIAGE, GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, BAIL OUTS, DRUGS, EXCESSIVE TAXATION AND MORE RESOLVED BY SEEING THE UNITED STATES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Filed Under ORGANIC LAWS, Oath of Office, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
Recognizing that the United States in the oath of office of the President of the United States is the land and other property belonging to the Confederacy formed, when Maryland becomes the thirteenth State to ratify the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, solves all the above problems by putting the solutions in the hands of the people and out of the hands of government.
Weeks before the May 25, 1787 Constitutional Convention finished its secret meeting and presented the Constitution of September 17, 1787 to the United States in Congress assembled, the United States of the Northwest Territory were made part of the United States of America.
On April 30, 1789, George Washington took this oral oath to the office of President of the United States: “I, George Washington, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” “So help me God.” This oath was to secure the lands and property belonging to the government. An oral oath has nothing to do with a written constitution.
This knowledge is not taught in any law school. Every person who contacts me about enrolling will get a free Lesson just e-mail me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
29
OWN REAL PROPERTY IN FORECLOSURE OR HAVE UNPAID PROPERTY TAXES? THEN YOU SHOULD ASK THE LOCAL SHERIFF TO SHOW YOU WHERE HE OR SHE GETS TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OVER YOUR PROPERTY
Filed Under COMMON LAW, CONSTITUTION, Foreclosure, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Property Taxes, TRIAL BY JURY, Territorial Jurisdiction | 1 Comment
Ask a sheriff to describe the origin of his territorial jurisdiction and he will tell you the entire county has always been his territory, but if you ask him about any federal property located within that county’s perimeter and he will deny any jurisdiction over that land. The States of the second Union the United States identify the counties within a State by name and draw boundaries called county lines, by metes and bounds. None of the States identify or describe the territory within the county lines as federal lands owned by the United States of America. Where can the legal division of legislative power between State and federal government be found?
Title 1, Section 2 of the United States Code defines a county as, “The word ‘county’ includes a parish, or any other equivalent subdivision of a State or Territory of the United States.” The phrase “of the United States” means belonging to the United States of America, the Confederacy. States of the 50 State Union must accept the federal definition of a county as consisting of all the territory belonging to the United States of America, as the Constitution of the United States and the laws made pursuant to that Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Upon close examination, all State and federal written legislation will be found to be applicable only to government and to lands owned by the United States of America.
The Congress of the United States is recognized as having complete legislative power over lands owned by the United States of America and, as for the States, there is the popular belief that the State legislatures somehow get legislative power from the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
The Posts on this site have explained in detail that the legislative power over the lands owned by the United States of America is derived from the proprietary power every owner possesses over property. All that proprietary power is granted by the first nine ratifying States of the United States of America. When all thirteen have ratified the Constitution of September 17, 1787
All government legislative power in America is derived from the proprietary power over lands owned by the “United States,” the Confederacy, the United States of America.
Before the Constitution of September 17, 1787 was ratified by nine States of the Confederacy, the United States of America, English common law, without the procedural and administrative power of the English monarchy, was the law in America. The sheriff was the elected common law officer, who was popularly recognized to have the power to assemble common law juries.
After the Constitution of September 17, 1787 was ratified by nine States of the United States of America, the States of the new Union, the United States, began the process of replacing the procedural and administrative power of the former English monarchy with legislated procedural law.
This is, in a very simplified form, how the territorial jurisdiction of the sheriff is limited to the lands owned by the United States of America within the county lines. Does the county sheriff know the territorial limitations of his or her office? Can you explain to the sheriff, why your property is not within his territorial jurisdiction? If you can’t, you need to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com for enrollment information.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
26
FINDING THE FASTEST WAY OUT OF FORECLOSURE
Filed Under COMMON LAW, Foreclosure, LEARNING THE LAW, OBAMA, Property Taxes, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
There widespread belief is that written law applies to the land under your house, so it is commonly believed that both the judicial and non-judicial foreclosure processes may be brought against you and your home. Unless you live in Louisiana, the English common law is the law, so the easiest way to avoid the severest consequence of foreclosure is to limit law enforcement to its lawful territorial jurisdiction.
President of the United States of America and President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama, who was speaking about law enforcement, as President of the United States, said about a year ago, they “acted stupidly,” in regard to the arrest of Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates at his home by a Cambridge Police officer, because law enforcement is limited to land owned by the United States of America. President of the United States Obama knew Professor Gates could not be arrested at his home, because the Cambridge police lacked territorial jurisdiction. This information couldn’t get out ,so a diversion was created by the White House.
You won’t be having a “beer summit” with the local sheriff, but if you do an investigation of his or her authority you will confirm that it is limited to the land owned by the United States of America.
Unless your home is in a national forest, no sheriff has the authority to put you off your home. Do they “act stupidly”? They sure do, but you shouldn’t. Enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government by contacting me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
7
SURVIVING THE COMING CRASH OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Filed Under BANKRUPTCY, CONSTITUTION, Declaration of Independence, LEARNING THE LAW, State of California, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
The State of California is an example of a modern political state, which was first devised by George Washington and the so-called Founding Fathers at the secret Constitutional Convention of 1787. After the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 and the success of the War for Independence, American politicians slowly realized that few Americans would only consent to be governed, if deceived or threatened by some form of coercion. Shays Rebellion supplied an imminent threat of anarchy and the result was the Constitution of the United States, which provides a State of a new Union completely controlled by a government of politicians.
A state consists of a large group of people who share a common territory, law and language. When California was part of the Estados Unidos Mexicanos, the law and language was different from what they are today, but the territory was much the same. The State of California went from a Mexican State to a State of the United States, while California remained unchanged except by its eternal earthquake activity.
In the coming crash of the government of the State of California there will be a tremendous opportunity for those who are prepared to replace old disreputable law with the more liberating English common law. Government law has slowly replaced common law, but it cannot be repealed as it is contained within the English language. With the collapse of the State of California comes the collapse of government law and the inevitable revival of English common law, unless unscrupulous politicians like George Washington intervene to take advantage of the crisis.
Only my Students know how George Washington engineered the overthrow of the free and independent States of America and plotted the substitution of the States of the United States. The commercial enterprise known as the State of California is about to liquidate, don’t invest in the newer model of that old lemon that will surely be offered. The Golden State will thrive under new management, if you arm yourself with the facts by enrolling in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
1
ENROLLED STUDENT IN BASIC COURSE IN LAW AND GOVERNMENT REPORTS ON STATE OF INDIANA
Filed Under LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Martial Law, Territorial Jurisdiction | 1 Comment
Here in Indiana starting today if you want to purchase Tobacco, Beer, Liquor and Wine products you have to show an ID no matter what your age. If your ID is expired (Driver License) you will be refused the purchase, if no ID no purchase. Store clerks have now become STATE of INDIANA License enforcers.
The lesson of taxation in America is that no matter how little it is it will be increased until it is too much. The second law enacted by the First Congress on July 4, 1789 was “An Act for laying a Duty on Goods, Wares, and Merchandise imported into the United States.” The first internal excise tax was a tax on the distillation of alcohol on March 3, 1791, which led to the famous Whiskey Rebellion. Nowhere in the Whiskey Tax was the United States mentioned.
In both taxes, the “United States” was the land owned by the United States of America. Both taxes were lawful, because an owner of land should and does have absolute control over that property, however, no owner not even the federal government should be able to control the property of another. Of course, this is exactly how all American governments have operated since April 30, 1789. George Washington put down the Rebellion using 13,000 troops months after Congress enacted the carriage tax, which resulted in the famous Supreme Court case, Hylton v. United States 3 Dallas171 (1796).
All the taxes paid in Indiana are imposed by law within the “United States.” One of the unintended consequences of independence is the freedom from taxation for those who would not be citizens. Taxes are imposed on the citizens of the United States retailing tobacco, beer, liquor and wine within the State of Indiana. Retailers collect the excise tax on the making of a sales transaction within the State of Indiana from the customer.
Applications for retail sellers permits expressly state that the applicant seeks a license for sales within the State of Indiana. Widespread ignorance and incompetence within the legal profession and public law enforcement has extended the territorial boundaries way beyond what is the United States in Indiana. Requiring customers to have some kind of State license in order to make a purchase is a violation of Article IV of the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, which is still binding on the States. A free inhabitant requires no identification outside of the United States, the land owned by and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States of America.
The State of Indiana’s law requiring customers of certain products to show proper ID will probably be compared to the Nuremberg Laws enacted by the Nazis. To learn if that is true, students of these Posts are invited to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government, the only course of its kind. Taking this Course is the only way to find out how taxation grew from nothing to the economy killing behemoth it is today. Enrollment information is available at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jun
3
ROD BEGOJEVICH GOES TO TRIAL
Filed Under GRAND JURY, JURY DUTY, LAW OF THE LAND, Martial Law, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
Eighteen months ago Rod Begojevich was arrested on political corruption charges and today his trial started by beginning the process that will pick a trial jury.
On December 20, 2008 my Post was: BEGOJEVICH CAN BEAT ALL CRIMINAL CHARGES. For a year and a half, I have explained without contradiction how all federal law is territorial. Immigration law is territorial it only applies to entering the United States. The law of eminent domain is territorial it only applies to property located within the United States. The Democrat Health Care Reform Bill is territorial it only applies within the United States.
All Rod Begojevich had to do to secure his freedom was file a motion to dismiss the grand jury indictment on the grounds that none of the grand jurors who brought the indictment were residents within the district.
Maybe Rod Begojevich just wants to use the United States district court to prove his innocence. What do you want? If you want to learn the law, all the law, you won’t find it anywhere else. Contact me to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Apr
12
PROPERTY TAXATION: WHAT THE STATES WANT YOU TO BELIEVE
Filed Under Articles of Confederation, COMMON LAW, CONSTITUTION, Declaration of Independence, Northwest Ordinance, Property Taxes, Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a Comment
The States want you to believe all property is taxable except that which the State exempt s. The States neglect to explain that beginning with Article 4 of the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 the States have agreed that property belonging to the United States of America shall not be taxed and that the States may only legislate within the territory that belongs to the United States of America. The self-evident truth that all men are created equal recounted in the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 precludes government rule by majority vote everywhere except where the United States of America owns the territory.
The States also want you to believe they have the police power outside of federal territory, because it appears that the people have refused to implement the English common law in non-federal territory.
The States want you to believe the first Union under the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 has been superseded and replaced by the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
If you continue to believe what the States want you to believe, you will surely lose your freedom and may even lose your property. To learn the truth the States don’t want you to know, enroll as a Student in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera