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
Jul
30
THE OFFICE OF SHERIFF HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PART OF THE MONARCHICAL GOVERNMENT OF ENGLAND AND IT CONTINUED TO BE SO IN AMERICA UNTIL JULY 4, 1776. TODAY, THE SHERIFF IS A COUNTY EMPLOYEE CHOSEN BY AN ELECTION OF THE UNITED STATES CITIZEN OF THE COUNTY
Filed Under COMMON LAW, Declaration of Independence, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Martial Law | Leave a Comment
When the Sheriff of Bristol County, Massachusetts established a program to charge prisoners for their custody, the inmates sued the Sheriff in, Richard Souza & others v. Sheriff of Bristol County, Supreme Judicial Court-10508 January 05, 2010. In deciding against the Sheriff, the court referred to an old volume that described the character and origin of the office of sheriff.
The office of the sheriff is one of considerable antiquity. The origin and earliest duties of the office is set forth in L.E. Hitchcock, Powers and Duties of Sheriffs, Constables, Tax Collectors, and Other Officers in the New England States § 4 (2d ed.1904), as follows:
“The office of Sheriff dates back to the early days of English history. Indeed it is sometimes claimed that it became a part of the government of England from the Roman law. As the people of England came gradually under one government the territory became divided, more or less arbitrarily, into counties; over each of which was placed an Earl, or Alderman; and this Earl, or Alderman, was supposed to be the ruler-subject of course to the King-over his county. But this Earl, from the privileges which he possessed and the duties which he was under in reference to his attendance upon the King, gradually ceased to exercise his powers himself, and they were in time delegated to an under-officer, called, in the Roman law, Vicecomes; in the Saxon tongue, Shire-reeve; or in the more modern terms, Sheriff. At first this under-officer, or Sheriff, was to administer the affairs of the county as the representative of the Earl; but in time his duties became more defined, and seem to have been fourfold,-as a Judge, as a Keeper of the Peace, as a Ministerial Officer, and as the King’s Bailiff.
“First, as a Judge. He held court and determined causes between parties wherein the value in dispute was not more than forty shillings, and also heard certain other civil causes. He was also the Judge of certain elections, and of the qualifications of voters.
“Second, as the Keeper of the Peace. Both by common consent and by special commission he became the first man in the county, and superior to all others while he continued in office. He had authority to apprehend persons for the commission of crimes or for breach of the peace, and it was his duty also to defend the county against all enemies of the King, and for this purpose he had power to summon all the people of the county to attend him. This summons every person over fifteen years old and not a peer was bound to obey upon warning.
“Third, as a Ministerial Officer. He was bound to execute all processes issuing from the King’s courts of justice. In the commencement of civil proceedings he had power to serve the writ, arrest and take bail, and, when the cause came to trial, to summon and return the Jury, and after the judgment to see that the same was carried into effect. In criminal matters, he had authority to arrest and imprison, to return the Jury, to have custody of the delinquent, and to execute the sentence.
“Fourth, as the King’s Bailiff. He was required to see that the rights of the King were preserved in his county, or bailiwick.”
All the sheriff’s power’s vanished when King George III was no longer the government in America.
The English common law didn’t vanish because the common law is firmly and permanently imbedded in the English language.
The word “Sheriff” survived the passing of the king although the sheriff was as much a part of the nobility as the king and queen.
The ghost of sheriffs past has been putting families out of their homes for far too long. A little learning is all it takes to put the sheriff in his place and out of yours. Enroll. Become a serious Student of the law and government. Ask me how 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
28
BRIDGING THE LEGAL GAP WITH WRITS: COMMON LAW AND WRITTEN LAW COMBINED
Filed Under COMMON LAW, Declaration of Independence, FREEDOM, LEARNING THE LAW | Leave a Comment
The Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 did more than sever the political bands that had connected Americans with Great Britain, the mother country. Independence freed men and women in America from all government not just the British King George III.
The English common law was not something they could get rid of even if they wanted. The English common law is embedded in the language itself. The administration of the common law was not automatic, because all government power was exercised through the king.
The king controlled justice by controlling the various writs that enabled the county sheriffs to enforce common law judgments.
Today, county sheriffs enforce court orders by a writ system that causes everyone to believe the English common law is still part of the written law system. Use of the writs of possession and replevin, for example, is just a ploy to fool the legal profession that somehow English common law and written law are united.
English common law and written law are like oil and water immiscible. The government’s written law has just appropriated the common law writ nomenclature for a seamless transition from freedom to what we have today—complete government control.
Writs with funny names do not mean justice. Writs are no more than court orders to a sheriff limited to the territory owned by the United States of America. To get the whole story, enroll in the Basic Course in Law and Government, by contacting me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
27
FORECLOSURE: WHAT DO YOU DO AFTER YOU OUT THE SHERIFF?
Filed Under COMMON LAW, CONSTITUTION, Foreclosure, LEARNING THE LAW | Leave a Comment
In “merrie olde England,” the sheriff enforced the English common law through the “no writ, no right no remedy” idea of civil procedure. The common law belonged to the people, but to get your jury verdict satisfied you had to have the proper writ issued by one of the king’s judges.
The sheriff in England got his power not from the people, for they had none to give, but from the sovereign, the king.
In America, when the power of the English King George III, the power of the local sheriff also vanished, “no writ, no right, no remedy.”
In the United States, that is the lands owned by the United States of America, all sheriffs obtain their power through the President of the United States of America and President of the United States.
As for foreclosure, there was none under common law, so how could a sheriff act to evict a homeowner, if there was no such writ.
Even if you have not received a notice of default you want to tell everyone about what you know about the county sheriff. Don’t think you know enough? Contact me to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government: edrivera@edrivera.com
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
24
USING A DICTIONARY TO LEARN THE LAW
Filed Under COMMON LAW, CRIMINAL LAW, Declaration of Independence, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Martial Law | Leave a Comment
The common law is so named because it is so much a part of the community that is also part of the oral language. Do not fall for the Wikipedia/government propaganda that the common law was made by judges. English common law had a history heavily influenced by the English monarchy’s administration of all legal matters in England, which accounts for the misconception that judges royally appointed made the common law. If an act is so detrimental to the wellbeing of a community, it will be designated a crime and it will be given a name. The people made an act a crime by giving it a name. Similarly, merchants created contract law by custom and usage of the English language to fashion valid agreements.
The common law crimes were named long before the first colonists brought the English language and English common law to America. Common law has continued to be the unwritten law in America, even as the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 announced the dissolution of the Political Bands, which once connected America with Great Britain.
Modern legal education has bastardized the teaching of law into an examination of the quirks of the judge’s mind rather than the proper separation of law into what is written and unwritten law. Any student of the law must decide at the onset of his or her education, if a full examination of written and unwritten law will be made or if the student will follow the herd and examine only the law made pursuant to the Constitution of the United States.
You can start your common law education by looking in the a’s of any dictionary to find “abduction,” “arson” and “assault.” Exhausting the a’s the student can go on to the b’s and then all the way to the end of the dictionary. For the student in a hurry to learn the common law, I recommend the index to any book on the common law.
The dictionary approach to learning basic law teaches the student that law has a very sensible and universal basis and what it isn’t basic and sensible is written law. I teach my Students how to confine written law to government and the land owned by the United States of America. To become one of those Students, contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
20
WHAT IS SO COMMON ABOUT THE ENGLISH COMMON LAW?
Filed Under COMMON LAW, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Martial Law, Oath of Office | 3 Comments
No matter what the English common law might be in Great Britain, what it becomes in America, after the British lose the American Revolution, is completely told in the English language.
Common law crimes, for instance, like statutory crimes, consist of elements each of which must be proven in any prosecution. In the common law, the definition of the word that describes the crime identifies the elements that constitute that common law offense. Two kinds of thefts, robbery and embezzlement are easily distinguished by consulting a dictionary. Did the accused use a pen to commit an embezzlement or a robbery? How difficult will it be for the new law student to remember robbery involves force or fear?
The English common law in America becomes even more common after Americans get rid of King George III. While he was king, George III controlled by his appointment of a Chancellor to do equity. No king no equity.
American English common law didn’t have a chance to take hold before George Washington took over law and government on the strength of his verbal promise to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Law is complex and government remains broken, because most of us are not aware of the fraud committed by the so-called Founding Fathers. We don’t have to dig deep to find the deception it is right where true masters of deceit would leave it, where they could use it if the need arose.
The English common law is as common as the language we all use to communicate. What is not common is a necessity for the truth. If George Washington never told a lie, he seldom told the truth. He beat the British with deception and he ruled America the same way.
You won’t learn the law at any other place and you certainly won’t learn all you need to know about Washington and the government in any other way. To enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government, contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
16
USING THE ENGLISH COMMON LAW TO AVOID RESIDENTIAL FORECLOSURE
Filed Under COMMON LAW, Foreclosure, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, Property Taxes | 1 Comment
There is no foreclosure process under the English common law, if a mortgage was not fully paid the title to the mortgaged property reverted to the mortgagee, the seller.
There is a foreclosure process. So how is it possible to avoid a residential foreclosure using the English common law?
In every State, but the State of Louisiana, the law is the English common law, which is an unwritten form of law. The common law may be unwritten, but the language of that law is clear. The words that comprise the English common law are all found and defined in any English dictionary.
The foreclosure process has been enacted into law where the government of the United States of America has proprietary power, where it owns the land. Excepting Louisiana, the English common law is the law where the United States of America does not own the land.
Unless the residential property sought to be foreclosed is located on land owned by the United States of America, the foreclosure process is not available this is how the English common law is used to avoid a residential foreclosure.
To avoid the prospect of foreclosure or any other calamity that might befall owners of property allegedly located in the United States, learn all the law and the facts about government in America. Enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government, by contacting at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera