William Michael, Kemp, Sui Juris
c/o General Delivery
Gadsden, Alabama state
non-domestic zip code exempt

In Propria Persona

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice







               DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

              NORTHERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

                         MIDDLE DIVISION


STATE OF ALABAMA [sic]       )  Case No. #CV-97-H-0022-M
                             )
          Plaintiff [sic]    )  16th Cir. Case #CC-95-1083-DWS
                             )
     v.                      )  MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
                             )  AUTHORITIES PROVING
WILLIAM MICHAEL KEMP  [sic], )  THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF
                             )  FEDERAL INCOME TAXES
          Defendant [sic]    )  (incorporating all attached
_____________________________)   exhibits by reference)


COMES NOW  William Michael,  Kemp, Sui  Juris, Citizen of Alabama

state, expressly  not a  citizen of  the United  States ("federal

citizen"),  and   Defendant  in   the   above   entitled   action

(hereinafter  "Defendant"),  to  provide  formal  Notice  to  all

interested party(s),  and to  demand mandatory judicial notice by

this honorable  Court, pursuant  to Rules 201(d), 301, and 302 of

the Federal Rules of Evidence, of this, Defendant's MEMORANDUM OF

POINTS AND  AUTHORITIES PROVING  THE VOLUNTARY  NATURE OF FEDERAL

INCOME TAXES,  particularly  for  all  3  judges  who  have  been

properly  requested  to  issue  a  Warrant  of  Removal  to  this

honorable District  Court of  the United States ("DCUS"), and any

single judge who may be assigned to preside over preliminaries.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 1 of 11


     1.   Evans v.  Gore, 253  U.S. 245  (1920)  is  controlling,

notwithstanding  the   so-called  16th Amendment,   because  said

"amendment" never  repealed  Article III, Section  1.  Repeals by

implication are  not favored,  on authority  of the Ninth Circuit

Court of  Appeals.   See U.S. v. Hicks, [cite omitted] (9th Cir.,

1991).     Evans  has   never  been   overturned  (see  Shepard's

Citations), notwithstanding  a  UCLA  Law  Review  article  which

alleges the contrary.  See Vol. 24, No. 2, December 1976, p. 308.

     2.   The  16th Amendment   was   effectively  demolished  by

respondent's total silence in People v. Boxer, California Supreme

Court, case  number S-030016,  December 1992.   This  case was  a

Petition for  Writ of  Mandamus compelling Senator-elect Boxer to

witness the  material evidence which the plaintiffs had assembled

against the  ratification  of  that  proposal.    The  California

Supreme Court  transferred the  case to the Court of Appeals, for

an advisory  opinion;   that appellate panel denied the petition,

without explanation.   However, respondent Boxer fell totally and

completely silent  in the face of the affidavits of fact filed in

that case;   those  affidavits have  now become  the truth of the

case.  Moreover, Boxer's silence is a fraud, pursuant to U. S. v.

Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977);  and silence activates estoppel,

pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932 (1906).

     3.   Title 26, United States Code ("U.S.C."), has never been

enacted into  positive law.   Therefore,  Title  1,  U.S.C.,  and

Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") section 7851(a)(6)(A) both control;

specifically, the  provisions of  subtitle  F  have  never  taken

effect.   Subtitle F  contains all  the enforcement provisions of

the IRC  including, but  not limited  to, the  grant of  original

jurisdiction to  prosecute alleged violations of the IRC.  See 26

U.S.C. 7402.   There  are no regulations for this statute either,

thus limiting its application to federal officers, employees, and

contract  agents  of  the  United  States  (federal  government),

pursuant  to  44 U.S.C. 1505(a).   Title  44,  U.S.C.,  has  been

enacted into positive law.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 2 of 11


     4.   As far as the federal income tax is concerned, the only

liability statutes  anywhere in  the IRC  (as distinct from Title

26) are  found in  the provisions  for withholding  agents [sic].

See IRC  1441, 1442,  1443, 1461, and the statutory definition of

"withholding agent"  at  IRC 7701(a)(16).   One does not become a

withholding agent until and unless said agent accepts a valid W-4

"Employee's   Withholding    Allowance   Certificate"   (allowing

withholding).  For many reasons like this, the federal income tax

is totally voluntary on compensation for services rendered.

     5.   The regulations  at 26 CFR 1.1-1(a) thru (c) are overly

broad for  imposing  liabilities  which  are  not  authorized  by

statute, specifically,  on "citizens  of the United States" [sic]

and on  "residents of  the United States" [sic].  The doctrine of

"implied legislative  approval" cannot  prevail against  all  the

points supra.  See Old Colony R. Co. v. C.I.R., 284 U.S. 552, 557

(1932), for  example.   Authorities must be expressly enumerated.

The U.S.  Department of  the Treasury was never authorized by any

Act of Congress to extend liability for the federal income tax in

such an overly broad fashion, as is the case in said regulations.

     6.   The  term  "citizen  of  the  United  States"  has  its

statutory  origin   in  the   1866  Civil  Rights  Act,  and  its

constitutional  origin  in the  so-called  14th Amendment  [sic],

which was  never lawfully  ratified, rendering  section 4 of that

alleged amendment null and void ab initio, and permitting federal

judges, and all other federal employees, to question the validity

of the  public debt.   See the First Amendment;  Dyett v. Turner,

439 P.2d  266 (1968);   State  v. Phillips,  540 P.2d 936 (1975).

Section 4  of the  so-called  14th Amendment is  one of the least

litigated provisions  in  the  entire  U.S. Constitution,  unlike

other sections of that so-called amendment.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 3 of 11


     7.   The only basis remaining for taxing the compensation of

federal judges  is the  Downes Doctrine, which cannot be extended

into the  state zone,  nor to  the judges  who preside on federal

courts established  for the  state zone.   The Downes Doctrine is

obsolete and unconstitutional, because Justice Harlan was correct

in his  eloquent dissent  in Downes  v.  Bidwell,  182  U.S.  244

(1901), paraphrasing  now:   the limitations  of the Constitution

extend to  the farthest  reaches of the known universe, as far as

United States  (federal government) employees are concerned.  The

Downes Doctrine  has permitted  a serious  tear to rip the entire

fabric of  Our constitutional  Republic,  as  manifested  by  the

controversy now swirling about the proper distinction between the

USDC and  the DCUS, their respective subject matter(s), and their

respective territorial jurisdiction(s).

     8.   The Downes  Doctrine was  attacked properly In re Grand

Jury Subpoena  Served on  New Life  Health Center  Company, USDC,

Tucson,  Arizona,   case  number  GJ-95-1-6,  but  United  States

District Judge  John M. Roll exceeded his discretion in that case

by failing  to rule  on numerous  proper and timely motions which

were  before   him,  including   a  formal   challenge   to   the

constitutionality of  the Downes  Doctrine.  Judge Roll committed

over 100  felonies in  that one case alone, and a proper judicial

complaint has  been filed  against Judge  Roll,  pursuant  to  28

U.S.C. 372(c).   See Ninth Circuit docket number assigned to that

complaint, available  from the  Clerk of the Ninth Circuit in San

Francisco,  California  state.    All  pleadings,  exhibits,  and

related documents  filed in  that case  are incorporated  here by

reference, as  if set forth fully herein, pursuant to Rule 201(d)

of the  Federal Rules  of Evidence, and the Full Faith and Credit

Clause.  See Supremacy Clause;  Seventh Amendment;  FRCP Rule 38.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 4 of 11


     9.   Title 31,  U.S.C., has  been enacted into positive law,

pursuant to  Title 1,  U.S.C., but the "Internal Revenue Service"

[sic] ("IRS")  is not  listed in  the organizational structure of

the U.S.  Department of  the Treasury.   The  only mention  is an

authority for  the President  to appoint  the General Counsel for

the  "Internal   Revenue  Service"   [sic].     This  mention  is

insufficient to  identify the  true organizational  situs of  the

"Internal Revenue Service."

     10.  The "Internal  Revenue Service"  has now been proven to

be an  alias for  Trust #62,  which is  domiciled in  Puerto Rico

under the Federal Alcohol Administration ("FAA"), but the FAA was

declared unconstitutional  in the  year 1935  by the U.S. Supreme

Court.    The  FAA had its historical roots in Prohibition, which

was motivated  by the  goal of  monopolizing automotive fuels for

the benefit  of the  petroleum cartel.   See the Volstead Act and

the  attached   Affidavit  of   author  Paul   Andrew   Mitchell,

summarizing this motive.  See also "The Cooper File."


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 5 of 11


     11.  Taxing the compensation of federal employees creates an

unnecessary and  deceptive bureaucracy,  the primary  purpose  of

which is to skim money from the U.S. Treasury, for the benefit of

foreign banks  and their alien owners.  Congress should advertise

the "real"  compensation paid  to federal  employees, and  exempt

them from  filing returns  and from paying taxes on an "inflated"

salary, only a part of which the federal employee ever sees.  For

this reason,  the Public  Salary  Tax  Act  should  be  repealed,

because its deceptive purpose is unconstitutional.

     12.  The  court   of  original   jurisdiction  to  prosecute

violations of  the IRC  is defined in a statute which is found in

subtitle F.   See  26 U.S.C. 7402.   Subtitle F  has  never taken

effect because Title 26 has never been enacted into positive law.

For this  reason alone,  criminal  prosecutions  of  alleged  IRC

violations are legally impossible, and they create a massive tort

liability for the United States (federal government).  See People

v. United  States et  al., DCUS,  Billings, Montana  state, as  a

foundation for  quantifying the  real damages  which have already

been done  by the U.S. Department of Justice to untold numbers of

American Citizens (read "Citizens of one of the States United").

     13.  All United  States (federal  government) actions, civil

and criminal, which were done under authority of the Secretary of

the Treasury  during Lloyd  Bentsen's tenure in that office, were

ultra vires  because he  violated the  U.S. Constitution  when he

voted to increase the pay for that office, as a U.S. Senator, and

then he vacated his Senate seat to claim the office of Secretary.

However, Lloyd Bentsen was not eligible for that office until the

end  of his last Senate term.  See Article I, Section 6, Clause 2

("1:6:2").


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 6 of 11


     A FOIA  request for  a list  of all civil and criminal cases

which were brought under his watch has not been answered to date.

This, again,  has created a massive tort liability for the United

States (see  point 12  above).   Failure to  answer this  FOIA is

tantamount to  fraud and obstruction of justice, not to mention a

host of other criminal torts.  See IRC 7401 for the implications;

see also  USA v.  One 1972  Cadillac Coupe  De Ville, 355 F.Supp.

513,  515   (1973).     Failure  to   place  proof  of  requisite

jurisdictional facts  in  the  court  record,  when  specifically

denied, is  fatal to any court action.  However, IRC 7401 is also

found in subtitle F of the IRC (see discussion at point 3 supra).

     14.  Lloyd Bentsen  was unable  to  delegate  any  authority

downwards during  the period  in which  he claimed  to occupy the

office of  Secretary of  the Treasury.  This disability has meant

that all  tax assessments which were made by the Internal Revenue

Service (as  opposed to voluntary taxpayer self-assessments) were

ultra vires  per force, because the assessment officers could not

exercise any  delegated authority.  See U.S. v. Brafman, 384 F.2d

863, 867  (5th Cir.  1967) for  a court  authority  holding  that

assessment officers  must sign  assessments before  they  can  be

valid;   without delegation  of authority, the signatures are not

those of  assessment officers.   Lex non cogit impossibilia.  The

IRC defines  the term  "Secretary" to  mean the "Secretary of the

Treasury or  his delegate";   without delegation, there can be no

delegates.   Without an  authorized  officer  to  head  the  U.S.

Department of  the Treasury,  there can  be no  Secretary of  the

Treasury,  and   hence  no   Secretary  whatsoever,   under   any

circumstances.  Delegation was, therefore, impossible.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 7 of 11


     15.  The Appointment  Affidavits signed by IRS employees are

unconscionable contracts,  because they  express  the  employees'

contractual  commitment   to  support   the  U.S.   Constitution;

however, it  is quite  simply impossible for Citizens to enforce,

and it  is also  impossible for  public employees  to obey, their

solemn oaths  to support  the U.S. Constitution, if the weight of

material evidence  now proves  that the  exact provisions of that

Constitution are  still in doubt, for any reason.  See discussion

of 14th  and 16th  amendments [sic]  supra;  also People v. Boxer

supra.  This question concerning the equitable nature of Oaths of

Office was specifically raised in People v. Boxer.

     16.  Again, the  respondents In re Grand Jury Subpoena supra

properly  and  timely  raised  this  objection,  when  the  first

Appointment Affidavit  was produced  by  the  so-called  "Special

Agent" in  that case,  in response  to a  proper request  brought

under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA");  but U.S. District

Judge John  M. Roll  abused his  discretion by failing to rule on

that motion  and decided  instead to  commit over  100  felonies,

including but  not limited  to 28 counts of mail fraud, 28 counts

of jury  tampering, 28  counts of  obstruction of justice, and 28

counts of conspiracy to commit all of the above.  Judge Roll did,

however, rule  that the  USDC is  not the proper forum to bring a

request  under  the  Freedom  of Information  Act ("FOIA").   See

5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B).  If  the USDC  is not  the proper forum to

bring a  request under  the FOIA,  then neither  is it the proper

forum for prosecuting any criminal violations of Title 18, U.S.C.

See  18 U.S.C. 3231, and rules of statutory construction in Title

1, U.S.C.   Singular  and plural refer to the same entity always.

Title 1,  U.S.C., has  been  enacted  into  positive  law.    See

Supremacy Clause.  The Administrative Office of the United States

Courts has  alleged, in writing, that U.S. District Judge John M.

Roll is an Article III judge.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 8 of 11


     17.  Congresswoman Barbara  Kennelly has  admitted, on House

stationery transmitted  through the  United States Postal Service

("USPS"), that  the term  "State" at IRC 3121(e) is restricted to

the named  territories and  possessions, and does not include the

several States  of the Union.  She put this admission in writing,

after first  consulting with  "experts"  in  the  office  of  the

Legislative Counsel,  and also in the office of the Congressional

Research Service.   Rep. Kennelly's admission provides absolutely

stunning support  for the  main (and highly controversial) thesis

of a  book entitled  The  Federal  Zone:  Cracking  the  Code  of

Internal Revenue,  electronic fifth  edition.    Not  long  after

publication of  the printed  first edition  in 1992,  the Supreme

Court of  the United States utilized the term "federal zone" as a

household word  in their  sweeping decision in U.S. v. Lopez, 115

S.Ct. 1624  (1995), Kennedy  concurring.  The term "federal zone"

now  has   a  permanent   place  in   the  history   of  American

constitutional jurisprudence.

     18.  The Petitioner  in the case of Burnett v. Commissioner,

KTC 1996-292,  D.V.I. 1996, is reported to have prevailed against

the Respondent,  the Commissioner  of Internal  Revenue, on  this

very same  point, namely,  the definition  of "United  States" is

restricted to  the federal  zone.   The court in that case stated

that Subtitle  A taxes apply only to the District of Columbia and

to the  Territories of  the United  States.    Referring  to  IRC

section 7701(a),  Definitions, subsection (9), that court pointed

out that  the term  "United States" includes only the above.  IRC

7701(a) reads  "(a) When  used in this title, where not otherwise

distinctly expressed  or manifestly  incompatible with the intent

thereof --", and subsection (a)(9) reads "(9) United States.  The

term 'United  States' when  used in a geographical sense includes

only the  States  and  the  District  of  Columbia."    No  other

definition of the term "United States" is offered anywhere in IRC

Subtitle A.   A  written request  for a  certified copy  of  that

court's written  opinion was  faxed to  the Clerk  of  the  USDC,

Virgin Islands,  on Wednesday,  January 22,  1997 (see attached).

For an  authoritative discussion  of these  key  definitions  and

their proper construction, see the book The Federal Zone supra.


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 9 of 11


                          VERIFICATION

     I, William  Michael, Kemp,  Sui Juris, hereby declare, under

penalty of  perjury, under  the laws  of  the  United  States  of

America, without  the "United States", and under knowledge of the

law forbidding  false witness  before God  and  men,  attest  and

affirm that  I have  read the  foregoing and  know  the  contents

thereof, and  that the  same is  true of My own knowledge, except

those matters herein alleged on information and belief, and as to

those matters,  I believe  them to  be  true,  so  help  Me  God,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).


Executed on January 24, 1997:


/s/ Mike Kemp
________________________________
William Michael, Kemp, Sui Juris
Citizen of Alabama state
(expressly not a federal citizen)


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 10 of 11


                        PROOF OF SERVICE

I, William  Michael,  Kemp,  Sui  Juris,  hereby  certify,  under

penalty of  perjury, under  the laws  of  the  United  States  of

America, without the "United States", that I am at least eighteen

years of  age, a  Citizen of one of the United States of America,

and that I personally served the following document(s):

              MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
                 PROVING THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF
                      FEDERAL INCOME TAXES

by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first

class United  States mail,  with  postage  prepaid  and  properly

addressed to the following:


Solicitor General               William H. Rehnquist, C.J.
Department of Justice           Supreme Court of U.S.
10th and Constitution, N.W.     1 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C.                Washington, D.C.

James E. Hedgspeth, Jr.         Clerk of Court
Etowah County Offices           District Court of the U.S. [sic]
c/o 800 Forrest Avenue          c/o 1729 Fifth Avenue North
Gadsden, Alabama state          Birmingham, Alabama state

Clerk of Court                  Attorney General
Circuit Court of Etowah County  Department of Justice
c/o 800 Forrest Avenue          10th and Constitution, N.W.
Gadsden, Alabama state          Washington, D.C.

Clerk of Court                  Chief Judge
Court of Criminal Appeals       11th Circuit Court of Appeals
c/o P.O. Box 301555             c/o 56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Montgomery, Alabama state       Atlanta, Georgia state


Executed on January 24, 1997:


/s/ Mike Kemp
_________________________________________________
William Michael, Kemp, Sui Juris
Citizen of Alabama state
(expressly not a federal citizen)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


   Memo of Points/Authorities, Federal Income Taxes on Judges:
                          Page 11 of 11


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT A:

         "Congresswoman Suspected of Income Tax Evasion"

                               by

                Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT B:

          Fax Request to Clerk of USDC, Virgin Islands


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT C:

                 "Karma and the Federal Courts"

                               by

                Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT D:

           NOTICE OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA)
           APPEAL RESPONSE BY IRS DISCLOSURE OFFICER,
                  NOTICE OF PROBABLE FRAUD, AND
                MOTION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT:
               In re Grand Jury Subpoena Served on
                 New Life Health Center Company


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT E:

                      NOTICE OF MOTION AND
           MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND RECONSIDERATION,
        AND CHALLENGE TO HOLDINGS OF U.S. SUPREME COURT:
               In re Grand Jury Subpoena Served on
                 New Life Health Center Company


                             #  #  #


                          Attachment F:

           AFFIDAVIT OF DEFAULT AND OF PROBABLE CAUSE:
               In re Grand Jury Subpoena Served on
                 New Life Health Center Company


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT G:

                Letter to Carol S. Sefren, Chief
             Judges Compensation and Benefits Branch
                   Article III Judges Division


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT H:

              FIRST AMENDMENT PETITION TO CONGRESS
                    FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES


                             #  #  #


                          ATTACHMENT I:

                  "BATF/IRS -- CRIMINAL FRAUD"

                               by

                         William Cooper


                             #  #  #
      


Return to Table of Contents for

Alabama v. Kemp