FORMAL PETITION TO AMEND THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

FORMAL PETITION TO AMEND THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

March 7, 2010 A.D.

Hon. Patty Murray

United States Senator

915 Second Avenue, Suite 2988

Seattle 98174

WASHINGTON STATE, USA

Greetings Senator Murray:

The Supreme Law Firm hereby submits our Formal Petition to the Congress of the United States, to forward a proper Resolution to the 50 State Legislatures promptly proposing the following article of amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America, in full compliance with Article V of that Constitution:

Section 1. The status of Citizen of one of the United States of America shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State of the Union on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2. The fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America is hereby repealed with prejudice.

Section 3. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

We have attached a meaningful sampling of research and litigation which the Supreme Law Firm has performed in connection with the relevant history and pertinent laws now in existence. For your convenience and ready access, we also maintain a full set of related documents on the Internet (see links below).

We are quite satisfied that a major fraud was committed against all succeeding generations by the devious language and fraudulent intent of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, 14 Stat. 27-30, April 9, 1866 A.D. Cf. “fraud in the inducement” in law dictionaries.

Accordingly, in our capacity as a qualified Private Attorney General, with authority to represent the United States (Federal government) legally in all American Courts, we hereby also notify you formally of our intent to challenge the constitutionality of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. We offer to prove that said Act is void for vagueness ab initio, and specifically for violating the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393, 15 L.Ed. 691 (1856), as later elaborated in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), to wit:

Congress ... cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.

The pertinent court authorities we have already investigated did hold that unconstitutionality dates from the moment of enactment, not from any decision so branding the Act in question. See 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec. 177.

Thank you, Senator, for your professional consideration and for your timely and appropriate actions in reply to this FORMAL PETITION.

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

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

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13

U.S. Mail:

c/o Lake Union Mail

117 East Louisa Street

Seattle 98102-3203

WASHINGTON STATE, USA

Attachments:

“Citizenship for Dummies,” by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.,

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964, (3/4/2010), Internet URL:

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/citizenship.for.dummies.htm

(see also all links at end)