Time: Mon Aug 11 12:23:23 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA07639;
	Mon, 11 Aug 1997 12:24:12 -0700 (MST)
	by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA04678;
	Mon, 11 Aug 1997 12:20:17 -0700 (MST)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 12:19:11 -0700
To: <jldortch@telalink.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: more authorities on the "Right of Election"

[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
c/o general delivery
Battle Lake [zip code exempt]
MINNESOTA STATE

In Propria Persona

Under Protest and
by Special Visitation






                 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         EIGHTH CIRCUIT


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [sic], )  Case No. 97-2099-MNST
          Plaintiff [sic]/      )
          Appellees,            )  USDC Minneapolis #CR-4-96-65
     v.                         )
                                )
EVERETT C. GILBERTSON [sic],    )
          Defendant [sic]/      )
          Appellant.            )
________________________________)
                                )
Everett C. Gilbertson,          )  DCUS Minneapolis #4-96-65
          Plaintiff/Appellant,  )
     v.                         )  NOTICE OF MOTION,
                                )  MOTION FOR DISCRETIONARY
United States,                  )  JUDICIAL NOTICE, AND
James M. Rosenbaum,             )  APPLICATION FOR LEAVE
and Does 2-99,                  )  TO FILE ENLARGED BRIEF:
          Respondents.          )  FRAP Local Rule 28A(e),(j);
                                )  Rule 201(c), Federal Rules
________________________________)  of Evidence


COMES NOW  Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris, Citizen of Minnesota

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

citizen"),  and   Appellant  in   the   above   entitled   matter

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

interested  party(s),   to  move   this   honorable   Court   for

discretionary judicial  notice, pursuant  to Rule  201(c) of  the

Federal Rules  of Evidence,  and to  apply for  leave to  file an

enlarged REPLY  BRIEF, pursuant  to Local Rules 28A(e) and (j) of

the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure ("FRAP").


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             1 of 6


     Appellant respectfully  requests  judicial  notice  by  this

honorable Court  of the  pleading entitled  DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

AND DEMAND  TO STAY  PROCEEDINGS PENDING  FINAL REVIEW  OF FORMAL

CHALLENGE TO  JUROR AND VOTER REGISTRANT QUALIFICATIONS, as filed

July 8,  1997, in Mitchell v. Nordbrock, Pima County Consolidated

Justice Court,  Tucson, Arizona,  case number  #CV-97-3438.  Said

pleading (hereinafter  "Arizona Pleading") is attached hereto and

incorporated by reference, as if set forth fully herein.  Arizona

state is in the Ninth Circuit.

     The two exhibits attached to the Arizona Pleading are nearly

identical in  form, and substance, to the corresponding MOTION TO

STAY PROCEEDINGS  and the VERIFIED STATEMENT, as previously filed

by Appellant, more than once, in the trial court below.

     The Complaint  of  Judicial  Misconduct  which  follows  the

VERIFIED STATEMENT  infra was  filed  by  Paul  Andrew  Mitchell,

Counselor  at   Law,  against  U.S.  District  Judge  William  D.

Browning, who  presided over  the trial  of Sheila  T. Wallen  in

U.S.A. v. Wallen, USDC, Arizona, case number #95-484-WDB.

     Appellant requests  discretionary judicial  notice  of  said

Complaint of  Judicial Misconduct,  in part  to  demonstrate  the

consistent lack  of professionalism  which the  federal judiciary

has exhibited, when presented with the uncontested facts and laws

previously documented,  under penalty  of perjury and outside the

United States,  in Appellant's  MOTION TO  STAY  PROCEEDINGS  and

requisite VERIFIED STATEMENT.  See 28 U.S.C. 1746(1) in chief.

     Appellant hereby  directs the  attention of  this  honorable

Court to  the following key points of law which are elaborated in

some detail in the Arizona Pleading, to wit:


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             2 of 6


     (1)  The "Right  of Election"  is established and recognized
          by the  Maine Supreme  Court, Appleton concurring at 44
          Maine  528-529  (1859).    The  Maine  Legislature  had
          requested that court's judicial opinion, in response to
          the holding  in Dred  Scott v.  Sandford, 19  How.  393
          (1856).

     (2)  The existence  of two  (2) classes of citizenship under
          American law,  never repealed,  is also  recognized  by
          numerous authorities infra, both state and federal.

     (3)  The proper construction and common understanding of the
          Qualifications Clauses  are also  explored  thoroughly,
          with pertinent  citations dating back to the California
          Constitution of  1849, and subsequently in People v. De
          La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311, 337 (1870).

     (4)  The cases  recognize that  one may  be a citizen of the
          United States  ("federal citizen") without also being a
          Citizen of  any particular Union state.  See e.g. Hough
          v. Societe  Electrique Westinghouse  de Russie,  231 F.
          341, (USDC, NY, 1916).

     (5)  The cases also recognize that Americans may be Citizens
          of a  Union state  without also being federal citizens.
          See McDonel  v. State,  90 Ind.  320 (1883);  Crosse v.
          Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A.2d 431 (1966);
          11 C.J.,  Section 3,  page 777  and cases cited therein
          (Harding, McDonel, Fowler).

     (6)  The cases  also recognize  that, both  before and after
          the so-called  Fourteenth amendment  [sic], it  has not
          been necessary for one to be a federal citizen in order
          to be a Citizen of a Union state.

     (7)  The failure to capitalize the "C" in "Citizen", as that
          term is used in the Qualifications Clauses, has created
          an immense,  nearly immeasurable,  amount of  confusion
          among references  to state  and federal  citizenship in
          all federal  and state  laws which  utilize the  phrase
          "citizen of the United States" [sic].

     (8)  It is  also clear  that this confusion was intentional,
          in order to co-opt the American People into associating
          with a political jurisdiction which is not protected by
          the Guarantee  Clause.    The  United  States  (federal
          government) is  not required  to guarantee a Republican
          Form of  Government to  the federal  zone, only  to the
          state zone [sic].  See Guarantee Clause.

     (9)  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.   See  Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S.
          189 (1919)  (holding predicated  on ratification of the
          16th amendment [sic] as applied to the term "income").


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             3 of 6


     (10) The Qualifications  Clauses have  never  been  amended,
          despite recent efforts to impose limits on the terms of
          federal Representatives  and/or  Senators.    Appellant
          agrees that  limits upon the terms of federal lawmakers
          would require  an amendment  to the  U.S. Constitution.
          See U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 115 S.Ct. 1842,
          131 L.Ed.2d 881 (1995).

     (11) It  is   a  cardinal   rule  in  dealing  with  written
          instruments that  they  are  to  receive  an  unvarying
          interpretation, and  that their  practical construction
          is to  be uniform.   See Cory et al. v. Carter, 48 Ind.
          327, 335 (1874);  Qualifications Clauses, 3:2:1, 4:2:1.

     (12) Citizenship is  a term  of municipal law.  Prior to the
          1866  Civil   Rights  Act,   which  legislated  federal
          citizenship into  existence as  a municipal  franchise,
          one and only one class of citizenship was recognized by
          the U.S.  Constitution.    Thus,  prior  to  1866,  all
          constitutional references  to "Citizen  of  the  United
          States"  and   "citizen  of  the  United  States"  were
          identical in  all respects.   See  Roa v.  Collector of
          Customs, 23  Philippine 315,  332 (1912);    Murphy  v.
          Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15 (1885);  People v. De La Guerra, 40
          Cal. 311, 342 (1870).


                        REMEDY REQUESTED

     Appellant respectfully requests this honorable Court to take

formal judicial  Notice of all authorities cited herein, pursuant

to Rule  201(c) of  the Federal  Rules of  Evidence, and to grant

Appellant leave to file an enlarged REPLY BRIEF, pursuant to FRAP

Local Rules  28A(e) and  (j).   Appellant also  requests leave to

incorporate the instant application into Appellant's REPLY BRIEF,

now in preparation, as if set forth fully therein.


                          VERIFICATION

I, Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty

of perjury,  under the  laws of  the United  States  of  America,
 
without the "United States", that the above statement of facts is

true  and  correct,  to  the  best  of  My  current  information,

knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, per 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).

                 [Please see next page et seq.]


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             4 of 6


Dated: ______________________________


Respectfully submitted,




______________________________________________
Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Minnesota state, federal witness
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             5 of 6


                        PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Everett  C.  Gilbertson,  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 18 years

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

that I personally served the following document(s):

   NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION FOR DISCRETIONARY JUDICIAL NOTICE,
        AND APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ENLARGED BRIEF:
                  FRAP Local Rules 28A(e), (j);
             Rule 201(c), Federal Rules of Evidence

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

class U.S. Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to:


Attorney General                   James M. Rosenbaum
Department of Justice              United States District Court
10th & Constitution, N.W.          110 South Fourth Street
Washington [zip code exempt]       Minneapolis [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA               MINNESOTA STATE

Solicitor General                  Henry Shea
Department of Justice              United States Attorneys
10th & Constitution, N.W.          110 South Fourth Street
Washington [zip code exempt]       Minneapolis [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA               MINNESOTA STATE

Courtesy copies to:

William H. Rehnquist, C.J.         Clarence Thomas, J.
U.S. Supreme Court                 U.S. Supreme Court
One First Street N.E.              One First Street N.E.
Washington [zip code exempt]       Washington [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA               DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Paul Andrew Mitchell               Alex Kozinski (supervising)
Counselor at Law, federal witness  Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
c/o 2509 N. Campbell Ave., #1776   125 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 200
Tucson [zip code exempt]           Pasadena [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE                      CALIFORNIA STATE

[See USPS Publication 221 for addressing instructions.]


Dated:  ______________________________________





______________________________________________
Everett C. Gilbertson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Minnesota state, federal witness
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)


Requests for Judicial Notice/Leave to File Enlarged Brief:  Page
                             6 of 6


                             #  #  #


========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail