Time: Mon Aug 11 18:41:17 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA19737;
Mon, 11 Aug 1997 18:40:54 -0700 (MST)
by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA20775;
Mon, 11 Aug 1997 18:39:34 -0700 (MST)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 18:38:29 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Passports for American Citizens
References: <3.0.3.16.19970811121557.3ea76800@pop.primenet.com>
<3.0.3.16.19970811171729.3f4f0d1c@pop.primenet.com>
The term "national" is defined by federal statutes,
but it is not found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.
I just checked, by searching the White House Constitution,
which I obtained from the President, by means of a
proper FOIA request last year. There is another
version in the back of West's "Federal Civil Judicial
Procedure and Rules."
The term "Citizen of the United States"
is found in the Qualifications Clauses;
these clauses have never been amended.
See 1:2:2; 1:3:3; and 2:1:5.
Remember these!
Congress can create, alter, or abolish statutes.
Congress can neither create, alter, nor abolish,
terms that are found in the U.S. Constitution.
The cardinal rule of construction is that their
meaning remains constant over time.
See Eisner v. Macomber: "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." These
are very power words, and they were uttered
in the context of constructing the term "income"
as found in the failed 16th amendment [sic].
Federal citizenship was first established
by the 1866 Civil Rights Act -- a statute.
It is a municipal statute, which created
a municipal franchise, subject to the
municipal jurisdiction of Congress.
See Roa v. Collector.
The Qualifications Clauses were ordained by
the People of the United States, and ratified
by the several states of the Union which
existed under the Articles of Confederation.
As such, they cannot be touched, and their
meaning cannot be altered by any employees
of the federal government; any such alteration
MUST be effected by constitutional amendment,
ratified by three-fourths of the several states.
These principles have been with Us for a
very long time; it is time We took another
close look at them, and started applying
them in practical situations, like applications
for passports, and a myriad of other points
of government contact, where fraud was injected,
by design.
As for the ad hominem argumentation found below,
the author needs to understand that such a
method of argumentation is unpersuasive, at best,
and misrepresentative, at worst, because it is an
unsuccessful attempt to distract Us from the
core issues here, namely, status and jurisdiction.
Congress has a constitutional obligation to
extend passport protection to Citizens of
the several states which are united by and
under the Constitution for the United States
of America. See the Preamble for the correct
nomenclature for referring to the federal
constitution.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
At 07:48 PM 8/11/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>-> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List
>
>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List
>>
>> As a matter of supreme law, I would
>> begin with a FOIA to the Passport Office's
>> Disclosure Officer, for a copy of the
>> passport application for a Citizen of
>> _________ state. Fill in the blank here
>> with the Union state you inhabit. Then,
>> if they don't supply it to you, you have
>> a clear judicial remedy for compelling them
>> either to produce it, or to admit that they
>> don't have one. FOIA is the supreme law,
>> pursuant to the Supremacy Clause: Article
>> VI, Clause 2.
>>
>> We abbreviate this clause as "6:2".
>>
>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>> http://www.supremelaw.com
>>
>> p.s. In case you don't know, FOIA stands
>> for Freedom Of Information Act, Title 5,
>> United States Code, Section 552 et seq.
>> (and the sections which follow).
>>
>> At 07:00 PM 8/11/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> >
>> >-> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List
>> >
>> >So what is the procedure/forms required to obtain
>> >a green cover passport?
>> >> >
>> >> >I had heard that there was a passport
>> >> >available to state Citizens. Is this
>> >> >true and do you have any info?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, it has a green cover, instead of blue.
>> >>
>> >> You want to declare yourself to be a
>> >> "Citizen of the United States of America" [sic].
>> >> You enjoy the Right of Election, under the
>> >> Tenth Amendment. For authority, see
>> >> 44 Maine 528-529 (1859), Appleton concurring.
>>
>> ========================================================================
>> 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.]
>>
>> -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>> -> Posted by: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>
>Paul, quit bullshitting the public. When you make application for a
> passport, if you don't want to be a citizen of the District of
> Columbia, or some other 'federal' "State", then check the block
> "National", which covers you as a State (50, United) citizen, or
> a natural American, i.e., Indian, Eskimo, et al.
>If one wishes to get involved with some 'legal' law enterprise, then I
> suggest the 'Supreme Law' whatever, engineered by Paul Andrew Mit-
> chell.
>I do my best to protect you Paul, but you take advantage of every sit-
> uation and give no credit where credit is due. I think you are
> headed for a fall.
>
> Ray Earnest
>
>-> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>-> Posted by: Ray Earnest <cen11156@mail.ld.centuryinter.net>
>
>
>
========================================================================
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