Time: Sat Aug 30 09:20:51 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA28868; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:21:32 -0700 (MST) id MAA08364; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:19:53 -0400 (EDT) id MAA08323; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:19:45 -0400 (EDT) id AA09365; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:19:44 -0400 by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA21878; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:15:27 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:13:50 -0700 To: jus-dare@freedom.by.net From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SNET: SLS: Kangaroo Attitudes: Results? Cc: <frdmftr@primenet.com> -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List The Guarantee Clause does not require the United States (federal government) to guarantee a Republican Form of Government to itself -- only to the several states. See Art. IV, Sec. 4. In Downes v. Bidwell, 1901, the Supreme Court ruled, in effect, that the Constitution of the United States, as such, does not extend beyond the limits of the states which are united by, and under, it. Justice Harlan, dissenting in Downes, predicted that Congress would implement an absolute legislative democracy [sic]. That is, in fact, exactly what has happened. Later, in Hooven & Allison v. Evatt, 1945, the Supreme Court extended this Downes Doctrine [sic] by ruling that the guarantees of the Constitution extend to the federal zone ONLY as Congress makes those guarantees applicable, by statutes. Confer at "United States" in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, for the correct citation to Hooven. These themes are well documented in Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF, now in the Supreme Law Library at the URL just below my name here. Several of the Appendices are available there as well. /s/ Paul Mitchell http://www.supremelaw.com copy: Supreme Law School At 10:41 AM 8/30/97 +0000, you wrote: > >*Jus Dare* >Kangaroo Attitudes: Results? > >From: Freedom Fighter <frdmftr@primenet.com> >Subject: Constitutional issues prohibited! > >I have heard on many, many occasions that defendants in criminal court >actions are unable to defend themselves effectively because the >presiding judge states that raising constitutional issues and claiming >constitutional rights will not be tolerated in his court. > >I claim my right to be secure from the jurisdiction of any court >judge, federal or otherwise, who refuses to allow constitutional >issues, including but not limited to my claim to any right, to be >raised in his court. This judicial attitude is utter crap and must >not be allowed to continue. It is itself grounds for appeal. > >That being said, can anyone offer any explanation or legal background >for this judicial prohibition of the U.S. Constitution in the courts? >Has anyone appealed this kangaroo court attitude? What were the >results? > >-- >Donald L. Cline, a.k.a. >Freedom Fighter <frdmftr@primenet.com> >===================================================== >If the Federal Government will not recognize, after >the year 2005, any personal identification not bear- >ing a digitized fingerprint and/or other digitized >information of a private nature, perhaps the people >of America, who are the rightful and lawful masters >of government, should stop recognizing the Federal >Government. > -- Donald L. Cline, 7/23/97 >===================================================== >If individuals have no right to keep and bear arms, >then society cannot defend the right of free speech >or free press or any other right against the mere >whim of any superior force. (Media, take note.) > -- Donald L. Cline, 7/27/97 >===================================================== >I'll be your huckleberry. > -- Doc Holliday, 1851-1887 >===================================================== >All private e-mail should be encrypted. If we want >the right to privacy, we have to exercise it. > > ======================================================================== 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]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail