Time: Mon Oct 20 16:10:08 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA19675; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:08:44 -0700 (MST) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA05727; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:00:54 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:01:50 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: Human Rights treaties and "persons" The treaties were enacted to bolster the enforcement of fundamental Rights. You MUST read the explicit reservations, which take the Tenth Amendment into account. The treaties guarantee effective judicial remedies, notwithstanding that violations were committed by "persons" acting in their official capacity. They also obligate the United States to develop the possibilitites of effective judicial remedies. The operative term here is "effective judicial remedies". See the DRAFT NOTICE OF TREATY VIOLATIONS in State v. Kemp, to follow my latest thinking on this point, in the Supreme Law Library. Federal judges simply CANNOT provide effective judicial remedies, if they have adverse conflicts of interest, and/or if they attempt to preside on courts which do not have competent jurisdiction, pursuant to Law. We now argue that the W-4 is evidence of an adverse conflict of interest. That "Law" is the U.S. Constitution, and Title 28, United States Code, at the very least. Title 28 does not give the U.S. Supreme Court authority to promulgate rules for the District Court of the United States, but ONLY for the United States District Court!! But, the Supremacy Clause also renders these treaties supreme Law as well, notwithstanding whatever the "Patriot" community might say about those treaties vis-a-vis the United Nations. Wolfgram's treatise does a brilliant job of cutting away all the noise in this controversy. The best extant attack on these treaties is the DRAFT APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION OF RIGHT, which we never filed, but we did write, in Hawks v. County of Butte. This attack is based on an argument that the 17th amendment was never lawfully ratified; see that DRAFT APPLICATION for the details. /s/ Paul Mitchell http://supremelaw.com copy: Supreme Law School At 03:33 PM 10/20/97 -0700, you wrote: >But it seems to me that treaties only apply to "persons" ? =========================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01 B.A.: Political Science, UCLA; M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02 tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03 email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04 website: http://supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05 ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best 06 Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone 07 Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this 08 _____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09 As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall 10 not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11 ======================================================================== 12 [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail