Time: Thu Apr 10 07:10:08 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA25089;
	Fri, 11 Apr 1997 06:40:48 -0700 (MST)
	by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA25352;
	Fri, 11 Apr 1997 06:40:40 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 07:08:35 -0700
To: GovtAware-L@Citadel.Net
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: 14th amendment [sic]

At 01:59 AM 4/11/97 -0400, you wrote:
>This are various facts etc. I have gathered about the current decision by
>the Ninth Circuit Court.
>
>>From the decision:
>>[T]he "goal" of the Fourteenth Amendment, "to which the Nation continues to
>>aspire," is "a political system in which race no longer matters." Shaw, 509
>>U.S. at 657.


WRONG!!!  The Ninth Circuit has just gone
off the deep end (as if we didn't already
know that).  This is NOT the intent of
the so-called 14th amendment, as evidenced
by a TON of cases which litigated its
real intent during the first 20 years after
1868.  Here, the Ninth Circuit is creating
an historical fiction, by lying!  If that
had been the goal of the 14th amendment,
the proposed amendment would have been worded 
entirely differently, e.g.:


  "The right to be a Citizen of one of the United States
   shall not be denied or abridged by the United States,
   or by any State, on account of race."


See the language of the Fifteenth Amendment 
in pari materia with 1:2:2, 1:3:3, and 2:1:5
in the U.S. Constitution.

But, instead, Congress attempted to elevate the
1866 Civil Rights Act to a constitutional amendment,
making a second class of citizenship permanent,
by means of seditious syntax.  Then, the amendment
process was botched terribly;  witness the historical
details recited by the Utah Supreme Court in 1968,
100 years after the fraud began.  See Dyett v. Turner,
439 P.2d 266, 270 (1968):  begin reading where
"General Lee had surrendered ...."  I have the case
on disk, if anyone wants it.

/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com


NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST now follows:


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


Registered U.S. Mail #R 756 488 761
Return Receipt Requested

                                   c/o USPS P.O. Box ####
                                   San Rafael
                                   California Republic
                                   zip code exempt (DMM 122.32)

                                   December 29, 1993

Hon. William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice
Hon. Harry A. Blackmun, Associate Justice
Hon. John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice
Hon. Sandra Day O'Connor, Associate Justice
Hon. Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice
Hon. Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice
Hon. David H. Souter, Associate Justice
Hon. Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street, Northeast
Washington, District of Columbia

Subject:  NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST

Dear Honorable Justices:

     Notice is hereby  formally  served  upon you,  both  jointly
and severally,  that conclusive  evidence  now  available  to  Me
proves that  the so-called 14th amendment to the Constitution for
the United  States of  America was  never properly  approved  and
adopted.  I am under a legal and moral obligation to intervene on
behalf of  the many  millions of  Americans whose status has been
unlawfully subsumed  under federal jurisdiction, because this was
done without either their knowledge or their informed consent.

     As required  by Title  28, United  States Code,  Section 453
(Oaths of  justices and  judges), you  have  solemnly  sworn  (or
affirmed) that  you would  administer justice  without respect to
persons, and faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all
duties incumbent  upon you as Justices of the U. S. Supreme Court
under the Constitution and laws of the United States, so help you
God (see revision at 104 Stat. 5124).

     Please take formal notice that it is quite simply impossible
for you,  or for  any other public officials anywhere in America,
to perform  your solemn  duties under this oath (or affirmation),
if the  weight of  material evidence  should prove that the exact
provisions of  that Constitution  are still  in doubt.  Your oath
(or affirmation)  is a  binding contract  which I  hereby seek to
enforce, according  to the dictates of My conscience, My Creator,
and the supreme Law of the Land, as lawfully amended.

     Pursuant to the Guarantee Clause (4:4) and to the opinion of
the California  Court of  Appeal in  Steiner v.  Darby et al., 88
Cal.App.2d 481,  199 P.2d  429 (1948:  the year  of My birth as a
Sovereign natural born Free Citizen of one of the United States),
it is not only My Right, but also My Duty, to inform you that the
weight of  material  and  historical  evidence  proves  that  the
so-called 14th  amendment is  not now,  nor has  it ever  been, a
lawful provision  in the  Constitution for  the United  States of
America.   This proposed  amendment  failed  to  be  ratified  in
accordance  with   the  requirements   of  Article   5   of   the
Constitution.   At the  very least,  the evidence which I now lay
before you  consists of  the following  public records  and other
documents:

     State v. Phillips, 540 P.2d. 936, 941 (1975)
     Dyett v. Turner, 439 P.2d 266, 270 (1968)
     28 Tulane Law Review 22
     11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484
     House Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, p. 15641 et seq.

     Because the  available evidence  indicates to  Me  that  all
Federal and  State judicial  officers,  without  exception,  have
taken solemn  oaths (or  affirmations) which  disagree  with  the
Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America  as  lawfully
amended, I  am now  left entirely  without any  unbiased judicial
forum in  which to  seek review  and declaratory  relief  in  the
matter of the following federal questions:


(1)  The  constitutional   qualifications  for  election  to  the
     offices of President, Senator, and Representative retain the
     meaning they  had when  the Constitution  was first  drafted
     (see Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393-633 (1856)).

(2)  There is still no constitutional authority for the status of
     a "citizen  of the  United States", unlike the proper status
     of a  "Citizen of  one of  the States  United"  (see  1:2:2,
     1:3:3, 2:1:5,  and People  v. De  La  Guerra,  40  Cal.  311
     (1870): the term "United States" here means "States united";
     see also Hooven & Allison v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)).

(3)  There  is  still  no  constitutional  provision  prohibiting
     anyone from questioning the validity of the public debt, and
     freedom of speech is still guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

(4)  All provisions in Federal law are necessarily null and void,
     to the extent that they make reference, either implicitly or
     explicitly, to any section(s) of the failed 14th amendment.

(5)  All provisions  in  State  constitutions  and  statutes  are
     likewise null  and  void,  to  the  extent  that  they  make
     reference to  any section(s)  of the  failed 14th  amendment
     (e.g. see  the attached letter to the California State Lands
     Commission, to which all recipients fell silent).


                   DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST

     Therefore, by  virtue of  the superior  authority  which  is
vested in Me by My Creator, as a direct consequence of My natural
birth as a qualified member of the Sovereign People, "by whom and
for whom all government exists and acts" (see Yick Wo v. Hopkins,
118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)), and on behalf of each and every member
of the  Sovereignty known  and lawfully  identified as  "We,  the
People of  the United States" of America (see Preamble), I hereby
demand and  do hereby  order you to Cease and Desist from any and
all of the following official acts on your part:


(1)  any  and  all  official  oaths  or  affirmations  which  are
     predicated in  any way  on the  lawful ratification  of  the
     so-called 14th amendment;

(2)  any and  all judicial  decisions or determinations which are
     predicated in  any way  on the  lawful ratification  of  the
     so-called 14th amendment, including but not limited to:

     (a)  decisions or  determinations which  construe in any way
          the rights,  responsibilities, privileges,  immunities,
          and liabilities  of "citizens  of the United States" as
          that term  is used  in any and all Acts of Congress and
          administrative rules and regulations promulgated by any
          employees  of  the  Executive  Branch  of  the  Federal
          government (e.g. 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1(c));

     (b)  decisions or determinations which attempt in any way to
          enforce the administration of the individual income tax
          provisions of the Internal Revenue Code upon the People
          of the  50 Union States, or upon their private property
          (see Treasury Decision 2313 and Brushaber's pleadings);

     (c)  decisions or determinations which uphold in any way the
          validity of  the public  debt of  the Federal and State
          governments, acting  in whatever  capacity and  through
          whatever agency, lawfully delegated or not (see 1:6:2);

     (d)  decisions or  determinations which recognize in any way
          the lawful  existence of a "State within a state", with
          particular reference  to the  political body defined by
          the population  of "citizens  of the United States" who
          may inhabit  the 50  Union States  at any given moment,
          however those  terms may  be defined (see 4:3:1 and the
          case law interpreting the Buck Act, 4 U.S.C. 105-113).


     Until such  time as you demonstrate officially that each and
every one of you has executed a solemn oath which agrees with the
Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America  as  lawfully
amended, I will take the absence of such an oath to mean that you
are  jointly  and  severally  biased  in  your  understanding  of
the Constitution and that you are, therefore, unqualified to rule
on these matters and hereby recused from doing so.

     The burden  of proof  is now  upon you  to authenticate  the
Constitution which  you agree  to uphold, now and at all times in
the future, using established principles of Law and the published
rules of evidence.

     I realize  that this  NOTICE AND  DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST
may constitute  an historically  unprecedented act on My part, as
an individual  California Citizen  who enjoys neither elected nor
appointed  authority   of  any  kind  at  this  moment  in  time.
Nevertheless, this  act is necessitated by the fact that there is
presently not  one  single  judge,  magistrate,  or  commissioner
anywhere in America whose oath of office is not colored by faulty
(non-existent) provisions  in the federal Constitution which they
are sworn to uphold.

     I realize  also that  this Notice and Demand must be general
in  nature   and  in   substance,  because  of  the  far-reaching
consequences which  issue from  the facts  and Law  which  impugn
federal "adoption" of the so-called 14th amendment.  It is not My
purpose here to anticipate, nor to delineate, each and every such
consequence.   Better minds than I should hesitate to assume such
a weighty task by themselves.

     Therefore, for  the time  being, I will leave it to you, and
to the  capable expertise  on your respective staffs, to find and
recommend the  course of  action which  will  best  execute  this
Demand with  maximum justice,  liberty, and domestic tranquility.
These are,  after all,  the stated  goals of  our chosen  form of
government in the United States of America (see Preamble).

     Furthermore, I do explicitly reserve My unalienable Right to
take whatever  steps I  deem necessary  and proper to correct, at
any time,  a government  which has now drifted so far off course,
it hardly  resembles the  constitutional Republic it was designed
to be (see also Declaration of Independence (1776)).

     Thank you  very  much  for  your  attention,  and  for  your
consideration.


Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John E. Trumane, Sui Juris

California Citizen, on behalf of the
People of the United States of America

All Rights Reserved AT LAW

            NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENTS.
            NOTICE TO AGENTS IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS.

copies:      Marin County Grand Jury, San Rafael
             Bill Clinton, President
             Pete Wilson, Governor of California
             Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator
             Dianne Feinstein, U.S. Senator
             Lynn Woolsey, U.S. Representative
             Janet Reno, Attorney General
             Drew S. Days, III, Solicitor General
             William K. Suter, Supreme Court Clerk
             Frank D. Wagner, Reporter of Decisions
             Alfred Wong, Marshal
             Shelley L. Dowling, Librarian

attachment:  letter to California State Lands Commission

enclosures
(under separate cover to Librarian supra):

             The Federal Zone, hard-copy second edition
             The Federal Zone, electronic fourth edition
             Chapter 11, from upcoming fifth edition


             California All-Purpose Acknowledgement

CALIFORNIA STATE/REPUBLIC       )
                                )
COUNTY OF MARIN                 )

     On this  twenty-ninth (29th)  day of  December,  1993,  Anno
Domini, before Me personally appeared John E. Trumane, personally
known to  Me (or  proved to  Me  on  the  basis  of  satisfactory
evidence) to be the Person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument and  acknowledged to  Me that  he executed the same in
His authorized  capacity, and  that  by  His  signature  on  this
instrument the  Person, or  the entity  upon behalf  of which the
Person acted,  executed the instrument.  Purpose of Notary Public
is for identification only, and not for entrance into any foreign
jurisdiction.

WITNESS My hand and official seal.


/s/ Notary Public
_____________________________________
Notary Public


   C E R T I F I C A T E   O F   S E R V I C E   B Y   M A I L

     It is  hereby certified that service of this LETTER has been
made on  interested parties  by mailing one copy thereof, on this
twenty-ninth (29th)  day of  December, 1993, in a sealed envelope
with postage prepaid, properly addressed to them as follows:

Registered U.S. Mail #R 756 488 761
Return Receipt Requested of:

Hon. William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street, Northeast
Washington, District of Columbia


Copies via first class U.S. mail to:

Hon. Harry A. Blackmun, Associate Justice
Hon. John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice
Hon. Sandra Day O'Connor, Associate Justice
Hon. Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice
Hon. Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice
Hon. David H. Souter, Associate Justice
Hon. Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street, Northeast
Washington, District of Columbia


Dated:  December 29, 1993

/s/ John E. Trumane
_________________________________________________________________
John E.  Trumane, Citizen/Principal,  by Special  Appearance,  in
Propria Persona,  proceeding Sui Juris, with Assistance, Special,
"Without Prejudice" to any of My unalienable Rights.


                             #  #  #

========================================================================
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.    : Counselor at Law, federal witness
email:       [address in tool bar]   : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU
web site:  http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration
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
========================================================================


      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail