Deeds: An update - (re: car quit claim)- details?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on September 03, 1998 at 21:46:35:

In Reply to: Re: Deeds: An update - (re: car quit claim)- details? posted by Common Right Group on September 24, 1997 at 05:59:17:

The operative phrase in the State's response,
quoted above, is the term "in this state" [sic].

Here's 25 cents on a bet that the above
phrase was actually spelled "in this State"
(i.e. a Buck Act "federal area" a/k/a clear
plastic overlay created under the colorable,
and rebuttable, presumption that Wyoming
is a federal State (NOT "state") subject to
federal municipal law, under authority of the
Territory Clause (4:3:2) :)

So, now that you have their feet in the fire,
let's roast their toe jam, shall we? Write
back to them and tell them, "Yes, I do not
wish to re-register my private property
in your federal State. My car is private
property owned without any other controlling
legal interest held by any other human being or
other entity. Please send me instructions
for registering my private property in
Wyoming state. See 31 CFR 51.2 and 52.2
for authority and definitions. Thank you."

If you read the Commerce Clause very closely,
you will find that it gives Congress authority
to regulate commerce among the several states;
it does NOT empower Congress to regulate
commerce among the inhabitants of the several
states. There is a world of difference between
these two constructions. Once a corporate State
has an MSO, the car/truck is presumed to be
operating in interstate commerce, i.e.
COMMERCE AMONG THE SEVERAL STATES (i.e.
the employees and other assets of the 50
corporate States). The People of the several
state are obviously not one and the same with
the several state governments. Just compare
"State v." with "People v." for more, if less
obvious, evidence. "State v." is the corporate
State goverment moving as Plaintiff; "People v."
are literally the People of some jurisdiction,
usually represented ex rel. by a Private
Attorney General (the People cannot all fit
inside a court room, obviously :)


/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]