The Texas rancher was living his worst nightmare. He was embroiled in an income tax case with the federal government that was intent on foreclosing on his ranch, taking everything and leaving nothing due to unpaid liens.
The rancher’s effort to fight back turned the incident into a landmark case. On September 14, 2015, he filed a petition in United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division Case No. 9:14-CV-138 that challenged the Constitutional authority of the feds to usurp the authority of the courts in Tyler County, Texas.
The United States had 14 days to respond, but remained silent, apparently the first and only time that the government failed to respond to a jurisdiction challenge.
The rancher was not dissuaded. On September 30, 2015, he filed a Demand for Dismissal. Again, there was no response. How can the worst nightmare become even worse? The rancher will likely answer that when the Federal Court in conjunction with the IRS is trying to illegally seize your property while ignoring your legal rights, this is about as bad as your nightmare can be.
All within the rights of the rancher, his petition claimed that the Federal Court lacked the territorial and personal jurisdiction in Tyler Country, Texas, and demanded a dismissal of the case. The text of the petition indicated that the law was on his side.
Read the next page to find out what happened to the Texas rancher and to the Constitutional rights of all Americans.
Are you sure. Perhaps you should see if it was approved per the constitution as amendments are required to be.
Also tell me how an ammendment that contradicts the main body of the constitution is valid.
The 16th Amendment has been upheld in the court’s numerous times. It is valid unless and until a court challenge is successful or it is changed by another amendment. For example, prohibition was instituted through a Constitutional amendment and was repealed by a later amendment.
“Amendment” means “change”. The Constitution is changed through amendments. To directly answer your question, if amendments could not contradict the language of the original document, slavery would still be the law of the land and US senators would still be chosen by state legislatures instead of by direct election, among many other things.
While the subject matter in this post is interesting.., before rendering an opinion, it would be more interesting to know just who this ‘Truth and Action’ person or group is. The anonymity afforded by the Internet can allow just about any buffoon to post these kind of things…, true or not.
Would Antoin Scalia be a judge you would remove?
Hardly, Scalia was fairly well balanced in his decisions
Shiek Smith-El your just a douche bag liberal$#%&!@*hat. YOUR time will come, fucking poser
What administration in recent history would you re-instate as the perfect expression of America pure and free?
Does the land belong to the ranchers? Or is there a very generous lease option . I though the argument was about land management not necessarily about ownership.