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.
Constitutional jurisdiction this constitution and all treaties signed under the authority thereof and all laws passed in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law if the land to which ALL JUDGES IN EVERY STATE SHALL BE BOUND, ANYTHING IN THE LAWS OR CONSTITUTION OF ANY STATE NOT WITHSTANDING. This is verbatim from the constitution of the united states yes the Federal courts have jurisdiction but more importantly the courts in Texas are bound by the constitution to uphold the IRS as it is federal law passed in pursuance of the constitution The rancher has no case. Learn the constitution prior to posting this s**t
Note the term ” and all laws made in pursuance thereof” This is referring to the Constitution. And any law made which violates the Constitution is invalid because it violates it.
How many times does the supreme court have to say the same thing before you will accept that just because a law is passed it does not make it legal. I have about thirty more of these.
Boyd v. United, 116 U.S. 616 at 635 (1885)
Justice Bradley, “It may be that it is the obnoxious thing in its mildest form; but illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way; namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. This can only be obviated by adhering to the rule that constitutional provisions for the security of persons and property should be liberally construed. A close and literal construction deprives them of half their efficacy, and leads to gradual depreciation of the right, as if it consisted more in sound than in substance. It is the duty of the Courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. Their motto should be Obsta Principiis.”
Downs v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)
“It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside supreme law finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this Court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violations of the principles of the Constitution.”
Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 155 (1966), cited also in Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649.644 “Constitutional ‘rights’ would be of little value if they could be indirectly denied.”
Juliard v. Greeman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884)
Supreme Court Justice Field, ‘There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States… In this country, sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise power which they have not, by their Constitution, entrusted to it. All else is withheld.”
Mallowy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1
“All rights and safeguards contained in the first eight amendments to the federal Constitution are equally applicable.”
MIRANDA v. ARIZONA , 384 U.S. 436 (1966) 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no ‘rule making’ or legislation which would abrogate them.”
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 p. 442
“An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
Need to stay on top of this.
Damnit! We need a jillion Pat Henrys … Some G Ws. Judges have betrayed reason for being. Too indoctrinated in political direction. Wish to God we be like getting back to strict construction of constitutional discipline! We are farting away rights of mankind. One day these F…. up might need strict constitutional constructionism!!!
Abolish the IRS!! Abolish the FED!! Remove judges who refuse to follow the written law!!!
Why is this worthy of being posted?
Wonder if we can have Hillery and O no more charged with constitutional treason and have them shot
“Every truth passes through three stages before it is recognized. In the first it is ridiculed, in the second it is opposed, in the third it is regarded as self-evident.”[1] Arthur Schopenhauer, 1818.
Stand your ground.
And you wonder why we voted for Trump.
Most government agencies start out with good intentions. But get to much power. EPA,BLM you name it. Look up FEMA and what it’s original purpose is. Talk about a monster.