-6

Is it the birth certificate, voter's registration, social security, or more? What common binding of contracts or agreements, in this free country, allows one sovereign (the state) to assume authority over another sovereign (a natural person)?

Dale M
  • 208,266
  • 17
  • 237
  • 460
Patrick Samples
  • 7
  • 1

2 Answers2

8

The source of the power of the United States government to do the things that it does are the people themselves. (United States Constitution)

The people have decided on three branches of government (judicial, executive, and legislative). The expression of the will of the people through these three branches of government results in the government having authority to enforce laws within the borders of the United States.

It is not through any contract, agreement, certificate, registration, or other that you come under the jurisdiction of the United States, but simply by your presence. (There are some limited exceptions for foreign diplomats and tribal sovereignty.)

  • Yes if the people are sovereign, and the United States are sovereign, That would make the people foreign diplomats. as the United States is a foreign Limited Liability Corporation from the Organic Act of 1871, which emulates a government.. It operates with the Federal Reserve bank as a part of the IMF which would also make every court in the system foreign, from London. – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:06
  • "outdated" as they may be.. There is also:

    "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."* S.C.R. 1795, **Penhallow v. Doane’s Admins

     – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:12
  • && There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman without his consent." [Cruden v. Neale, (1796) ] – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:12
  • I'm not asking how the US works. I'm asking how it is legal for them to work in this way?.. seeing that there is no laws anymore, and it is all policy since 1933(??).. maybe nothing is illegal, just a breach of contract. whether it be the social contract, or just corporate policy. How do they kidnap people and set ransoms on them? Because the law of man(common law) is not enforced? – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:13
  • No, you answered That they can control the people in their borders, which is subject-matter jurisdiction.. as they also require personam jurisdiction, also the US does not extend outside of the 10 square miles of Washington DC. – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:18
  • What isn't correct? – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:19
  • oh sorry 68.3 square miles.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-307
    (h)

     – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:20
  • I don't think I have misstated what it means for the US to be able to enforce laws or policies within it's border.
    I don't understand the jurisdiction that the courts have, hence why I started this question.
    I have not said anything about the United States of America. That is a different entity then US. The US is a Limited Liability Corporation operated out of London. The US of A are a group of people occupying territories in the Land Mass of North America.     – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:36
  • I would have to say that you don't know and need to get on my level. – Patrick Samples Oct 12 '15 at 16:41
  • 3
    nomenagentis - Your answer and explanation so far is more than adequate. @PatrickSamples: If you have coherent legal questions please pose them as questions, after reviewing the Help center for guidance and information on asking questions and what is considered on-topic. This isn't a discussion site. – feetwet Oct 12 '15 at 16:42
  • 3
    @PatrickSamples The US enforces its law through physical force, just like every other sovereign nation. The things you've said that nomen agentis disagrees with all reflect various crackpot theories that seek to use legal logic to explain why the legal system is bogus, but they generally rely on several logical fallacies, not least of which is contrafactual assumptions. An example is your assertion that the US is an LLC. What evidence do you have for that? When was the LLC incorporated, and in what jurisdiction? – phoog Oct 13 '15 at 00:08
1

Why you are not sovereign

In the first place, you are not sovereign. Sovereign means:

A chief ruler with supreme power; one possessing sovereignty. (q.v.) It is also applied to a king or other magistrate with limited powers.

In the UK, the sovereign is the monarch, currently Queen Elizabeth II. In Australia and Canada it is Queen Elizabeth II's representative, currently Peter Cosgrove and David Johnston respectively. In the USA it is the President, currently Barak Obama. And so on ...

Perhaps, you are thinking of a sovereign state? Well, you're not one of those either:

a state which administers its own government, and is not dependent upon, or subject to, another power.

In fact, you are not even a non-sovereign state, like New South Wales, Ottawa, Scotland or South Carolina:

A federated state is a territorial and constitutional community forming part of a federal union.

Why sovereign's have authority over you

Because they have "supreme power" or "limited powers"; and you don't.

Dale M
  • 208,266
  • 17
  • 237
  • 460
  • 7
    Obama is not considered sovereign in the US. The US is a republic; the people are the sovereign (that is, "the people" as abstract entity, not any individual person). – cpast Oct 22 '15 at 19:50