Requirement for Consent

If you are a subject of the federal government, and have made your children subjects of the federal government by writing 1 them off as privileged tax deductions on a federal tax return, the U.S. Supreme Court has held over and over that you 2 cannot bring constitutional challenges against the federal government in federal court. Federal judges will dismiss you... 3 and rightly so... for "lack of standing". 4

" These general rules are well settled:

5

(1) That the United States, when it creates rights in individuals against itself [a "public right", which is a euphemism for a "franchise" to help the court disguise the nature of the transaction], is under no obligation to provide a remedy through the courts . United States ex rel. Dunlap v. Black, 128 U.S. 40, 9 Sup.Ct. 12, 32 L.Ed. 354; Ex parte Atocha, 17 Wall. 439, 21 L.Ed. 696; Gordon v. United States, 7 Wall. 188, 195, 19 L.Ed. 35; De Groot v. United States, 5 Wall. 419, 431, 433, 18 L.Ed. 700; Comegys v. Vasse, 1 Pet. 193, 212, 7 L.Ed. 108. (2) That where a statute creates a right and provides a special remedy, that remedy is exclusive. Wilder Manufacturing Co. v. Corn Products Co., 236 U.S. 165, 174, 175, 35 Sup.Ct. 398, 59 L.Ed. 520, Ann. Cas. 1916A, 118; Arnson v. Murphy, 109 U.S. 238, 3 Sup.Ct. 184, 27 L.Ed. 920; Barnet v. National Bank, 98 U.S. 555, 558, 25 L.Ed. 212; Farmers’ & Mechanics’ National Bank v. Dearing, 91 U.S. 29, 35, 23 L.Ed. 196. Still the fact that the right and the remedy are thus intertwined might not, if the provision stood alone, require us to hold that the remedy expressly given excludes a right of review by the Court of Claims, where the decision of the special tribunal involved no disputed question of fact and the denial of compensation was rested wholly upon the construction of the act. See Medbury v. United States, 173 U.S. 492, 198, 19 Sup.Ct. 503, 43 L.Ed. 779; Parish v. MacVeagh, 214 U.S. 124, 29 Sup.Ct. 556, 53 L.Ed. 936; McLean v. United States, 226 U.S. 374, 33 Sup.Ct. 122, 57 L.Ed. 260; United States v. Laughlin (No. 200), 249 U.S. 440, 39 Sup.Ct. 340, 63 L.Ed. 696,

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

decided April 14, 1919."

21

[U.S. v. Babcock, 250 U.S. 328, 39 S.Ct. 464 (1919)]

22

Since the Constitution offers no remedy to statutory “subjects” and serfs of the federal government when Rights [which 23 state citizens have surrendered for a bribe] are violated, what is it they actually celebrate on the 4th of July by waving those 24 federal flags made in COMMUNIST China? Hmmmm... 25 What is really going on is that there is an invisible war being waged against your constitutional rights by people who are 26 supposed to be serving and protecting you, but who have stealthily and invisibly transformed from protectors into 27 predators. As a result of these stealthful transformations, Americans are largely unaware that they are a conquered people. 28 The conquerors are statutory but not constitutional aliens from a legislatively foreign land called the District of Columbia, 29 who bribed you to put on chains and go not into a physical cage, but a LEGAL cage called a franchise. This is the same 30 thing that Jacob did to Esau, his brother, in the Bible: Persuaded him to give up his freedom and inheritance for a stinking 31 bowl of pottage. Here is the way the Bible dictionary describes it, wherein “taxes” used to be called “tribute” in biblical 32 times: 33

“ TRIBUTE. Tribute in the sense of an impost paid by one state to another, as a mark of subjugation, is a common feature of international relationships in the biblical world. The tributary could be either a hostile state or an ally. Like deportation, its purpose was to weaken a hostile state. Deportation aimed at depleting the man- power. The aim of tribute was probably twofold: to impoverish the subjugated state and at the same time to increase the conqueror’s own revenues and to acquire commodities in short supply in his own country. As an instrument of administration it was one of the simplest ever devised: the subjugated country could be made responsible for the payment of a yearly tribute. Its non-arrival would be taken as a sign of rebellion, and an expedition would then be sent to deal with the recalcitrant. This was probably the reason for the attack

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

recorded in Gn. 14.

42

[New Bible Dictionary. Third Edition. Wood, D. R. W., Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. 1996, c1982, c1962,

43

InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove]

44

Your devious conquerors are doing and will continue to do EVERYTHING in their power to keep you in their legal cage as 45 their SATANIC SEX SLAVE, PRISONER, and WHORE. This is the same whore that the Bible refers to as “Babylon the 46 Great Harlot” in the Book of Revelation. By “sex”, we mean commerce between you and a corrupted de facto government 47 that loves money more than it loves YOUR freedom. Black’s Law defines “commerce”, in fact, as “intercourse” and 48 therefore “sex” in a figurative sense: 49

“ Commerce . … Intercourse by way of trade and traffic between different peoples or states and the citizens or inhabitants thereof, including not only the purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities, but also the instrumentalities [governments] and agencies by which it is promoted and the means and appliances by which it

50

51

52

is carried on…”

53

[ Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 269]

54

Requirement for Consent

266 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________