Requirement for Consent

In fact, based on several Freedom of Information Act Requests (FOIA) about the status of numerous federal district court 1 “judges” we have, who hear such tax cases, most of the judges do not have a valid appointment document, never took any 2 oath as required by positive law, and aren’t even listed as “judges” in the records of the government! Don’t believe us? 3 Send in a Freedom of Information Act (F.O.I.A.) request yourself and find out! Throughout the remainder of this section, 4 we will refer to these imposters simply as “pseudo judges”. Therefore, our “United States District Courts” have simply 5 become the equivalent of administrative federal office buildings that are part of the Executive, and not Judicial, branch of 6 the government. A truly sovereign and independent Article III Judicial Branch can’t even be mentioned in any federal 7 statute, because of the separation of powers doctrine, and yet we have a whole Title of the U.S. Code, Title 28, which 8 defines and prescribes what pseudo judges in these bogus “courts” can and can’t do. The Supreme Court says the existence 9 of such laws proves that such “courts” aren’t really judicial tribunals. Notice the statement “the ONLY judicial power 10 vested in Congress” below: 11

"As the only judicial power vested in Congress is to create courts whose judges shall hold their offices during good behavior, it necessarily follows that, if Congress authorizes the creation of courts and the appointment of judges for limited time, it must act independently of the Constitution upon territory which is not part of

12

13

14

the United States within the meaning of the Constitution. " [O'Donohue v. United States, 289 U.S. 516 , 53 S.Ct. 740 (1933)]

15

16

Title 28 not only “creates” all the district and circuit courts of the United States, but it in fact even defines what the 17 “judges” CANNOT rule on. See 28 U.S.C. §2201(a), which plainly states that federal judges CANNOT rule on rights in 18 the context of income taxes. Excuse our language here, but what the HELL is a judge for if he can’t defend or rule on our 19 rights(!)? We’ll give you a hint: The only “rights” he is there to protect are the governments “right” to STEAL your money 20 and use it to subsidize socialism. The only type of court over which the Congress could have such absolute legislative 21 power over judges is in an Article IV (of the Constitution), territorial court, and this in fact exactly describes our present 22 District and Circuit federal court systems. Our present federal District and Circuit courts were created to rule ONLY over 23 issues relating to federal territory and property under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, and Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 of 24 the Constitution. They are all “legislative” rather than “constitutional” or “judicial” courts. They are part of the Executive 25 Branch of the government, and which have no authority to even address Constitutional rights. They are NOT part of the 26 “judicial branch”, and this is a deception. The entire Judicial Branch, in fact, is composed exclusively of the seven justices 27 of the U.S. Supreme Court. A very exclusive club, we might add! 28

“The United States District Court has only such jurisdiction as Congress confers [by legislation].”

29

[Eastern Metals Corp. v. Martin, 191 F.Supp. 245 (D.C.N.Y. 1960)]

30

If the pseudo judges who hear tax trials aren’t even part of the Judicial branch, were never appointed, and are simply 31 “employees” of the Executive Branch, then what exactly are they? They are simply imposters who are there to create the 32 illusion that there is even a remote possibility of equity and justice in the courtroom relating to an income tax issue. To 33 preserve some semblance of civil order and prevent a massive civil revolt, the government has to maintain some kind of 34 façade so that the people don’t lose faith in a government that in fact has already become totally corrupted in the area of 35 money and commerce. Keep in mind that deceit in commerce is the most offensive and abominable sin that God hates the 36 most. Below is an excerpt from Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Bible demonstrating why this is: 37

"As religion towards God is a branch of universal righteousness (he is not an honest man that is not devout), so righteousness towards men is a branch of true religion, for he is not a godly man that is not honest , nor can he expect that his devotion should be accepted; for, 1. Nothing is more offensive to God than deceit in commerce. A false balance is here put for all manner of unjust and fraudulent practices [of our public dis- servants] in dealing with any person [within the public], which are all an abomination to the Lord, and render those abominable [hated] to him that allow themselves in the use of such accursed arts of thriving. It is an affront to justice, which God is the patron of, as well as a wrong to our neighbour, whom God is the protector of. Men [in the IRS and the Congress] make light of such frauds, and think there is no sin in that which there is money to be got by, and, while it passes undiscovered, they cannot blame themselves for it; a blot is no blot till it is hit, Hos. 12:7, 8. But they are not the less an abomination to God, who will be the avenger of those that are defrauded by their brethren. 2. Nothing is more pleasing to God than fair and honest dealing, nor more necessary to make us and our devotions acceptable to him: A just weight is his delight. He himself goes by a just weight, and holds the scale of judgment with an even hand, and therefore is pleased with those that are herein followers of him. A balance cheats, under pretence of doing right most

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

exactly, and therefore is the greater abomination to God."

52

[Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible; Henry, M., 1996, c1991, under Prov. 11:1]

53

Back in the 1600’s in our country and elsewhere in Europe, there were several notable occasions where so-called “witches” 54 were tried and finally executed for practicing “witchcraft”. The nature of the proceedings strongly resembled the religious 55 “inquisitions” that preceded them throughout Europe in the 1400’s. In fact, witchcraft trials evolved out of these religious 56

Requirement for Consent

323 of 396

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

EXHIBIT:________