Posted on 02/25/2015 8:15:28 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
I have no knowledge of jurisprudence - but is it really illegal to send a letter (signed by, e.g., the "Grand Duchy of Fenwick") ordering someone to appear before the Fenwickian Supreme Court?
I mean: How would that be different than my bowling club issuing a "cease and desist" order to someone? Unless they threatened violence in case of refusal to appear...
Regards,
Regards of the feds, there is no reason for Texas to accept the law breaking of this group.
Complaining about the feds is just noise. It is no justification for fake courts and fake legal actions.
Depends on how much force you can wield.
Law is force.
The king said the same thing. The Crown had seen all this before by non loyalist. Traitors to the Crown. Try them all for treason.
That’s why the Internet must me reined it, monitored, controlled and totally regulated.
The US Constitution is silent on the subject of secession.
Are you arguing we should accept private courts set by those that want to do so?
Are you arguing we should accept private courts set by those that want to do so?
That was a comment. Perhaps you have difficulty distinguishing the difference between a comment and an argument.
Do you think loyalist to the Crown might have asked the same exact question you did?
Since the courts have standing to issue summons I guess “impersonating a public servant” might be one of the charges filed. If debt collectors are involved they can get them fo violation of the FDCPA....
[ And yet Obama supports Hawaii’s own secessionist movement. ]
And remember the O-bots in 2008 whining about Todd Palin’s very lose ties to some people in the Alaska Independence movement....
Of course O can do no wrong...
[ Is there any provision in law or the Constitution for states to secede from the union? We know there are provisions for admitting new states to the union. But what about states wanting to leave? History tells us we fought a civil war to keep the union together.
If the states really have sovereign status, shouldn’t they legally be allowed to develop plans to secede? I don’t know the law and am curious as to whether someone is committing a federal offense to work towards a state leaving the union. ]
Bingo! There SHOULD be a Process, it shouldn’t be overty easy, but then againit shouldn’t be Insanely hard either. It should all hinge on a Majority of the residents in the State and a certain amount of the population of the borderign states or the rest of the state agreeing to it, something like 2/3rds of the population of the state in question and 1/3 of the neighboring or rest fo the states agree to let them leave.
Also the process needs to deal with any federal property ie, millitary assetts and bases and weapons etc...And handing over a certain amount of them to the state national guard as well as an option for anyone inthe millitary from that state to be given the option to stay in the federal millitary provided they move to another state or they can stay in state and join the state guard.
Finally the conversion of the state government to a National one.
[ I love how “consent of the governed” works. “I will only govern you if you consent to be governed, but if you refuse me consent to be governed, I will imprison and/or kill you.” ]
Well if your ancestors INITIALLY consented to be governed but your children do not consent to be governed they are SOL.
I think one of the Article V amdnements should be a process for A (singular) state to leave the union and set it up so that it can take place in an ordring and consented order. So that we cannot have a cluster of states leaving at once, but a state has to leave on it’s own, once the process is done it can do whatever or join up with other states/countries as it sees fit.
“Doing this- is against the law. “
I’m guessing the person who suggested the idea knew that it was against the law and the rubes fell for it.
Let them try to bring a “case” against a non-muslim. There is no legal basis to any decision they make. If there IS— it needs to be exposed w/in Texas system. It will not stand.
Divorce is a legal decision. Child custody. All sorts of things.
Well, that’s kinda the point of the heavy handed police types. A “non-legal” serving is meaningless. The existing
structure is threatened, and there must be some aspect of the “filing/serving” that was illegal— let’s hope anyway. So, scared they came in with force and “data mining”
I say that the lesbians who are in the supreme court trying to get Texas to recognize their marriage so they can get a divorce should see if the Islamic court will grant them a divorce. I’m grabbing some popcorn.
No idea. There are some you tubs of their positions and advocacy.
Just aware of any Sharia courts— those “judgements” would only be binding to those wishing to be bound w/in their religion I would think. Not legally binding in any way- unless Texas legal system is completely nuts.
In brief, exactly the kind of thing from which the 4th Amendment is supposed to protect us.
The Marx brothers made a movie about Freedonia— that’s a real place, right LOL? This outfit is not a bowling club though. It would be nice to see the “served notice” the judge got.
In GA we had the Nuwabians (see Wikipedia) which included actor Wesley Snipes— tax dodgers and black neo egyptian fake historical “kingdom”— really just a bunch of horny swinger blacks acc. to local sheriff etc. They were, uh, raided and shut down. So, what are the limits of “govts. unto themselves” within the existing framework. Having had some experience in the family some 150 plus years ago, the outcome wasn’t good then either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.