Discussion:
The (USA) CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE
(too old to reply)
Vicegerent
2007-02-04 17:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Clearfield Doctrine

"Governments descend to the Level of a mere private corporation,
and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen...where
private corporate commercial paper [Federal Reserve Notes] and
securities [checks] is concerned. ... For purposes of suit,
such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities
entirely separate from government." -
Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 (1942)

What the Clearfield Doctrine is saying is that when private
commercial paper is used by corporate government, then
Government loses its sovereignty status and becomes no
different than a mere private corporation.

As such, government then becomes bound by the rules and
laws that govern private corporations which means that if they
intend to compel an individual to some specific performance
based upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules, then
the government, like any private corporation, must be the holder-
in-due-course of a contract or other commercial agreement
between it and the one upon whom demands for specific
performance are made.

And further, the government must be willing to enter the contract
or commercial agreement into evidence before trying to get to
the court to enforce its demands, called statutes.

This case is very important because it is a 1942 case after the
Erie RR v. Tomkins 304 U.S. 64, (1938) case in which the
Legislatures and Judiciary changed from legislating under
"Public Law", which was in consonance with the CONstitution,
to legislating under "Public Policy" according to the wishes
of the "Creditors of the US Corporation".

Posted by:

Vicegerent
Vicegerent
2007-02-04 23:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Further to this thread:
From: www.supremelaw.org
(A must read: "The Federal Zone" ebook at this website!)

ONE'S STATUS IS A VITAL ISSUE IN DETERMINING
FEDERAL COURTS' JURISDICTION, OR LACK THEREOF.

The following anecdote summarizes nicely many of the
key points which we have covered thus far:

Several years ago in a coffee shop while talking
with a friend about "tax matters," a man in the adjacent
booth overheard our conversation and asked to join us.
The conversation continued, and centered mainly on
IRS abuses.

This gentleman seemed particularly knowledgeable about
the subject and we asked him what he did for a living.
He told us his name and that he was an attorney with
the Tax Division of the Department of Justice in Washington.

Naturally, this put us on guard, but he quickly put us at
ease by agreeing in large part with the conclusion we
had drawn.

Reluctantly, I asked him this question, "Why are defendants
in federal district court always asked if they are 'citizens of
the United States'?"

He replied without hesitation, "So we can determine jurisdiction.
In many cases the federal court does not have jurisdiction
over a citizen unless they testify they are a citizen of the
United States -- meaning a federal citizen under the
14th Amendment."

My friend innocently asked, "What's a federal citizen?"
The attorney replied, "That's a person who receives benefits
or privileges or is an alien that has been admitted [naturalized]
as a citizen of the United States ."

I quickly interjected, "What if the individual denied being
a citizen of the United States and claimed to be a sovereign
citizen of Oklahoma?"

The attorney bowled me over with, "We don't get jurisdiction ."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This approach is likely flawed, considering that
all 'persons' - fictional status of slave owned by the
State, has been declared 'disobedient slaves' by
FDR in 1933, thus obliterating the rights to
'due process of law', including the right to challenge
jurisdiction.

One who declares that, or acquiesces to being,
a 'citizen' or 'natural person' is admitting that they
are of the status of slave owned by the State.

If the jurisdiction challenge is based upon one being
a free will man, then the treason applies to the
'officer' of the court, a court which belongs to, and only
has jurisdiction over fictitious crewmembers of the
make believe ship called the 'body politic'.

Vicegerent

Loading...