BeforeItsNews only exists through ads. We ask all patriots who appreciate the evil we expose and want to
help us savage the NWO with more Truth to disable your ad-blocker on our site only so we can grow and expose more evil! Funding
gives us more weapons! Thank you patriots! Oh and If you disable the Ad-blocker - on your deathbed you will receive total
consciousness. So you got that going for you...which is nice!
‘Protest’ leader Ammon Bundy and his fellow ranchers have refused to leave the Burns, Oregon refuge over allegations of federal overreach by the Bureau of Land Management. They want the ‘federal government’ to surrender its control over the land. They also want father-son ranchers Dwight and Steve Hammond to be released from prison, where they are serving a prison sentence for ‘arson’.
U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan sentenced the pair to a one-year prison sentence in 2012 for fires they caused that spilled over into acreage, also leased by the Hammond Ranch. In 2014, however, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that now-retired U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan illegally sentenced the Hammonds to terms below the five-year minimum. The Hammonds were ordered back to prison, despite serving time and paying $400,000 in damages to the government.
Brown said Wednesday that her patience with the protesters is at an end. “[Federal officials] must move quickly to end the occupation and hold all of the wrongdoers accountable,” the governor said at a press conference in Salem, CBS News reported. “The residents of Harney County have been overlooked and underserved by federal officials’ response thus far. I have conveyed these very grave concerns directly to our leaders at the highest levels of our government: the U.S. Department of Justice and the White House.”
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown told federal officials that it is time
to advance on ranchers holed up in the
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge since Jan. 2
Brown estimates Bundy’s protesters have cost the state $100,000 per week in resources required by multiple local law enforcement agencies.
“The residents of Harney County have been overlooked and underserved by federal officials’ response thus far,” Brown said, CNN reported. “This spectacle of lawlessness must end. And until Harney County is free of it, I will not stop insisting that ‘federal officials’ enforce the law.”
Rancher Ammon Bundy, has led protesters at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge since Jan. 2
Stock v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211
P2d 289 In Interest of M.V., 288 Ill.App.3d 300, 681 N.E.2d 532 (1st
Dist. 1997) “Where a court’s
power to act is controlled by statute, the court is governed by the
rules of limited jurisdiction, and courts exercising
jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the structures of
the statute.” “The state citizen is immune from any and all
government attacks and procedure, absent contract.” see, Dred
Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393
or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, “…every man is
independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not
bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his
consent.”
Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533. “A
judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the
defendant is void. It is a nullity.”
Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan. App 2d 573, 576-7,
840 P. 2d 553 (1992) rev. denied 252 Kan. 1093(1993)
“The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction
has been challenged, it musts be proven.”
Main v
Thiboutot, 100 S Ct. 2502(1980)
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and “Jurisdiction,
once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.”
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be
assumed, it must be proved to exist.”
GOLOC
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.”
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah
Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.
“It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial
jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefor.” U.S.
v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).
“The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been
challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502
(1980).
“Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative
and judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no
protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct
collateral attack.” Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381;
and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.
“The United States is entirely a creature of the Federal Constitution,
its power and authority has no other source and it can only act in accordance
with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” Reid v. Covert,
354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“The rights and liberties of the citizens of the United States are not
protected by custom and tradition alone, they are preserved from the
encroachments of government by express/enumerated provisions of the Federal
Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148
(1957).
“The prohibitions of the Federal Constitution are designed to apply to
all branches of the national government and cannot be nullified by the executive
or by the executive and the senate combined.” Reid v. Covert, 354
U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“Where rights as secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be
no rule making or legislation which will abrogate them.” Miranda v.
Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966).
“Congress may not, by any definition it may adopt, conclude the matter,
since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution.” Eisner v.
McComber, 252 U.S. 189 at 207.
Stock v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211
P2d 289 In Interest of M.V., 288 Ill.App.3d 300, 681 N.E.2d 532 (1st
Dist. 1997) “Where a court’s
power to act is controlled by statute, the court is governed by the
rules of limited jurisdiction, and courts exercising
jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the structures of
the statute.” “The state citizen is immune from any and all
government attacks and procedure, absent contract.” see, Dred
Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393
or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, “…every man is
independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not
bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his
consent.”
Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533. “A
judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the
defendant is void. It is a nullity.”
Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan. App 2d 573, 576-7,
840 P. 2d 553 (1992) rev. denied 252 Kan. 1093(1993)
“The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction
has been challenged, it musts be proven.”
Main v
Thiboutot, 100 S Ct. 2502(1980)
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and “Jurisdiction,
once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.”
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be
assumed, it must be proved to exist.”
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.”
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah
Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.
“It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial
jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefor.” U.S.
v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).
“The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been
challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502
(1980).
“Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative
and judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no
protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct
collateral attack.” Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381;
and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.
“The United States is entirely a creature of the Federal Constitution,
its power and authority has no other source and it can only act in accordance
with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” Reid v. Covert,
354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“The rights and liberties of the citizens of the United States are not
protected by custom and tradition alone, they are preserved from the
encroachments of government by express/enumerated provisions of the Federal
Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148
(1957).
“The prohibitions of the Federal Constitution are designed to apply to
all branches of the national government and cannot be nullified by the executive
or by the executive and the senate combined.” Reid v. Covert, 354
U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“Where rights as secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be
no rule making or legislation which will abrogate them.” Miranda v.
Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966).
“Congress may not, by any definition it may adopt, conclude the matter,
since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution.” Eisner v.
McComber, 252 U.S. 189 at 207.