Tag Archives: Can First Amendment Rights be Licensed?

Abolish all Family Courts!

The American Freedom Party today (September 15, 2018) agreed to endorse an original understanding of the First Amendment Establishment Clause:
“CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.”

The American Freedom Party agreed to my proposal to adopt and endorse, as a key plank of the party platform, the gradual abolition of the family courts and family codes at both the state and federal level, and to return all control over family and child rearing decisions to the people and only such non-governmental institutions as those to which individuals, in the exercise and delegation of their freedoms of religion and association, may wish to adopt as their own by contract.

The American Founding Fathers opposed Monarchy and sought to establish a Republic. The Family Courts (in America and elsewhere) have de facto reestablished absolutely tyrannical monarchical control over the fundamental freedoms of every individual involved in any sort of “family” (divorce or child or elder-related) dispute.

These courts, on an ad hoc basis, routinely violate every fundamental freedom. establishing arbitrary and capricious rules that defy all reason, logic, and rationality. These courts intrude and infringe upon our rights to freedom of speech and association. They intrude upon every aspect of our lives.

Original Intent: In 1787-1791, the American Colonists were only 200-250 years away from historical memory of the first Protestant “Acts of Uniformity” by which the Church of England was established, and all its sacraments (including the licensing and solemnization of marriage) adopted by Parliament.

Thus, it can be inferred that the American Founding Fathers sought forever to prevent the Federal Government from licensing or otherwise regulating marriage (or its dissolution, or child-rearing). The abuses of the Family Courts were and are so great that we must now “disestablish” all family courts, and all regulation of the “businesses of family organization and reproduction.”

14th Amendment: The American Freedom Party recognizes that certain clauses of the 14th Amendment have been interpreted in such a way as to have disastrous consequences for the American people (especially the “automatic citizenship by birth” clause, which should almost certainly be repealed).

However, the American Freedom Party wholeheartedly endorses the “doctrine of incorporation” which has developed under 14th Amendment jurisprudence, which requires that the several states apply the First Amendment and other portions of the Bill of Rights as federally guaranteed rights within the borders of each state.

Thus, just as the First Amendment prohibits all Federal Regulation of Marriage, the First Amendment, incorporated to the States, should prohibit all State regulation of marriage or its dissolution and consequences, including child custody disputes. There is simply no way of saving the Family Courts in their present form. They have become dens of corruption and iniquity, which impoverish the people, confuse and disorient both parents and children, destroy all meaning value to family life, and render the people dependent upon the arbitrary and capricious whims of government for every iota of common, everyday, happiness.

As membership campaign manager and coordinator for the AFP, I solicit your suggestions about how this can be accomplished.

I suggest a seven year transitional plan starting with the immediate abolition of all state issued marriage licenses.

To facilitate this transition, the states will institute educational programs in both the schools and for the communities.

Every individual who comes to any state agency, from the adoption of such a law forward, to apply for a marriage license will be advised to go to counseling and arrange a marital contract regarding the nature of the relationship and the expectations of the individuals to be married, including their expectations regarding child rearing and child custody upon divorce.

For the initial stages of implementation, the courts, will continue to resolve divorce petitions filed under current law, but with a mandate to respect all constitutional rights, an expedited review process for all judicial infringements on constitutional rights, and a mandate to accommodate jury demands for all issues involving money or custody.

The next stage will begin between one and three after the adoption of the reform program, and after this date, the state divorce courts will only hear cases where a couple bring forward a marital or pre-marital agreement, or two comprehensive proposals, and the court will resolve those differences.

The goal will be the final abolition of the family courts within seven years…..and after that stage, the civil courts will only be involved to the extent required to interpret, apply, enforce, modify, or (only if illegal or unconscionable) abrogate the agreements between “partners”.

Really Bad “Patriot Mythologies” (the antidote: READ, ABSORB, REFLECT, and UNDERSTAND)(sorry if it sounds like work, but it is!)

I received an e-mail this morning from a client, referring me to this article under the subject heading: “A Good Article about Lawyers and the BAR”.  

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=238180

Quite simply, nobody despises the “Integrated Bar” more than I do—by “Integrated Bar” is meant the constitutionally intolerable “licensing” of attorneys through the State Supreme Court system, adopted almost everywhere in the United States, Constitutionally enshrined here in the State of California.  But real is real and fake is fake, and the article posted by “Seawitch” on “Rumor Mill News” is about as far from reality as anything could be.  I do not wish to reproduce such drivel on my humble blog, so I’d ask you to read it first, and then my commentary:

No, sadly, that’s not a “good” article at all but a collection of poppycock fake “mythology” just plausible enough to fool some of those with no actual experience on the inside of the legal profession, or any good instinct for how life works, either, I might add.  I first ran into all that gibberish and nonsense about twenty years ago before my son Charlie was born even when I had just finished law school at the U of C and was getting ready to take the Florida Bar Exam.  
The Republic of Texas movement was still on the upswing, Ruby Ridge had not yet happened and it was almost a year before Mount Carmel, Waco, went up in flames.  If you ever want to dissect this pack of lies line-by-line we can do it late some night when there’s absolutely nothing better to do, but I submit to my own readers that it is hardly worth your time…..
Just for starters, I attach here for your reading enjoyment the cited case of  Erie v. Tompkins.  Erie R Co v Tompkins 304 US 65 58 SCt 817 92 LEd 1188 SCOTUS 1938
Now this is not one of the cases that normally fills the student of history with shock and awe at the majestic progression of historical process a la longue durée.  No, this is a “do your really want to be a lawyer” bone dry deadly dull case torturous case dealing with procedure and choice of law that every law student reads in first year civil procedure.  
And moreover, contrary to “Sea Witch’s” article on “Rumor Mill News”, the Supreme Court’s opinion in this case says nothing even remotely like “no cases are allowed to be cited that are prior to 1939.” or that “There can be no mixing of the old law with the new law. The lawyers (who were members of the American BAR Association, were and are currently under and controlled by the Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britain) created, formed and implemented the new bankruptcy law. The American BAR Association is a franchise of the Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britain. Since the Erie RR. v. Thompkins case was decided; the practice of law in this country was never again to be the same.”.
Every word of this paragraph is absurd nonsense. But it is especially weird to derive it all from a case which concerns nothing more dramatic than a rule that state law applies in federal court in diversity cases. I will send “Erie” to you So you can read it for yourself.  And as a former member of the bar, I can tell you that there are no secret oaths.  Now, truthfully, there may be a lot of broken oaths to uphold the Constitution, but no secret oaths.  No, sadly, that article is not only bad but it perpetuates myths which are so far off base that they hurt us in our fight for serious reform against the bar.  The bar is corrupt, monstrously so, but it is not because it is really a “British Accredited Registry” or anything remotely like that.  
Real Patriots must  be armed and ready for the fight to save our country.
Real Patriots need to be, like those of 1774-1792, literate and well-studied in the common law and constitutional history of England, her Empire, and of Europe and even Latin America.   The line “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” or that you can defeat ignorance through gossip or cheap and shallow knowledge cheaply and shallowly acquired and used, is a tool of our Globalist enemies.
Real Patriots would do well to learn how to read history and in particular how to study and understand Judicial Decisions, especially those of the Supreme Court of the United States. It’s work. In fact it’s REAL work—Erie v. Tompkins does not touch on juicy issues of race, sex, contraception, or even whether the New Deal was constitutional or not (despite the fact that it was decided in 1938 after the Court-packing crisis was over and Felix Frankfurter and other Roosevelt appointees were safely on the Court).
Patriotism without historical knowledge and common sense is exactly what our enemies frame it to be: blithering idiocy.  Please study the case itself, and don’t rely on “Seawitches”, for legal advice or anything else, because the reality of the Supreme Court’s Erie R.R. v. Tompkins‘ key holdings are that they are dry as  bleached bones:
In federal courts, except in matters governed by Federal Constitution or by acts of Congress, law to be applied in any case is law of the state.
There is no federal general common law and Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a state, whether they be local or general in nature, be they commercial law or apart of the law of torts.
The phrase “laws of the several states,” as used in statute requiring federal courts to apply laws of the several states except in matters governed by federal Constitution or statutes, held to include not only state statutory law, but also state decisions on questions of general law, in absence of any constitutional provision purporting to confer upon federal courts power of declaring substantive rules of common law applicable in a state.
I would generally be wary of any website that calls itself “Rumor Mill News” anyhow and authors with names like “Seawitch”…. even though I admit that Rumor Mill News has published some of my material, which is why, I guess, my client thought I would like that article….  But “fair is fair and real is real and fake is fake”, you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and such like aphorisms forever!  
The problem with the Bar is that it is unconstitutional both as a matter of substantive (First, Fifth, Ninth Amendment) and procedural (“Separation of Powers” between Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches) and monopolistic in nature, and is simultaneously socially, economically, and culturally (as well as legally) corrupt for all those reasons.
There are no easy answers to why our legal system is so corrupt, but “lack of education” and the quest for “easy solutions to difficult problems” and the general population’s lack of education and unwillingness to read and become educated are all major aspects of the problem.  The average American graduates High School (and College, and amazingly enough, many who finish Law School itself) with no real practical notion of any legal procedure, how to read or research law, and so the average American High School Graduate, College Graduate, and even Law School graduate has no idea how to defend himself or herself when (1) arrested, (2) questioned by the police or other authorities, (3) sued, (4) threatened with divorce or a child custody fight, (5) assessed with back taxes, (6) required to seek a license or register for some otherwise “lawful form of employment,” (7) do anything at all in the real world.  Saying that lawyers are all employees of an alien power or the British Crown doesn’t help anybody make it through any of these problems.
 So many Patriotic Americans have been led down insane roads by idiotic gurus to believing really stupid things, and Rumor Mill News has recently gathered a lot of the most incompetent, inept, and stupid ideas into one single article.  No one benefits except the “new world order” types who get to cite such examples to call all of us who believe in the constitution crazy idiots without a smidgen of common sense, historical knowledge, or real practical experience in the legal world….. and that means THEY get stronger and WE get weaker—so let’s learn how to take criticism from each other and improve our standing as a movement with real brains and practical intellectual capacity AT LEAST equal to the 1790s frontiersmen of the Blue Ridge Mountains of Western Virginia & North Carolina, Kentucky & Tennessee….who after all, were the First to assert States Rights against the Federal Government’s attempts to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and of the press when protesting against the government.  
The Los Angeles-based 10th Amendment Center has led the way in showing how State’s Rights Nullification, in the tradition of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions against the Federalist Presidency of John Adams, is still a viable option for neutralizing the worst abuses of the Bush-Obama administrations including (1) the USA Patriot Act, (2) the Real ID Act, (3) Obamacare, and (4) the National Defense Authorization Act.   But even Governor Michael Dukakis once tried to assert States’ Rights in Massachusetts to Nullify his state’s participation in illegal and unconstitutional undeclared wars abroad, and for that he should be applauded…..