Primary Sources of Law

Many in the Freedom Movement who are interested in legal arguments too often rely on self-proclaimed “gurus” because of the lack of access to fundamental legal sources. At times, arguments asserted by these gurus (if the argument is not just completely fabricated) cite particular legislative acts for amazing propositions that are readily believed by those who don’t know differently. For example, the “redemptionists” claimed that the 1935 Social Security Act set aside approximately 600,000 bux “on the private side” for everyone having a social security account. But a reading of the act itself reveals this contention to be just another (of the great many) lies of the gurus, who intentionally (like their employer) deceive the masses. One guru presently hitting the weekend seminar circuit alleges that the International Sovereign Immunities Act placed all government offices under the UN. Proof that this is just another big lie promoted by deceptive gurus is proven by simply reading the act itself.

Of course, the United States Constitution is a primary source of legal authority. Another primary source of legal authority is the U.S. Statutes at Large. After ratification of the U.S. Constitution, Congress started meeting in Philadelphia and enacting federal laws. Acts adopted by Congress are presented to the President for signing, and thereafter delivered to the State Department for archival purposes. For the first 50 years of this country’s existence, these federal laws were published and made available to the public by a publishing firm named Bioren and Duane as well as Justice Story. In the early 1840s, Justice Story spearheaded a project to republished these Congressional acts in an official publication, and Congress agreed in 1845. By 1848, another law publishing company, Little and Brown from Boston, published the first official U.S. Statutes at Large, and today this publication constitutes the official source for acts of Congress.  Starting in 1875 and continuing ever since, actual printing of the U.S. Statutes at Large has been performed by the U.S. Government Printing Office.
Today on the Net, a portion of these U.S. Statutes at Large can be read on an official government website. But the entire U.S. Statutes at Large appear nowhere on the Net, until recently.  Years ago, a patriot associated with Truth Attack converted the entire U.S. Statutes at Large into PDF files, converted the images to text, and saved the text conversions beneath the PDF images, making each volume searchable. These files were provided to Jon Roland, who posted them on his website. Now, Truth Attack provides handy links to all these volumes of the U.S. Statutes at Large. 
The U.S. Statutes at Large are posted on Jon Roland’s Constitution Society website, and are linked below:
Vol. 14, U.S. Statutes at Large (1865-67) (48MB)

Vol. 15, U.S. Statutes at Large (1867-69) (30MB)

Vol. 16, U.S. Statutes at Large (1869-71) (52MB)

Vol. 17, U.S. Statutes at Large (1871-73) (55MB)

Vol. 18, U.S. Statutes at Large (1873-75) (72MB)

Vol. 19, U.S. Statutes at Large (1875-77) (35MB)

Vol. 20, U.S. Statutes at Large (1877-79) (42MB)

Vol. 21, U.S. Statutes at Large (1879-81) (43MB)

Vol. 22, U.S. Statutes at Large (1881-83) (53MB)

Vol. 23, U.S. Statutes at Large (1883-85) (45MB)

Vol. 24, U.S. Statutes at Large (1885-86) (54MB)

Vol. 25, U.S. Statutes at Large (1887-89) (89MB)

Vol. 26, U.S. Statutes at Large (1889-91) (100MB)

Vol. 27, U.S. Statutes at Large (1891-93) (68MB)

Vol. 28, U.S. Statutes at Large (1893-95) (83MB)

Vol. 29, U.S. Statutes at Large (1895-97) (62MB)

Vol. 30, U.S. Statutes at Large (1897-99) (121MB)

Vol. 31, U.S. Statutes at Large (1899-1901) (125MB)

Vol. 32, U.S. Statutes at Large (1901-03) (110MB)

Vol. 33, U.S. Statutes at Large (1903-05) (115MB)

Vol. 34, U.S. Statutes at Large (1905-07) (118MB)

Vol. 35, U.S. Statutes at Large (1907-09) (98MB)

Vol. 36, U.S. Statutes at Large (1909-11) (115MB)

Vol. 37, U.S. Statutes at Large (1911-13) (83MB)

Vol. 38, U.S. Statutes at Large (1913-15) (100MB)

Vol. 39, U.S. Statutes at Large (1915-17) (100MB)

Vol. 40, U.S. Statutes at Large (1917-19) (117MB)


Vol. 41, U.S. Statutes at Large (1919-21) (129MB)

Vol. 42, U.S. Statutes at Large (1922) (92MB)

Vol. 43, U.S. Statutes at Large (1923-25) (120MB)

Vol. 44, U.S. Statutes at Large (1925-27) (128MB)

Vol. 45, U.S. Statutes at Large (1927-29) (147MB)

Vol. 46, U.S. Statutes at Large (1929-31) (138MB)

Vol. 47, U.S. Statutes at Large (1931-33) (126MB)

Vol. 48, U.S. Statutes at Large (1933-34) (108MB)

Vol. 49, U.S. Statutes at Large (1935-36) (171MB)

Vol. 50, U.S. Statutes at Large (1937) (77MB)

Vol. 51, U.S. Statutes at Large (1937) ((19MB)

Vol. 52, U.S. Statutes at Large (1938) (107MB)

Vol. 53, U.S. Statutes at Large (1939) (79MB)

Vol. 54, U.S. Statutes at Large (1939-41) (106MB)

Vol. 55, U.S. Statutes at Large (1941-42) (71MB)

Vol. 56, U.S. Statutes at Large (1942) (88MB)

Vol. 57, U.S. Statutes at Large (1943) (49MB)

Vol. 58, U.S. Statutes at Large (1944) (76MB)

Vol. 59, U.S. Statutes at Large (1945) (55MB)

Vol. 60, U.S. Statutes at Large (1946) (88MB)

Vol. 61, U.S. Statutes at Large (1947) (76MB)

Vol. 62, U.S. Statutes at Large (1948) (103MB)

Vol. 63, U.S. Statutes at Large (1949) (87MB)

Vol. 64, U.S. Statutes at Large (1950) (102MB)

Vol. 65, U.S. Statutes at Large (1951) (58MB)

Vol. 66, U.S. Statutes at Large (1952) (61MB)

Vol. 67, U.S. Statutes at Large (1953) (47MB)

Vol. 68, U.S. Statutes at Large (1954) (94MB)

Vol. 69, U.S. Statutes at Large (1955) (53MB)

Vol. 70, U.S. Statutes at Large (1956) (85MB)

Vol. 71, U.S. Statutes at Large (1957) (47MB)

Vol. 72, U.S. Statutes at Large (1958) (126MB)

Vol. 73, U.S. Statutes at Large (1959) (52MB)

Vol. 74, U.S. Statutes at Large (1960) (74MB)

Vol. 75, U.S. Statutes at Large (1961) (60MB)

Vol. 76, U.S. Statutes at Large (1962) (89MB)

Vol. 77, U.S. Statutes at Large (1963) (59MB)

Vol. 78, U.S. Statutes at Large (1964) (77MB)

Vol. 79, U.S. Statutes at Large (1965) (91MB)

Vol. 80, U.S. Statutes at Large (1966) (105MB)

Vol. 81, U.S. Statutes at Large (1967) (64MB)

Vol. 82, U.S. Statutes at Large (1968) (96MB)

Vol. 83, U.S. Statutes at Large (1969) (56MB)

Vol. 84, U.S. Statutes at Large (1970) (149MB)

Vol. 85, U.S. Statutes at Large (1971) (56MB)

Vol. 86, U.S. Statutes at Large (1972) (110MB)

Vol. 87, U.S. Statutes at Large (1973) (73MB)

Vol. 88, U.S. Statutes at Large (1974) (166MB)

Vol. 89, U.S. Statutes at Large (1975) (71MB)

Vol. 90, U.S. Statutes at Large (1976) (181MB)

Vol. 91, U.S. Statutes at Large (1977) (98MB)

Vol. 92, U.S. Statutes at Large (1978) (233MB)

Vol. 93, U.S. Statutes at Large (1979) (82MB)

Vol. 94, U.S. Statutes at Large (1980) (224MB)

Vol. 95, U.S. Statutes at Large (1981) (110MB)

Vol. 96, U.S. Statutes at Large (1982) (152MB)

Vol. 97, U.S. Statutes at Large (1983) (86MB)

Vol. 98, U.S. Statutes at Large (1984) ((199MB)

Vol. 99, U.S. Statutes at Large (1985) (114MB)

Vol. 100, U.S. Statutes at Large (1986) (308MB)

Vol. 101, U.S. Statutes at Large (1987) (169MB)

Vol. 102, U.S. Statutes at Large (1988) (293MB)

Vol. 103, U.S. Statutes at Large (1989) (149MB)

Vol. 104, U.S. Statutes at Large (1990) (343MB)

Vol. 105, U.S. Statutes at Large (1991) (139MB)

Vol. 106, U.S. Statutes at Large (1992) (303MB)

Vol. 107, U.S. Statutes at Large (1993) (141MB)

Vol. 108, U.S. Statutes at Large (1994) (300MB)

Vol. 109, U.S. Statutes at Large (1995) (52MB)

Vol. 110, U.S. Statutes at Large (1996) (308MB)

Vol. 111, U.S. Statutes at Large (1997) (8MB)

Vol. 112, U.S. Statutes at Large (1998) (14MB)

Vol. 113, U.S. Statutes at Large (1999) (8MB)

Vol. 114, U.S. Statutes at Large (2000) (15MB)

Vol. 115, U.S. Statutes at Large (2001) (10MB)

Vol. 116, U.S. Statutes at Large (2002) (14MB)

Vol. 117, U.S. Statutes at Large (2003) (12MB)

Vol. 118, U.S. Statutes at Large (2004) (19MB)

Vol. 119, U.S. Statutes at Large (2005) (10MB)

Vol. 120, U.S. Statutes at Large (2006) (10MB)

Vol. 121, U.S. Statutes at Large (2007) (6.6MB)

Finding a specific act of Congress is easy. For example, a student might run across a reference to the Legal Tender Act of 1862, 12 Stat. 345. To find this act with its citation,one would simply pull Volume 12 of the U.S. Statutes at Large, and turn to page 345. The first number, in this example, 12, is the volume number and the second number, 345, is the page number in that volume.

In 1926 pursuant to a Congressional act, the United States Code was created. Please see this article, Titles of the U.S. Code, for an explanation of how this Code was created. The first U.S.Code was published in a single volume, and it may be downloaded (in a searchable format) here:

The older federal income tax acts in a searchable PDF format are linked here:

Have you ever wondered why doesn’t somebody combined all the relevant volumes of the federal income tax regulations into one huge PDF file and make it available to the public? Wonder no longer, because it is here (more than 10,000 pages in this single file):

Do you have trouble finding good state codes posted on the Net? Here they are:




“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be Freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses and Farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army – Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance or the most abject submission; that is all we can expect – We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die.”

George Washington, general orders, July, 1776.

Like Washington, Truth Attack perceives that our beloved country is confronting some of the most troubling times in our history. It is reputed that Admiral Bill Halsey said during the Battle of Midway, “Son, there are no great men. There are only great challenges which ordinary men, like you and I, are forced to meet.” One mission of Truth Attack is to educate ordinary Americans so that the cause of Liberty can prevail in these times. And one way to achieve this goal is to provide solid legal information.

Via this Law Library, Truth Attack wishes to provide to its friends, supporters and other Americans solid information not only regarding the subject of taxation, but other relevant issues as well. As time permits, TA will be adding legal discussions of taxation to these pages and, wherever possible, providing links to the relevant legal authorities. Our purpose is to provide the average American with an excellent working knowledge not only of the subject of taxes, but also other issues essential for the American people to regain control of our governments.

“If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home in peace.  We ask not your counsels or your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hands of those who feed you.  May your chains set lightly upon you.  May posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Samuel Adams.

“Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle! Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”

Frederick Douglass, August 4, 1857.

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap we esteem too lightly; ’tis dearness only that gives everything its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its good; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as Freedom should not be highly rated.”

Thomas Paine, Dec. 23, 1776.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place will never be with those timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case; you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

“Those great and good men foresaw that troublous times would arise, when rulers and people would become restive under restraint, and seek by sharp and decisive measures to accomplish ends deemed just and proper; and that the principles of constitutional liberty would be in peril, unless established by irrepealable law. The history of the world had taught them that what was done in the past might be attempted in the future. The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to preserve its existence; as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority. ”

Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866).

“Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty.”

Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 377, 47 S.Ct. 641, 648-49 (1927).


1. Are you either a sovereign state citizen or a slave 14th amendment U.S. citizen?
2. The Federal Gov. has absolutely no power over a state citizen in the Union.
3. Have you read the court cases that the state citizenship proponents rely on to find out if their quotes from court cases are correct?

The answer to all of the above is a solid NO!

A short essay by Peymon M., a former proponent of state vs. U.S. citizenship theory.

Many of us are fed up with the oppressive taxation and control that we are suffering at the hands of government at all levels. Back in 1993, I was persuaded to believe that I had unknowingly allowed myself to become a U.S. citizen/slave by trading in my “sovereign state citizen status” to that of a “U.S. citizen/subject/slave” created by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America.

I used to teach “state citizenship.” I studied with some of the most renowned “state citizenship” experts in America. Not knowing how to look up a court case in the law library, I never read the full court cases, which I previously quoted from the law digest books.

Eventually, when I learned how to find a court case in the law library, and upon the insistence of some good friends, I pulled out and read the full text of each court case from which I was quoting. I did not like what I read. I was wrong about this whole thing. But hey, better to stand corrected than to keep my head in the sand.

Do yourself a favor and read the full court cases, which I quote. Make sure for yourself that your position is the correct one. If you don’t know how to find the court cases in the law library, you may get them through me. Happy reading.

Where did citizenship come from?

In the beginning, people were created free, independent, and sovereign and no one could force them to do anything unless they were overpowered. This is exactly what happened. Evil people formed gangs that attacked, raped, robbed, and murdered other free, independent, and sovereign men, women and children, one by one.

This went on for a while until the good people “wised up” and started forming their own good gangs and tribes mutually to protect each other from the evil gangs and thereby created a gang, tribe, jural society or a state. The fundamental purpose of any gang, tribe, jural society, or state is to protect the life, liberty, and property of its individual members. Members of these groups are also called citizens.

The Massachusetts Bill of Rights is explicit regarding how this takes place: “The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals; it is a social compact by which the whole people covenants with each citizen and each citizen with the whole people that all shall be governed by certain laws for a common good.”

Each group outlined a territory or turf, which they called collectively theirs. The borders of this area are the borders of the state. To assure the continued existence of this collective entity, which is needed to protect each of its individual members, each member in addition to his or her rights had privileges; immunities and duties (such as jury duty, service in the militia…) This way the shared contribution of everyone assured the future protection of all members and their posterity (children). This is a classical “all for one and one for all” kind of a situation.

By now, you realize that in the political sense, the terms gang, tribe, jural society and state are synonymous. The word “member” (of a gang or tribe) is the same as a “citizen of a state”. I know this might sound distasteful for some people to accept that their state is just a collection or group of people (albeit a good one with good purposes in mind), but I never promised you that reality is always sweet; did your parents?

How about citizenship in America?

In 1776, after the American people kicked the sovereign King of England out of the colonies by the use of force, the American people once again became sovereigns. As mentioned above, to protect themselves from control and abuse by the power hungry criminal gangs (the mobsters of the time), they organized themselves into 13 distinct and separate groups/gangs (states).

Under the Articles of Confederation, these states joined in a voluntary association for their mutual benefit much like how most (not all) countries of the world are members of a confederacy called the United Nations. The confederate government (the United States) supposedly had limited powers over its member nations much like the way the U.N. has limited powers over its member states.

Read New York v. U.S. 112 S.Ct.2408 (1992) on page 2421 which states: “Alexander Hamilton observed: ‘The great and radical vice in the construction of the existing confederation is in the principle of LEGISLATION for STATES or GOVERNMENTS, in their CORPORATE or COLLECTIVE CAPACITIES, and as contra distinguished from the INDIVIDUALS of whom they consist.’ The Federalist No. 15, p. 108.”

The confederate U.S., like the U.N. of today, had no power over the individual citizens of its member states and was totally dependent upon the whim of the clear and strong majority of its members to pressure the members who are behind in paying their membership dues to pay up; otherwise the U.N. and the confederate U.S. are both powerless to do anything about their lack of funds.

Again, read New York v. U.S. in page 2421: “Under the Articles of Confederation, Congress lacked the authority in most respects to govern the people directly. In practice, Congress could not directly tax or legislate upon individuals; it had no explicit ‘legislative’ or ‘governmental’ power to make binding ‘law’ enforceable as such.”

Did the U.S. Constitution change anything?

The American people were told in 1789 that in order for them to be better served by their gangs/groups (states) they ought to approve the creation of a new and empowered super gang (the U.S. government), which will exercise certain functions (powers) delegated from the states to this new super gang or super state. Furthermore, the states would no longer be under the power of the U.S. (which could not be enforced anyway), and retain their sovereignty. They would just be prohibited from exercising those functions (powers) now delegated to the U.S. government.

Read New York v. U.S. on page 2422 and 2423: “The necessity of having a government which should at once operate on the people, and not upon the states, was conceived to be indispensable by every delegation present.’…”Laws to be effective must not be laid on states, but upon individuals.”…And the laws of the Confederation were binding on the states in their political capacities, but now the thing is entirely different. The laws of Congress will be binding on individuals.” “…In providing for a stronger central government, therefore, the framers explicitly chose a constitution that confers upon Congress the power to regulate individuals, not States. As we have seen, the Court has consistently respected this choice.”

However, now the individual members (citizens) of these states, in the areas delegated to the U.S. government came directly under its powers and thereby became members/citizens of the super state called the United States (U.S. for short). This was a proposal which the anti-federalists like Patrick Henry strongly opposed and argued as an opening window to a new central government which will eventually come to oppress the people much like the King of England (How right they were is too obvious now.)

Nevertheless, the anti-federalists lost the argument and the people of the several states allegedly approved the Constitution of the United States of America, which created a new U.S. government and our dual system of government.

In New York v. United States, on page 2421 the court states: “Both the States and the United States existed before that instrument established a more perfect union by substituting a national government, acting with ample power, directly over citizens, instead of the confederate government which acted with powers, greatly restricted, only upon the states.” Lane County v. Oregon, 7 Wall at 76

This is to say that, if a bunch of street gangs, like the Crips and the Bloods (famous L.A. gangs) came together to form a Union in which they delegated powers to a Super Gang authority, and in the areas delegated, their members also became members of this Super Gang.

By becoming a member (citizen) of the Super Gang (the U.S.) you become eligible to become the member (citizen) of the gang (state) of which you lived in its turf (the state in which you live): a U.S. and State citizen at the same time.

In Dred Scott v. Sanford, 19 How. 393, 15L.Ed 691 (1857), the U.S. Supreme court stated: “It is true, every person, and every class and descriptions, of persons, who were at the time of the adoption of the constitution recognized as citizens in the several states, became also citizens of this new political body [The United States of America].”

When I was getting into “state citizenship”, I was shown by a law digest quote which stated: “(Ala. 1909) there are two classes of citizens, citizens of the United States and of the state: and one may be a citizen of the former without being a citizen of the latter. Gardina v. Board of Registrars of Jefferson County, 48 So. 788, 160 Ala. 155.”

This statement appeared to indicate a case of 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, which was held not to be a state citizen. But if you read the actual court case, you will get a very different picture.

The court actually said: “There is, then, under our republican form of government, two classes of citizens, one of the United States and on of the state. Once class of citizenship may exist in a person without the other, as in the case of a resident of the District of Columbia; but both classes usually exist in the same person. The federal government by this amendment (the 14th amendment) has undertaken to say who hall be citizen of both of the states and United States.”

Didn’t the 14th Amendment change anything?

Yes. The alleged 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution changed some things. For example, it allowed the former black and oriental slaves who were supposedly freed by the alleged 13th amendment to become U.S. and State citizens in a wholesale way. It also brought state legislation under the scrutiny of the U.S. government in many ways never intended by the founding fathers…

However, it did not create a new class of citizenship as suggested by some. Remember, by ratification of the U.S. Constitution, each citizen of the state was also made a citizen of the United States.

Can you disprove the state citizenship proponent’s arguments?

The state citizenship theory claims many other things such as:

  1. A “state citizen” is not a “person.”
  2. “Resident” means only a temporary place of living, and is for U.S. citizens, not state citizens.
  3. A state citizen is individually sovereign.
  4. A state citizen is not subject to state and federal legislation.
  5. Income taxation is primarily based on your status as a 14th Amendment U.S. citizen.
  6. The word “United States” means only Washington D.C. and federal territories.

To clearly and unequivocally disprove the above I will mostly refer to the very court cases that they refer to and pre-14th Amendment (1868) court cases and dictionaries.

The words 1) “person,” 2) “resident”and 6) “United States:”

The 1867 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary states “Persons are also divided into citizens and aliens when viewed with regard to their political rights.” The U.S. Constitution in Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5 states: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at this of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office… and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Obviously, “citizens” are included in the meaning of the word “person”. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were Citizens of the United States “residing” in the “United States” (states of the Union).

3) A state citizen is individually a sovereign:

I was originally convinced that state citizens are sovereign when I read this quotation from a law digest: “People of a state are entitled to all rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89.

Wow! I was so excited to get confirmation that I am truly free and independent as a sovereign. I went about teaching this to many others, until I learned how to look up a court case in the law library and dug up this hard-to-find case of Lansing v. Smith, of which no one I knew had seen a copy.

The Supreme Court of New York in 1829 did say the above, but what it said immediately after gave it a totally different meaning. The sentence in Lansing continued; “Through the medium of the legislature they nay exercise all the powers which previous to the revolution, could have been exercised by the King alone…”

This case was about the right to navigate in the waters of New York. Further down the same page the court continues: “The right to navigate the public waters of the state, to fish therein, and the right to use the public highways, are all public rights belonging to the people at large. They are not the private inalienable rights of each individual.” Reading the rest of the story does draw a different picture, doesn’t it?

4) The “state citizen” is not subject to State or Federal legislation:

The 1867 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary under the definition of “person” states: “When the word ‘persons’ is spoken of in legislative acts, natural persons will be intended, unless something appears in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons. 2 III. 178. “It describes Natural persons as: “Natural persons are divided into males, or men, and females or women.”

Clearly if you are a man or woman, you are a “natural person” and a “person”, and you are the “person” in the state and federal legislatures acts to which they are subjecting the laws.

5) Income taxation is primarily based upon your status as a 14th Amendment U.S. citizen.

In the Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. 171 (1796), the earliest tax case to reach the Supreme Court of the United States, all four judges that gave an opinion on this case agreed that Congress possesses very wide taxing powers within the United States and therefore could tax Mr. Hylton’s (a state and U.S. citizen) carriages.

Back in 1796, the U.S. government had no territories. The White House was not even built yet. Obviously, citizenship was not an issue here.

Form our own “Jural Society”, “Township” or “Common Law Court” to have them leave us alone?

Yes, you may; but remember, they claim that they are the only lawful authority around. If your group starts to get too big or successful they may simply crush you and portray you as the “extremist nut” like they did in the Waco massacre. If they did not let the South secede (separate) from the American Union back in 1861, what makes you think they will let you and your friends secede now?

So, what can I do now to live free?

There is a lot that you can do to regain your freedoms.The hated income tax is voluntary; “income” legally refers to privileged activities and not to compensation for your labor. The primary purpose of government is still to protect your life, liberty, and property.

You will find the “silver bullet” within the following quotes:

“If a nation wishes to be ignorant and free, they want something which never has and never will be.”
“Seek the truth and the truth shall make you free.”                   
“Freedom is not free.”

Click here to obtain the court cases and cites mentioned in this article.