...and where is the Supreme Court?
by Zeke Layman (www.powerpolitics.com)

In 1787 the framers, by vesting power in the One Supreme Court or the judicial branch
of government, gave to the people, and the posterity, an opportunity to exercise
sovereignty if they could understand the process of their own Constitution and take
action.  All the powers of the legislative and executive branches are vested in elected
people and not in a forum or arena available to all.

Two years after the Constitution was signed, the 1789 Judiciary Act created the Supreme
Court and the Attorney General’s Office.  There is a difference between the “Supreme
Court” and the “One Supreme Court.”  The Inferior Supreme Court created by Congress
is run by an Attorney General.  The One Supreme Court created by the Constitution can
only be run by the Attorney Specific... that’s YOU!

The judicial Power that is vested in the “One Supreme Court,” was also vested in
“inferior courts that the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”  This
concept is very important because two years after the creation of the “One Supreme
Court” in 1787, congress established an inferior court which they conveniently called the
“Supreme Court.”  This inferior court, created by the Judiciary Act in 1789, was designed
to be under the control of a chief justice and associates appointed by the President (i.e.
the executive branch).

The operation of this “inferior Supreme Court” was used so prevalent by the legislators,
executives, and their agents (lawyers) that the people, with the help of elected officials,
forgot about the One Supreme Court.  This allowed the legislative/executive “Supreme
Court” to usurp the judicial power.  Confusion and omission have always been the way
of the deceiver.

Both the legislative/executive and judicial courts recognize that there are two types of
persons under the law.  corporeal (body) and incorporeal (without body).  The
incorporeal person is known as a legal fiction (the group or straw-man).  A legal fiction
has certain rights under the law, but all fictions are unable to speak and, therefore, have
no constitutional rights and must be represented by an agent.

When an agent characterizes the style of one’s name in all uppercase letters, it is an
indication (rebuttable presumption) that the person is a legal fiction or incorporeal. This
is a presumption that the individual is “subject to” the regulations and laws of a legal
(legislative) fiction, i.e. police power. 

The interaction between the officer (government agent) and the “subject” (individual) is,
in fact, a policy hearing.  It is held under the executive branch, also known as‚ “police
power.”  In the old days these interactions were formalized in what were called Police
Courts, then  Municipal Courts, and now Superior Courts.

The police powers are grounded in the 14th Amendment and the guarantee of “due
process and equal protection of the laws.”  Reasonableness, fairness, and good faith are
paramount to agencies and their agents.  It just so happens that we, the posterity, are
also bound by the same “due process” rules of reasonableness, fairness, and good faith. 
While exercising the judicial power we must be in agreement with the executive branch
upon these fundamental concepts and principals.

BROKEN SYSTEM

Is the legal system in America broken?  If you feel it is then you may be on a quest to
find out where the break is.  Why it is broken can be a timeless investigation into
numerous conspiracy theories,  however, the ‘why’ and the ‘where’ may have a
connection that can be found in examining your own relationship to the American Legal
System.

Our laws are composed of a Constitution, statutes, and case law.  These “written laws”
make up the bulwark of conclusions that are used in the court system to generate
judgments and orders.  The laws are quoted in various legal maneuvers known as
motions, petitions, requests, and arguments, etc.  These maneuvers are also known as
“court procedures”.

All political power is inherent in the people.  They, individually, are responsible for
convening the One Supreme Court and exacting a remedy that is just, equitable, and fair
to all involved.

As it turns out, the Constitution also guarantees each person access to the procedures of
the Court.  This right to the process, guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution, allows a person to go to the Court, present a reasonable argument,
subpoena witnesses, and obtain a judgment, order, or decree.

All courts have limited power to hear cases of a certain subject matter and to bind
parties (persons) to issues it might otherwise try.  In civil matters the parties are bound
to the court by service of summons, in criminal matters the warrant of arrest binds the
defendant, and in quasi-criminal matters the ticket (notice to appear) is both the
summons and the complaint (short form).  In these matters the defendant proceeds
voluntarily.  How?  By not objecting properly!

When the government is moving they are proceeding in statutory jurisdiction.  The
action is one in the nature of a “summary proceeding” and technically neither civil nor
criminal. 

For purposes of our inquiry, we have two questions. First, what requires you or I to
follow the “laws” that the U.S. Congress or State Assemblies write?  Second, how do all
of the statutes, codes, and court decisions (case law) apply to me?

When you’ve allegedly violated the law, you will be invited to court.   It is up to the
individual to take the proper steps to obtain the answers and get the court to dismiss the
case, if it lacks jurisdiction or a cause of action.  Questions are answered at a due process
hearing with the charging agency, where the adversary or real party in interest is
required to appear with evidence.

When the burden of producing evidence falls upon the individual and he or she fails to
exercise the processes available, it may appear that the legal system is broken, however
this is not true.  Although it appears that the system is not working, in reality it is the
person seeking the remedy that is not proceeding properly. 

Learning and understanding how to protect one’s rights is the road to freedom and
redemption. Obtaining the remedy, somewhat like playing an instrument, takes
confidence, study of theory, learning basic fundamentals, practice, and patience. 

“The most common way people give up their power
is by thinking they don’t have any.”
    -- Alice Walker

POWER POLITICS

Power Politics is a nonpartisan activity that can only be established and executed by the
individual.  It is the revelation that the each one of us has more power than the group
when it comes to exercising political power and that party politics draws away from the
individual and his or her understanding of the political process, which creates an
environment for lack of responsibility of one’s own actions.

This concept is a way of thinking. The individual is encouraged to learn the basic theory
and understand the fundamentals well enough to go into the proper arena (court) to
effect a remedy that is reasonable ,fair, and just.  This is brought about through “good
faith” by all parties concerned.

Political Power can be exercised by voting for representatives to take up space in the
legislative or executive branches of government. It may also be exercised by the personal
action taken through the judicial branch of government by conducting The “One
Supreme Court.”  This is done by exercising sovereignty or controlling the “due process”
and “equal protection of the laws” that are guaranteed by the Constitution.
We are a government of the people (Legislative), by the people (Executive) and for the
people (Judicial).

This concept makes the United States Constitution the most powerful document of
modern times.  The government created is a government having three separate and
equal powers as opposed to the usual one (king).  These three powers were vigorously
debated over by the framers with the object of allowing them to be exercised, not only by
government legislators and executors, but also by the people themselves.

A careful analysis of the foundation of the California State Constitution shows that each
individual has standing to operate judicial power as the Chief Justice.
Is it possible that the judicial power was reserved for each individual to act as the Chief
Justice?  Is it also possible that we give this power up to an associate justice if we are
absent or unable (fail) to act?

Yes!  There are no shortcuts to this understanding.  Not only must one know the law and
the process of law, but the fact that many words have been redefined by the legal
profession, in essence manipulating the masses through mind control.

I hold firm in my political theory that each individual must exercise judicial power using
the position of the Chief Justice as described in the California Constitution or be
“subject” to the legislative and executive power.

I’ll end this article with a quote from Ron Paul, 2008 presidential candidate:

“The public also plays a role in the erosion of our judiciary.  Since many citizens
lack basic knowledge of our Constitution and federalist system, they are easily
manipulated by media and academic elites who tell them that judges are the
absolute and final arbiters of US law.  But the Supreme Court is not supreme
over the other branches of government; it is supreme only over lower federal
courts.  If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least
develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican government.  The
present state of affairs is a direct result of our collective ignorance.”