
by Anna Von Reitz
The Ninth Circuit Court (15-10-117) just ordered the Federales to prove 
federal subject matter jurisdiction --- not just assume subject matter 
jurisdiction-- over property "owned" by the federal government.
Federal ownership of land may be (and usually is) merely proprietary--- 
meaning that the Federales are acting as property managers--- a role that does 
not create any exclusive use by the federal government and does not 
create federal subject matter jurisdiction.
This Ninth Circuit case cited above is not directly tied to the Bundy 
Cases, but addresses the issue of federal subject matter jurisdiction merely 
presumed to exist on the basis of federal property ownership. 
In truth and in fact claims of Federal subject matter jurisdiction require: 
(1) a Federal use of the land (that is, a use related to the duties directly 
delegated to the federal government); (2) specific action by the State ceding 
jurisdiction. Neither one of these conditions were met with regard to the Oregon 
Wildlife Refuge. 
The portions of the Wildlife Refuge including the buildings which the 
protestors occupied were purchased by the Federales from private land owners 
back in the 1930's --- under a Congressional Act that not only allowed, but 
which invited, adverse possession claims such as the protestors brought 
forward and which additionally ordered the "liquidation" of such properties back 
to state or private ownership. 
 

