
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.