Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 8400 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Thursday, July 2, 2020

Update on Court Matters for State Nationals/Citizens

By Anna Von Reitz

All those who are awake will be seeing some very odd things going on in the courts and with the nomenclature they are trying to use, and even with the way they are stating purported charges. 

For example:  

Court Orders signed by judges using names styled like this: 
John M CHAMBERS  or LISA S White

Charges brought by entities styled like this:  
State Of Florida or FLORIDA

Charges restated in ways that make no sense, like this: 
Fleeing of Justice  (instead of Fleeing from Justice)

Defendants addressed like this:  John Maynard Keynes, but with the number (2) in parenthesis, indicating that there are two Defendants present, albeit only one name. 

All these details are important, and all of them need to be severely questioned when and if you are snagged into dealing with these courts.  

"Just what is this Plaintiff entity doing business as "State Of Florida" styled in this manner?   I have never seen this entity before in my life and certainly have no contract with it or obligation to it."

"Why does this docket present one three-part Proper Name, yet indicate the presence of two Defendants?"  

"What does this charge --- "Fleeing of Justice" --- mean?  One could flee from justice or flee to justice, but fleeing "of" justice seems an impossibility, as it would mean "fleeing apart from justice" or "fleeing separate from justice" or "fleeing belonging to justice".  How is anyone supposed to answer a nonsensical charge?"  

And that is just for starters.  The very names of the courts are also being changed to amount to gibberish, for example: 
The STATE Court of Missouri The State Court of MISSOURIthe Superior Court for TENNESSEEetc., etc., etc., 

"Pardon me, your Honor, but I have never seen the name of any court styled in the way that this court is presenting itself, and it appears that the very name of the court is gibberish, a combination of English and Latin amounting to fraud. How do you answer for this anomaly ---on the record, please?" 

So, they are piling on a lot of new crappola and still trying to make their scheme work and are still trying to address false commercial claims made by the erring Municipal Government contractors. 

But their situation is getting more and more desperate and all their attempts to deceive people are more threadbare by the hour, as Americans are tuning up their brains and observational skills.  

There are always many "gurus" out there offering answers and selling their pet legal theories like so many pastries in a shop. Quite often the purveyors of these wares are well-intentioned and eager to test their latest theories --- on you and your case.
Let me stress the fact that if you have to deal with these courts at all, you should not (unknowingly) allow yourself to be a Test Case. 

And in no case should you dabble in such activities with Other Parties and then attempt to implicate me or my processes because you added them in as an afterthought.  That will get you nothing but Minus Brownie Points with me. 

Changing your political status is not a Magic Bullet and is not, generally speaking, retroactive with respect to charges brought by these foreign courts. 

There are two reasons for this, the first of which is simply that if you are already in trouble with these courts and you then change your political status, it may be interpreted as "self-serving" and as an attempt to "flee justice".  If applicable, this will have to be answered successfully before any other consideration.  

The second reason is that crimes that occur in one jurisdiction may or may not also apply in other jurisdictions.  Murder, for example, is murder.  Armed robbery is armed robbery.  No matter which jurisdiction you are in, these are crimes and they will be prosecuted as crimes. 

So in no case should you think of the change of political status as a "Get out of jail free card." 

And in no case should you ever imply that I am responsible for your actions taken in respect to any court case when you are "mixing and matching" bits and pieces from other sources. 

For example, I have long warned everyone against presenting "writs" of any kind in these courts, as they do not, generally speaking, apply to anything these courts entertain.  Writs belong to a different species of law.  

In particular, I have discouraged the use of Writs of Habeas Corpus for the following reasons: (1) Writs of Habeas have been suspended in Territorial Courts since 1863; (2) Writs of Habeas are allowed in Municipal Courts only to the extent that the parties are Federal Civil Service Employees or Federal Municipal Dependents owed "Equal Civil Rights" and as we have all learned, "Equal Civil Rights" are privileges that can be suspended at any time. 

Mr. Trump signed an Executive Order a few months ago declaring a "National Emergency" and suspending "Equal Civil Rights" --- including any right that Federal citizens have with respect to Writs of Habeas Corpus. 

So, if you know your butt from buttercups, you would not present a Territorial Court with a Writ of Habeas Corpus and you would not present a Municipal COURT with a Writ of Habeas Corpus at this time.  

Despite the above explanations being given to people, explicitly, just as I have given it to you above, there are still those who are insisting on trying to enter Writs of Habeas Corpus into Territorial and Municipal court cases---- even Writ Law from England published in the 1600's, which --- if it applied to anyone --- could only apply to (1) Englishmen and/or (2) British Territorial Citizens, except that the entire reason that Americans would present a Writ of Habeas to a Territorial Court in the first place, is that they are NOT British.  

And then, having made this obvious blunder, against my advice, these same people have the unmitigated gall to come back to me and complain when they are (rightly) rebuffed.  

In order to profit from anything I teach or recommend, you must take the time to learn and educate yourself about the logic and history of things, pay attention to what you are doing, and then, actually take my advice.  Follow my recommendations.  

Don't take someone else's advice, fall on your nose and look like a loon in court, and then think you are going to blame me for it.  Okay?  Everyone got that?  

Here for the record is the general protocol for an avowed and recorded American State National or State Citizen being addressed by one of these foreign courts.  

When you hear your name called, you stand up without going into the court arena that is separated from the public by a railing, and you ask the important question:  "Is the Defendant being called a corporation, or a corporate officer, or a living man (woman)?" 

This is the crucial question.  The court will not want to answer.  The judge will most likely answer with another question, like, "Why do you ask?" 

"Because before God, I am a living man (woman) and I do not belong in this court."  

And that is the coup de grace.  That is the entire issue.  If, in the unlikely event that proceedings continue and you are questioned more severely, you will want to know what kind of court is addressing you --- whether it is a Municipal COURT or a Territorial Court.  So ask. 

Most likely, they will have to admit that it is a Territorial Court, but regardless of the answer, you know how to respond. 

1. If it is a Municipal COURT, you answer that you are exempt from all Municipal duty and service and you claim your exemption found at Title 50, Section 7 (c) and (e) of the 2012 Edition of the Federal Code. 

2. If it is a Territorial Court, you answer that you are a Foreign Sovereign and you give them your mandatory Foreign Sovereign Immunity Notice, and you claim your exemption under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of The Constitution of the United States of America and Amendment XI thereof, which provides that no American is subject to foreign law.  

That's it, whether a Municipal COURT or a Territorial Court, you have your answer ready and you have your proof in your handy-dandy file folder.  If there is ANY continued "offer" to contract presented to you at all, you look at the Clerk or the Prosecutor, and gently inquire, "May I ask the birthdate of the Defendant?"

The Clerk will rattle around and offer one of two dates --- what you would normally recognize as your birthday, and another date a few days or weeks later, that is completely unfamiliar to you.
If they offer the familiar birthday, they are trying to identify you as a Ward of the Federated State of State organization in the State where you were born, and you are in Territorial Court.  

If they offer the unfamiliar birthdate, they are trying to prosecute you as a commercial corporation under Municipal Law. 

In either case, the answer is the same.  "Your Honor, I have court admissible evidence in my hand of a crime committed against me while I was still a baby in my cradle.  My identity was stolen and I was impersonated and a foreign political status was unconscionably conferred upon me, an American civilian. Here's the proof." 

Wave the Birth Certificate at them, let them examine it --- if they dare. 

"Let the record show that as a living man (woman) I have a day of creation that nobody knows and no certain name, either."

"The Clerk has submitted the evidence that the Defendant has a birthday and is therefore an individual created under 1 USC 8 and is a Territorial Citizen." 


"The Clerk has submitted the evidence that the DEFENDANT has a birthdate (different from the normal birthday) and is therefore an individual corporation created under Municipal law." 

I have presented proof (the BC) that both these entities were created and attached to me without my conscious knowledge or permission when I was still a baby in my cradle.  I am in fact a living American, a non-combatant and peaceful civilian, who has been grossly presumed upon by my employees and subjected to unconscionable contracting processes.  

I owe no duty to this court, but this court has a duty to me to set me free from any presumption of obligation under any foreign law, and to return to me my assets and my freedom without debt or encumbrance."

Period.  The end. 

This is the course that I recommend when answering anything to these courts at any initial hearing at all. Cut to the chase.  Do not "entertain or encourage" any false suppositions.  

If the validity of your presentation is questioned at all, you may refer them to the State Assembly Recording Secretary to affirm your political status and also refer to the recorded evidence --- in particular, the 1779 Declaration.  

Thus you stand acquitted of any charge these courts can bring, though in a serious case, like murder charges, they will hold you and refer you for trial under our American Common Law, which is considerably more harsh in such cases than the Territorial or Municipal law. 

Why?  Because the Territorial and Municipal law both regard you as property, and keeping their property alive so as to profit from incarceration fees and taxes and other emoluments is often more attractive than putting an end to your criminality, whereas the Public, which is charged the expense for your incarceration has the opposite motivation, and a sincere desire to protect those who are not causing trouble from violent criminals. 

I often use the example of a drunk driver swerving off the road onto a sidewalk and hitting and killing an innocent pedestrian. 
Under American Common Law, you are facing capitol punishment and Murder One, because you had cause to know how drunk you were and you chose to drive anyway--- and the all-important point is that you killed someone.  

Under the foreign corporate forms of law, you are facing a host of lesser charges--- vehicular homicide, involuntary manslaughter, drunk driving, etc., etc., etc. --- and looking at jail time and fines and property losses.  Not the loss of your own life.  

So it pays to know where your bread is buttered and which form of law you are standing under and why.  And if you don't "get it" --- brother, sister --- it isn't my fault for trying to clue you in.  

Finally, I recommend that whenever you are mis-addressed, coerced, or presumed upon by any of your erstwhile public employees and certainly any time that your constitutional guarantees are challenged or violated in any way, that you produce a complaint and Witnessed Testimony in Lieu of an Affidavit and deliver it to the Office of the State Prosecutor. 
It's their duty to ride herd on the rest of the animals in this zoo and to defend your constitutional guarantees.  Call upon them to do so.  

And if all else should fail, take it to the United States State Department, because at the end of the day, mis-addressing and importuning an American civilian as if they were Territorial or Municipal persons, is a diplomatic issue requiring prompt action by the Secretary of State.  

If the Secretary of State does not provide remedy and relief, it goes higher. 

Pray God our system is never so broken that the Secretary of State doesn't know their duty and their job, and in the meantime, work like hamsters in a wheel to build your own State Assembly and get your own court officers elected, fill your jury pools, and set up your American Common Law Court for the civilian populace, so that Ex Parte Milligan, 71 US 2, kicks in, and there is no longer any excuse for these foreign courts to ever address you at all.  


See this article and over 2500 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal buttons on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.


  1. As one who serves on occasion and as appropriate as an "expert witness", I shall look with interest for such deviations of language and capitalization on court documents I receive .

  2. Were any of the Governmental Services Corporations delegated authority over the living people? I have never found any evidence that they were. If we are not under their jurisdiction, why should we set foot into their private corporation administrative courts operating under the "Law of the Sea"? Would not a reply by registered mail be a lawful reply to the charges? All presentments are an offer to contract. I would reject and return the offered contract within 72 hours of receipt (Truth in lending act). Study law. Don't jump in without doing your homework. You will sink or swim based on your knowledge. There are no guarantees.

  3. Wow, earthdweller that is a great point. Yes, "Keep it simple." I have used the name & address to good wins in court.
    "I Am standing before you" on the other side of the Bar; works fine (Jesus tried to teach us back then that!). Their victim is in ALL CAPITAL letters. Any address is according to Their [utility] Grid; therefore don't have one-of-theirs!


Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.