By Anna Von Reitz
Questions have arisen concerning the Solicitor General's letter and notice addressing the problems with administrative courts. It appears that a large number of people are unfamiliar with the concept of administrative courts versus true courts of law.
An administrative court is also commonly called an "administrative tribunal" or "corporate tribunal". These courts enforce corporate statutes, rules, codes, regulations, public policies, mandates, and ordinances adopted by the corporation's own legislative bodies. They are private by nature and lack the authority of public courts.
These Administrative Courts are courts delineated in the Federal Constitutions as Article I Courts created by Congress to address controversies, processes, or crimes arising in the realm of legislated law that governs the operation of the government corporations and their employees, together with their franchise operations.
The reason that these Courts can be dissolved by President Trump and the reason he can fire the judges operating these courts, is self-evident. He is the CEO responsible for the proper functioning of all corporation services, franchises, agencies, and instrumentalities.
If the Administrative Courts or their Judges are functioning in an incompetent or negligent or corrupt manner, it's the President's responsibility to correct the problem.
A great part of the corruption of these courts lies in their abuse of so-called "discretionary judicial powers" that the Congress improperly attributed to them. These so-called discretionary powers allowed the judges to determine -- in their own best judgement and opinion -- the jurisdiction of the court with respect to individual defendants.
This may not seem like anything controversial, but by allowing individual judges to arbitrarily determine their court's jurisdiction the U.S. Congress also allowed them to dictate the presumed nature and capacity of the defendants appearing before them.
This is how they "bypassed" the Constitutional limits and Due Process requirements --- by arbitrarily choosing commerce as their jurisdiction, they were also enabled to view all defendants appearing in their courts as Municipal Corporation franchises and "citizens of the United States"--- who were, under the Fourteenth Amendment, already conveniently defined as criminals.
Once the judge, upon his own choice, settled into operating the court in commercial jurisdiction and acting under this given set of definitions provided by the Fourteenth Amendment, all he had to do was "provide an appearance of justice" and sentence the already pre-judged defendants.
This sets up an "assembly line of injustice" in which the judge rubber stamps convictions and issues sentences regardless of the actual facts and regardless of the actual law --- and also regardless of the actual nature and rights of the defendants involved.
Many of these Article I "Administrative Law Judges" thought that their job was to control rebels, maintain the peace, and collect as much money or property from the defendants as possible, for the benefit of the corporations paying their salaries.
Historical records show that they weren't wrong in this supposition.
These infamous Carpetbagger Courts were weaponized in the years following the so-called American Civil War to collect war reparations from the citizens of the former Confederate States of America and Municipal "citizens of the United States" who were allied with them.
Under that system, all that an Administrative Law Judge had to do ---according to their own discretion--- was to operate the court in the jurisdiction of commerce, and determine that the defendant was a Municipal "citizen of the United States" and therefore a rebel and a criminal by definition.
The abuse of this purported discretionary power accounts for the 96% conviction rate of these courts and the vast amounts of private property unlawfully confiscated from the American people, who were arbitrarily mischaracterized and impersonated by these Article I Courts and convicted under these convenient False Legal Presumptions.
In support of this scheme, millions of American babies were registered as U.S. Citizens and then unlawfully converted into "citizens of the United States", too, in order to mischaracterize them as Federal Dual Citizens, who, by definition, had no Constitutional guarantees to begin with.
These convoluted, private, and arbitrary determinations made by individual Judges according to their own "discretion" bypassed not only the Constitutional guarantees owed to the American people who were improperly summoned to appear in their corporate tribunals, but bypassed the Due Process provisions and other considerations the victims of this fraudulent misrepresentation were owed.
The actual jurisdiction and nature of these Administrative Courts as private Corporate Tribunals were never properly disclosed to the American Public and the defendants being addressed by these courts, so that all the actions of these Administrative Courts against average Americans were undertaken under color of law and non-disclosure--- fraud, in other words.
Everyone can now see that these private Corporate Tribunals, which are naturally supposed to be limited to administering the functions of their own corporations and their personnel, grossly overstepped their actual limitations and abused their positions of trust.
Millions of average Americans have been abused by these practices and the attendant legal presumptions and enforcement actions taken against them. Millions more innocent people worldwide have been similarly abused as this system of Administrative "Law" has been expanded and imported to other countries that have been operated as franchises of the UNITED STATES Corporation and U.S.A Corporation.
The entire genesis of this lies in the illegal and immoral enfranchisement schemes promoted by European Governments, especially the British Government, in the Nineteenth Century, as a means to latch onto private assets for use as collateral backing government debt.
Later on, the scheme was generalized and used to profit all the corporations and corporation franchises owned and operated by the British Monarch and the Roman Municipal Corporations operated by the Holy See. Debts, including tax debts, mortgages, and interest actually owed by government services corporations were foisted off on the unsuspecting people of each country impacted.
This has led to unaccountable "government" corporation spending based on commandeered private credit and private assets that don't actually belong to these corporations.
The misuse and abuse of the Administrative Courts is a secondary development in this gigantic fraud against the living people; the Perpetrators had to find a way to arbitrarily collect payment from the victims and the guilty corporations used their very own Administrative Courts to do it.
No wonder the courts have been stacked. No wonder they have a 96% conviction rate. No wonder the Fourteenth Amendment has not been formally removed from The Constitution of the United States of America, even though it was never ratified by the States of the Union.
When you realize that this is not only the situation in The United States, but in many countries worldwide, the scope of the abuse and the criminality becomes obvious --- and frightening.
Nonetheless, this abuse must be addressed and stopped. A lot of Odious Debt incurred as a result of the Great Fraud has to be jettisoned, and assets and credit owed to the living people must be returned.
Odious Debt is defined as debt created by means of fraud, that the victims were unaware of, and from which the victims did not benefit.
Various arguments and excuses for this circumstance have been advanced. Some lawyers have alleged that the victims did benefit because their countries as a whole benefited from infrastructure and employment made possible by the "governmental services corporations".
Other lawyers have argued that the victims must have known about these cozy arrangements favoring the corporations, because tax income alone could not account for "government" spending.
The failing point and default is that these corporations were under contract and required to provide "good faith service" to the victims who have been railroaded and mischaracterized by private corporate tribunals created, owned, and operated by these same parent corporations.
No matter what they say, no matter what benefits they claim to have provided, these corporations have been operating in gross breach of trust and violation of their service contracts -- the actual Federal Constitutions.
They have harmed and defrauded their Employers and committed vast crimes of personage and barratry against them for decades ---and their Article I Administrative Courts have been improperly used to enforce this abuse.
Some people have assumed that this correction is limited to courts that are explicitly Article I Federal Courts, but because the State of State and State Trust organizations have been operated as franchises of the federal parent corporations, the correction applies throughout the federal administrative system all the way down to incorporated State of State Courts, State Trust Courts, and County Courts.
We are pleased that this abuse is finally coming to an end.
Issued by:
Anna Maria Riezinger -- Fiduciary
The United States of America
In care of: Box 520994
Big Lake, Alaska 99652
February 26th 2025
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
