THE ONE SUPREME COURT IN
WHICH THE JUDICIAL POWER OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL BE VESTED BY THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
(The above title is used
in contradistinction to the Supreme Court of the United States the
inferior court created by the treasonous congress in the judiciary
act of 1891.)
DEMAND FOR JUDICIAL
PROCESS
Comes now into
Court Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Michael E. DiRosa, Sovereigns,
endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights, a self-evident
truth as declared in the Declaration of Independence, to demand
Judicial Process from the one supreme Court in which the judicial
Power of the United States is vested.
JUDICIAL
PROCESS. "Judicial process" is but the command of the sovereign
by whose authority the tribunal out of which it issues was
established, commanding the person or officers to whom it is
directed, or who is authorized to execute it, to do certain acts
therein specified, and it is, therefore, appropriate that such
process shall run in the name of the Government. But whether
appropriate or necessary of not, the Constitution requires it, and
what that instrument requires should be done without hesitation or
inquiry into the question whether, abstractly considered, the thing
required is essential or not. 160 Ky. 754, 170 S.W. 171. Bouvier's
Law Dictionary 1914 version updated Vol II. Pg 619
They
are what we familiarly call the "sovereign people," and
every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this
sovereignty." Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393
As an ambassador of
the enslaved Sovereigns, Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Micheal E. DiRosa
and their government, the State of Louisiana, they represent and by
the court of the King (Fourm regium) the authority out of which it
issues commands the officers of the one supreme Court in which the
judicial power of the United States shall be vested by Article III of
the Constitution to take the following appropriate actions without
hesitation because the Constitution requires it.
That the
overthrow of the Congress of the United States and the resulting
invasion of the State of Louisiana be declared null and void. The
Constitution requires it.
That the
fourteenth amendment and all actions perpetrated by this illegal
band of treasonous conspirators pretending to be the Congress of the
United States be declared null and void and our right to be
Sovereign from birth be reinstated thus freeing us from the bonds of
slavery as subjects of these treasonous conspirators. The
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution requires it.
That the
occupational government that still exists in the State of Louisiana
be removed form their pretend offices and all actions perpetrated by
this illegal occupational government be declared null and void. The
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution requires it.
JURISDICTION
Original
jurisdiction rests in this Honorable Court by virtue of Article III
of the Constitution of the United States as the State of Louisiana is
a party to this action in that it is the State of Louisiana, the
lawful government of this Sovereign, that has been invaded and
overthrown in direct violation of Article IV Section 4 of the
Constitution. Furthermore, as an ambassador of the enslaved
Sovereigns, Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Michael E. DiRosa and their
government, this Court is the only Court with authority to execute
this Demand of this ambassador and Sovereign.
"AMBASSADOR.
In international law. A public officer, clothed with high
diplomatic powers, commissioned by a sovereign prince or state to
transact the international business of his government at the court of
the country to which he is sent."
"Ambassador
is a person sent by one sovereign to another, with authority, by
letters of credence, to treat on affairs of State. Jacob."
Black's Law Dictionary Pg. 101
"AMBASSADOR.
In international law. A public minister sent abroad by some
sovereign state or prince, with a legal commission and authority to
transact business on behalf of his country with the government to
which he is sent."
"An
ambassador is a minister of the highest rank." Bouvier's
Law Dictionary 1914 version updated Vol I. Pg. 68
TRIBUNAL.
The seat of a judge; the place where he administers justice. The
whole body of judges who compose a jurisdiction. The jurisdiction
which the judges exercise.
The
term is latin, and derives its origin form the elevated seat where
the tribunes administered justice.
Any
court, forum, or judicial body. Anderson's l. Dict. Bouvier's
Law Dictionary 1914 version updated Vol II Pg. 1190
TRIBUNAL.
The seat of a judge; the place where he administers justice. The
whole body of judges who compose a jurisdiction; a judicial court;
the jurisdiction which the judges exercise. See Foster v. Worcester,
16 Pick. (Mass.) 81. Black's Law Dictionary Third Edition Pg 1756
The tribunals of
the Sovereigns, Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Michael E. DiRosa have
declared, on positive and irrefutable proof, that the overthrow of
Congress is illegal and unconstitutional. The tribunals of the
Sovereigns, Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Michael E. DiRosa, have
declared, on positive and irrefutable proof, that the invasion and
overthrow of this Ambassador and Sovereign's legal government, the
State of Louisiana, is also illegal and unconstitutional being in
direct violation of Article IV section 4 of the Constitution. This
is not only historical fact, it is confessed in "The Dubious
Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment" Tulane Law Review Vol. 28,
1953, among others. This article is a revision and amplification of
the material contained in an address delivered by the author at a
meeting of the New Orleans Bar Association on September 29, 1953. and
published in Louisiana Bar Association Journal, vol. 1, no 2. The
contents of "The Dubious Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment"
Tulane Law Review Vol. 28, 1953 and the legal arguments contained
within "The Dubious Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment are well
thought out and on point and are adopted by this Ambassador and
Sovereign by reference as if completely contained herein and attached
hereto.
How can it be
claimed that the Sovereign's legitimate government, the State of
Louisiana needed to be "reconstructed" when, after the Civil War,
it received Presidential recognition and had played an active part in
the then recent ratification and adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment
abolishing slavery? Nor could it be claimed that one of these
"reconstructed" States were instrumental in the ratification of
the Fourteenth Amendment if they were in need of "reconstruction".
Nor could it be claimed that they were only reconstructing the
"rebel States" when Tennessee was excluded from invasion. There
can be no doubt that "reconstruction" was just a convenient
pretense of these treasonous conspirators to violate Article IV
Section 4 of the Constitution.
RECONSTRUCTION.
"Reconstruction" presupposes the nonexistence of the thing to be
reconstructed as an entity; that the thing before existing has lost
its entity; and "reconstruction" is defined as follows: To
construct again; to rebuild; to restore again as an entity the thing
which was lost or destroyed. Black's Law Dictionary Third Edition
Pg 1756
Furthermore, it can
not be claimed that the Fourteenth Amendment did not directly violate
the Thirteenth Amendment by creating subjects of the United States.
Nor, can it be claimed that the Fourteenth Amendment did not violate
the both the self-evident truth that all men are created equal,
endowed by their creator with unalienable Rights upon which this more
perfect union was created as well as the Thirteenth Amendment
abolishing slavery.
"While
the thirteenth article of amendment was intended primarily to abolish
African slavery, it equally forbids Mexican peonage or the Chinese
coolie trade when they amount to slavery or involuntary servitude,
and the use of the word "servitude" is intended to prohibit
all forms of involuntary slavery of whatever class or name."
Slaughterhouse Cases 83 U.S. 36
It can not be
claimed that the Thirteenth Amendment does not also forbid villenage.
VILLENAGE.
A servile kind of tenure belonging to lands or tenements, whereby
the tenant was bound to do all such services as the lord commanded,
or were fit for a villein to do. Cowell. Black's Law Dictionary
Third Edition Pg 1818
By what claim can
these treasonous conspirators assert that the lawful government of
the State of Louisiana needed to be reconstructed or that they had
the right to reconstruct it? President Johnson even vetoed the
Reconstruction Act stressing its harsh injustices and its many
aspects of obvious unconstitutionality and denounced the
Reconstruction Act as "a bill of attainder against nine million
people at once."
Not only was the
Reconstruction Act a bill of attainder against nine million people at
once, the resulting Fourteenth Amendment, forced upon this country at
the point of a bayonet, was a bill of attainder upon every Sovereign
born in the conquered State of Louisiana from then to this day.
Every Sovereign born in the conquered State of Louisiana was, in
effect, shanghaied and put in service of the occupational government
of the entity pretending to be the lawful government of the State of
Louisiana under the pretense of available Sovereignty and unalienable
rights.
SHANGHAI.
under federal law, procuring or inducing, of attempting to do so, by
force, or threats, or by representations which one knows or believes
to be untrue, or while the person is intoxicated or under the
influence of any drug, to go on board of any vessel, or agree to do
so, to preform service or labor thereon, such vessel being engages in
interstate or foreign commerce, on the high seas or nay navigable
water of the United States, of knowingly to detain on board such
vessel such persons, so procured or induced, or knowingly aiding or
abetting such things, is an offense. Black's Law Dictionary Third
Edition Pg 1617
There can be no
doubt that the occupational government of the conquered State of
Louisiana still exist. It is confessed in the pretend constitution
of the State of Louisiana of the occupational government which
forbids any Citizen of the State of Louisiana from holding any
statewide elective office. This is confessed in Article IV Section 2
of the occupational government pretending to be the valid Louisiana
State Constitution.
"To be eligible for any statewide elective office, a person, by the
date of his qualification as a candidate, shall have attained the age
of twenty-five years, be an elector, and have been a citizen of the
United States and of this state for at least the preceding five
years. " Article IV Section 2 of the Louisiana State Constitution
Furthermore, if the
claim that Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution could be
circumvented by the claim that these "rebel States" were in need
of "reconstruction" they would have had no power to ratify the
abomination called the Fourteenth Amendment.
There can be no
doubt that Malinda Nicole DiRosa and Michael E. DiRosa, endowed by
their creator with unalienable rights, was, for however brief a time,
Sovereigns as is self-evident and were shanghaied by these
treasonous conspirators into service as a subject of the United
States.
He
could not at the same time be the sovereign and the slave. Scott v.
Sandford 60 U.S. 393
Nor can there be
any doubt that the entity pretending to be the lawful State of
Louisiana is nothing but the occupational government of the
treasonous invaders who overthrew the lawful Congress of the United
States and conquered the State of Louisiana and supplanted it with
the occupational government of the State of Louisiana. It is not
only historical fact, it is confessed by the traitors themselves.
Considering the
forgoing historical facts and positive and irrefutable proof it is
hereby demanded by this ambassador and Sovereign that this Demand for
judicial process be honored and the appropriate and aforementioned
actions be taken without hesitation because the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution requires it.
Now, a
curious problem arises. How do these victimized Sovereigns transmit
this voluminous collection of corruption of subordinates to the
supervisor? There is too much to be copied and shipped for our
meager means. And, again, of what use is the copying and shipment of
this information if the clerk is allowed to rule by summary judgment
and return our material.
Considering
the foregoing, these Sovereigns have decided to send the documents in
electronic form. The Sovereigns have organized the documents for
their own use and have, just like the courts, scanned the documents.
To make their retrieval easier, these documents were incorporated
into pages suitable for storage on the world wide web. We have
copied our document storage system which we introduce as EXHIBIT A .
All documents are
arranged by court, charge and date on the right side bar. All
attempts to reach the one supreme Court of our Constitution,
thwarted by the clerks of an inferior congressional court, and the
summary judgments of the Clerk can be found under the various names I
have tried to reach the one supreme Court created by our
Constitution. There is even a document guide to lead you through the
paperwork.
These Sovereigns do
hereby certify that all documents are true and correct copies of the
originals and further certify that the information in our document
retrieval system introduced as EXHIBIT A is, to the best of our
knowledge and belief, free of any harmful computer code.
I, Michael E.
DiRosa, Ambassador and Sovereign do hereby declare that the above is
the true and authorized demand of the Sovereigns and the State they
represent. This 21st day of December, 2009
Michael E. DiRosa
Ambassador and Sovereign unlawfully and
unconstitutionally imprisoned.
C/O 318 Lakeshore Pkwy.
New Orleans, Louisiana
XXX - XXX - XXXX
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Michael E.
DiRosa, Ambassador and Sovereign do hereby declare that the above has
been served upon the one supreme Court in which the judicial Power of
the United States shall be vested by the Constitution of the United
States by entrusting this document into the hands of the United
States Postal Authority for delivery.
I, Michael E.
DiRosa, Ambassador and Sovereign do hereby further declare that this
document would have been hand delivered were it not for the fact that
this Ambassador and Sovereign is currently illegally and
unconstitutionally held prisoner by the occupational government
pretending to be the lawful and Constitutional government of the
State of Louisiana.
This 21st
day of December, 2009
Michael E. DiRosa
Ambassador and Sovereign
TOP
|
