Citizens of the American Constit

Citizens of the American Constitution

Overview

This web site is established pursuant to the Constitution for these united States of America, and any replicas thereof, in particular, the Bill of Rights, and specifically, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Any public officer or official in any government position who has previously taken an oath or acts under agent-principal oath, who acts in opposition to this web site, in any manner, acts in opposition to,. including, but not limited to, the following: (1) his/her oath; (2) The Constitution, all powers thereof and all Rights guaranteed therein; (3) The Public Trust. By his/her own actions, such officer has invoked the self-executing sections 3 and 4 of the 14^th Amendment, vacates his office, his actions, rulings and authority are null and void, and he forfeits all benefits of his former office, including salary and pension.

“We, the People” is not just an expression. It is the phrase that our founding fathers chose to define the true Sovereigns of this Nation, namely, We, the People of America, from whom ALL political power is derived. We then delegated limited Constitutional authority to government to serve us, pursuant to oaths taken, as required by the Supremacy Clauses, Sections 2 and 3 of Article VI. All legislative power is vested in Congress. We have no kings in this Nation. The limited, delegated authority to government is found in Article I, Section 8, Clauses 1 through 18. All that is stated therein is the full and ONLY extent of its authority. That which is not authorized by the Constitution is prohibited by the Constitution.

In today’s America, because of false education, teachings, political maneuvering, propaganda, and for countless other reasons, many people think that it is the People who must serve government. That is not how our Nation was created, and that is not the law. Please understand this: Our government, created by the People, serves us. It does so pursuant to the Constitution, oaths taken to it, and the limited powers delegated by it to government. That is the extent of government’s legal and lawful power. Anything beyond that is usurpation of power, without authority, insurrection and sedition, and possibly, treason. Our Constitution is now and has been, for many years, the only thing that has kept this Nation from outright tyranny. Our duty is to protect it so it can protect us.

All laws created by Congress for the American People must be Constitutionally compliant or they are null and void, without force or effect, whatsoever. Since the “law” was created by the People for the People and affects the People, then, obviously, the People have the Right to discuss, deal with and in the law which was created for and which affects them. If government, which was created by the People, denies the People involvement and participation in laws created by and for them, then that government lacks Constitutional authority to do so and those laws from which the People are excluded no longer apply to or pertain to the People.

The Constitution, as the Supreme Law of the land, affects ALL the People, thus, it is obvious that the People have not only the Right, but also the duty and obligation to participate in and openly discuss, among themselves, the “law” and OUR Constitution. If one does not know that he has Rights, then he has none. People said that tyranny could not happen in Germany, Spain and Chile, to name just a few. It did. Those people had a level of sophistication and Rights that they thought would continue. They did not, because those people got careless and let it happen. It would be a tragic insult to the millions of Americans who died, were wounded or severely maimed in the numerous wars America fought in the name of American freedom for us to allow our own government and courts to deny the very Rights for which they bravely gave their last full measure of devotion to their Country.

Everyone in this Nation has the RIGHT to his/her opinion. We welcome all opinions. Although we may not agree with all expressed opinions, we, as Constitutionalists, support your RIGHT to say anything you want. Our “opinions” are based in and supported by fact, law and the Constitution. What we openly present and discuss on this web site is not, and is not to be construed, as “legal advice”. As stated, the “law” is for the People, and, as such, the People have the RIGHT to participate in and discuss, among themselves, all law that affects them, and if any government were to deny the People this Right, then the People are not subject to the “law” created for them and from which they are unconstitutionally excluded by that government which acts in opposition to the Constitution.

OUR CONSTITUTIONAL GROUP HAS WON WELL OVER 250 VICTORIES IN NEW MEXICO COURTS BY USING CONSTITUTIONALLY BASED PROCEDURES AND METHODS

The Constitutional group has been active in New Mexico for approximately five years, and members of that group have won well over 250 victories – a near 100% victory record – in New Mexico courts. The few lost in lower courts are won in higher courts. We win our cases because we know the CONSTITUTION IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THIS LAND, and, by and through certain Constitutionally based methods and pleadings we file with the courts, we hold all government officers, judges and officials to it and to their limited, delegated Constitutional authority. Remember, if any action is not authorized by the Constitution, it is prohibited.

Many Americans will say that the government and courts will no longer recognize the Constitution and, because of this, there is no sense in their using it. Please remember that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of this Land, and ALL public officers, judges and politicians have sworn oaths, and are bound thereby, to support and uphold the Constitution. Those public officers who deny the Constitution commit insurrection and sedition to it and, further, commit treason against the Sovereign Citizens. It is the responsibility of the American People to oppose all enemies, foreign and domestic. Any public officer who has previously taken an oath to the Constitution and then denies the Constitution, its powers and Rights guaranteed therein, is a domestic enemy and must be exposed as such. The American People must begin to recognize their powers guaranteed within the Constitution, and use those powers against any public officers who openly and covertly oppose their Rights and their law. You can be assured that the politicians will, obviously, NOT do this for you, so personal responsibility is mandatory.

Mark Twain once said: “In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man – brave – hated – scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.” The overwhelming majority of American People have been asleep, disinterested, too busy or too timid to take action. That recognition could spur them to awaken to their personal responsibilities, become that Patriot, and take effective action against those who would ruin this great Nation.

In New Mexico, we and our group are hated and scorned by all government and courts, as will be more fully explained later. This is because we demand our Rights, get them, win, and we DO NOT FEAR THEM. They fear us. One of our favorite quotes from Jefferson is: “When People fear their government, there is tyranny. When government fears the People, there is liberty.” What we have lawfully done in New Mexico you and other Patriots like you can do in your own communities, cities, towns and states and create beneficial changes for everyone.

This web site has many links for different purposes which may suit your individual interests or needs. The Current Court Victories link will explain some of what we consider to be major victories obtained against corrupt systems, corrupt opponents, corrupt judges and corrupt courts. Presented below are four current court orders from various New Mexico courts. These represent victories achieved under extremely difficult circumstances and against great odds. As many of you know, government and courts do not like to lose to what they refer to as pro-se litigants, who are, in actuality, American Citizens, claiming and exercising their Constitutional Rights in their courts. The system likes to keep People wrapped up in its corrupt little game, and if a Citizen speaks for himself in court, unrepresented by an attorney, then the system cannot control that Citizen through their system, which includes, in most cases, your attorney, who is unlikely to actually oppose the system for you since he depends upon that system for his livelihood.

A favorite gimmick of government and the courts is to dismiss cases brought by pro-se plaintiffs, because of some minor point or technicality, usually not Constitutionally based in law or case law, and ignore all the vast evidence and pleadings that will support the Citizen’s lawful positions. This dismisses a case for an insignificant, usually unrelated and unspecific position, while the main points are never considered. If the pro-se is a defendant, the judge usually finds against him/her for, again, some minor infraction, again, not Constitutionally based. The pleadings of the pro-se litigant and his evidence file are rarely considered or read and his case very seldom gets before a jury, a complete denial of his Constitutionally guaranteed Rights and due process. In fact, the judge’s job is to make sure that the case never gets before a jury. The entire matter is lost because of the minor, insignificant point by which the judge reduces the most important aspects of the case to the least important consideration. In so-doing, as previously stated, the vast amount of evidence presented by pro-se litigants in support of their cases is rarely, if ever, heard. Fortunately, our Constitutionally based methods have proven extremely effective against this outrageous and corrupt denial of the Constitution and due process.

We support everything we say, do and present in court with fact, law and evidence to uphold our lawful positions. This is imperative. A position supported by fact and law is legally and lawfully solid. That position which is not so based is frivolous and can be quickly dismissed as such. What Edwards presented was fully verifiable, and anything a Citizen does before the court should be the same. If your positions are based in fact and law and supported by evidence, while your opponent, whether a government, institution or corporation is based in fraud, then it will be very difficult for the judge to rule against fact and law and uphold fraud.

The vast majority of judges will automatically oppose the unrepresented Citizen who speaks for himself. This, as stated, is a challenge to his authority and “his” court, which, of course, properly belongs to the People. If the Citizen’s opponent is government, corporate or institutional, as was Edwards’, the judge usually, and automatically, takes their position over the Citizen. This is when the Citizen must display proper, lawful knowledge and actions, and have the proper methods to remind the judge of his assigned duties and his opponent of the truth. It has been our experience that when most judges and opponents encounter such an informed and legally well armed and prepared Citizen, they fold. All the various tricks of the trade they employ fall away in the stark reality of the law and the truth. Few judges are willing to outright defy the law presented by a Citizen who knows the law and defend a corporate or government position based in fraud. The judge could be in personal jeopardy. However, if the Citizen does not know the law, his Rights guaranteed therein and present positions based in fact and law, that judge will usually find for the corporate interests.

One of the court’s tricks of the trade is not to allow the Citizen’s case to get before a jury by dismissing it on some trumped-up fraud. The court and opposition realizes that a knowledgeable, unrepresented Citizen, who speaks for himself, before a jury, is dangerous to their positions. The jury will usually see the truth of the matter, no matter how hard the opposition tries to hide it. Our Constitutional methods require the court to honor the Constitutionally guaranteed Right of trial by jury, as well as honor all other Rights guaranteed in the Constitutions, federal and state. After all, the Constitution is the law of the land, to which the judge has sworn an oath. To deny the powers of and Rights guaranteed in the Constitutions is insurrection, sedition, and treason against the Sovereign People, and dangerous to the judge. When a Citizen properly presents his case, as did Edwards, many times the judge and/or the opposition will clearly see how the case is based, know that they are basically up against the law, and find reasons to either withdraw or find for the Citizen. However, in some cases, as in Edwards’ case, they will commit every fraud in the book to the very end, then withdraw. The Citizen has to be fully prepared for either situation.

For your own edification, you might inquire of your own local and federal courts systems and obtain printed information from them concerning the number of pro-se cases that came before them in the past five years, and how many of them prevailed or even got to a jury. You will be extremely surprised. For the most part, these records are not kept, and if they are, not released to the public. The reason is that few, if any, pro se litigants win in local courts, and fewer, if any, win in federal courts. This is a national disgrace. You might call local newspapers and have the legal editors or other interested reporters inquire for themselves. It would be a major scoop for them.

EFFECTIVE METHODS AND ACTIONS PRODUCE PRECEDENT-SETTING COURT VICTORIES FOR THE PEOPLE

The first court order presented below pertains to METRIS v, Edwards, case no. 2003-188-CV, heard in New Mexico state district court. This was brought against Edwards by Metris, the parent of a large national credit card bank, which has been previously accused of fraud, and settled out of court. Edwards used Constitutionally based documents in her case and because of these methods, the Plaintiff, Metris, knew they lost, failed to prosecute the case for ten months, their attorneys submitted a Motion to Withdraw, and the hostile man acting as “judge”, instead of dismissing the case, according to law, continued it, without authority, yet Edwards STILL WON.

These Constitutionally based methods protected her Rights guaranteed in the Constitution and required the judge and public officers to uphold those Rights. If a Citizen does not claim and exercise his Rights, he will not have them upheld. Our methods, as used by Edwards, are further explained in the link Current Court Victories and may be of assistance to you in your court battles against the organized corruption in most of our courts. Although we have not done extensive research, it seems that this case is precedent setting and one of the few, if any, victories in state district court by a Citizen who spoke for herself, unrepresented by attorney, against a national banking corporation.

The second court order below dismisses a case, with prejudice, brought by the Santa Fe, New Mexico police department against a Citizen who voluntarily surrendered his “driver’s license”, his registration and insurance to the state Motor Vehicle Department and freed himself from the fraudulent, deceptive and unilateral contract imposed upon him, under color of law, and one lacking full disclosure. Several months later he was arrested, his truck confiscated, and criminal charges were filed against him. Because of the Constitutional methods used, the tow truck operator, who had been warned by the police not to return the truck until the Citizen produced a driver’s license, registration and insurance, returned the truck to the Citizen, against the firm orders of the police.

If the laws, rules and regulations with which this Citizen was charged were valid and enforceable, then the case would not have been dismissed, with prejudice, and the Citizen would have been fined and/or jailed. He was not. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the few cases in the Country in which an unrepresented Citizen has prevailed in court against the massive fraud being perpetrated upon Citizens throughout this Nation, by the licensing, registration and insurance fraud being mandated by government, in defiance of the Constitution and without Constitutional authority.

Cases three and four below pertain to two Citizens who were denied their Constitutionally guaranteed Rights to trial by jury, which they requested, by Motion, in lower court, which used deception and fraud to deprive them of their Rights. These Citizens appealed to the New Mexico state district court and used our Constitutionally based methods to achieve victory against a government that, without authority, unlawfully denied them their guaranteed Rights and due process of law. As you can see, the court orders dismissing the cases are based on Constitutional grounds, which is extremely rare. Courts usually use grounds other than Constitutional reasons as a basis for dismissing a case.

These four cases and all of the other referenced victories were achieved by and through the Constitutionally based methods we employ as Citizens, with nearly unanimous success. The Constitution is the Law of the Land that protects your Rights, and our methods are based in and supported by that Constitution, to which all public officers have taken oaths. For more details on these cases and methods, please click on to the Current Court Victories link. The four court orders follow.

***************************************************

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF SAN MIGUEL

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

METRIS COMPANIES LLP,

PLAINTIFF,

VS.

NO. 03-188-CV

MARGARET EDWARDS,

DEFENDANT.

ORDER

This case having been set for a trial on the merits on February 8, 2005 at the hour of 9:00

a.m. pursuant to the Amended Notice of Hearing filed on October 28,2004, and defendant

having appeared at 9:00 a.m. ready to proceed to trial and the court having waited until 9:30 a.m.

for plaintiff to appear, but plaintiff not appearing; and the court being fully advised and informed

in the premises,

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED by the court that this case is dismissed.

DATED this 8^th day of February, 2005.

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I hereby certify that on the 8th day of February, 2005, a copy of the foregoing order was mailed to Edward Connelly, Metris Company, LLJ:>,Kied_l1d 1, Suite 300, 16430 N. Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85254 and Margaret Edwards, 739 Dalbey Drive, Las Vegas, NM 8770l.

Roberta J. Sena. TCAM

***********************************************************

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

CITY OF SANTA FE

IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT

CITY OF SANTA FE

No. L-201-TR-20048 943

Thomas Hyland ,Defendant

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

The complaint filed in this case is dismissed with prejudice.

Art Michaels

Prosecutor or complainant

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 15 day of Jan. 2005, this notice was either mailed to the Defendant or his attorney, or given to the Defendant or his attorney in

person.

Art Michaels

Prosecutor or complainant

Note: The signature of prosecutor Art Michaels did not scan, so we used italics to state his name.

****************************************************************

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

COURT STATE OF NEW MEXICO

COUNIY OF GUADALUPE

COURT ;'Li\i\:_1iSTRt_JOR

STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

PLAINTIFF,

v. No. 2003 - 05 - LR

MARIO LUCERO,

DEFENDANT.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

This matter came before the Court on February 19, 2004. The Court finds that

Defendant made a timely demand for trial by jury in the Guadalupe County

Magistrate Court and the Defendant was denied his right to trial by jury.

IT IS ORDERED that Uniform Traffic Citation No. 3850742-2, issued June 10

2003, is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

EUGENIO S. MATHIS

District Judge

Cc:_Ricardo Berry,ADA

Mario Lucero, 919 3rd Street, Las Vegas, NM 87701

Hon. James Moncayo. 601 Parker Avenue. Santa Rosa. NM 87701

*******************************************************