Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Form 110 - Designation of Exempt Person (and Instructions)

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by ag maniac View Post
    Grammatically correct....I'm New Yorker........not "a" New Yorker. But I left that land more than half my life ago for Florida. So I now claim Floridian as my nationality (also long enuff to qualify as "1/2 cracker" ;-]
    If one fails to indicate otherwise, they will presume upon you the status of 'person born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States' (i.e. a U.S. citizen per the 14th amendment) and corporate status generally.
    Last edited by allodial; 11-20-16 at 12:08 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  2. #12
    The presumption of your membership is HISTORICALLY accomplished in three ways:

    1. By land (jus soli)
    2. By blood (jus sanguinis)
    3. Your continued consent to be governed, by fact or presumption of law.


    But an express rescission of all the ties that bind & pledging allegiance per 8USC1481(a)(2) is in accord w/ obtaining a Certificate of Nationality issued by Secretary of State. I'm sure certified copies noticed to local/state authorities may place one "with standing".

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by ag maniac View Post
    The presumption of your membership is HISTORICALLY accomplished in three ways:

    1. By land (jus soli)
    2. By blood (jus sanguinis)
    3. Your continued consent to be governed, by fact or presumption of law.

    But an express rescission of all the ties that bind & pledging allegiance per 8USC1481(a)(2) is in accord w/ obtaining a Certificate of Nationality issued by Secretary of State. I'm sure certified copies noticed to local/state authorities may place one "with standing".
    Tip: Florida Nationality has little to nothing to do with D.C. IMHO, if you're looking to DC for that, you're looking in the wrong place. Regarding jus soli and jus sanguinis, consider that you have jurisdictions running in parallel.
    Last edited by allodial; 11-20-16 at 01:07 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  4. #14
    Absolutely right.....I'm not looking to DC for legitimacy on a State National declaration. That's my declaration of allegiance & I stand by it.....can't seek validation from without.

    No, I see 8usc1502 as the "do not detain" statute --> Fed SoS let's his "STATE OF" SoS know about an "American national" "in his district". STATE OF SoS --> ALSO wearing the State SoS hat simultaneously (that foreign state to the US), is now obliged to let his agents know about one's corrected status. I know....."works on paper".....but that's how I interpret 1502's language.

    By that time however, all the players should know who you are by declaration....via registered mail. They sure can't rebut that.....their "law" doesn't allow it. 'Course, you've got to "govern yourself accordingly"


    The 14th alters the nature of allegiance, without the consent of the people, by reversing paramount allegiance away from the state and towards the Feds by making "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, ....[are] SUBJECT to the jurisdiction....." of Congress.


    ......funny how the "expatriation act" [15 stat 223 ch249] was passed the day before 7/27/68 the 14th Amendment was ratified 7/28/68.


    About those parallel jurisdictions......I imagine claiming the BC might place one in either

  5. #15
    That is the thing, certain, if not all, state officials have 'two faces': one is for their obligations on the federal side and the other is their obligations on the organic state side.
    Last edited by allodial; 11-20-16 at 11:40 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  6. #16
    42 U.S.C. § 1983, commonly referred to as "section 1983" provides:

    Every person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, Suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.

    For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

    A state is not a "person" under section 1983, but a city is a person under the law (Will v. Michigan Department of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 109 S. Ct. 2304, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45 [1989]). Similarly, state officials sued in their official capacities are not deemed persons under section 1983, but if sued in their personal capacities, they are considered to be persons. Thus if a plaintiff wants to bring a section 1983 claim against a state official, she or he must name the defendants in their personal capacity and not in their professional capacity. Like a state, a territory, such as the territory of Guam, is not considered to be a person for the purposes of section 1983.- http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionar...ction+1983

    Saving to suitors clause
    The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of:
    (1) Any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction, saving to suitors in all cases all other remedies to which they are otherwise entitled.
    (2) Any prize brought into the United States and all proceedings for the condemnation of property taken as prize.

    The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of:
    (1) Any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction,
    (2) Saving to suitors in all cases all other remedies to which they are otherwise entitled.
    (3) 28 U.S.C. § 1333(1) (emphasis added).Feb 15, 2011

    28 U.S.C. § 1333(1) (emphasis added). Under this rule, in circumstances where a plaintiff
    (1) Possesses both state common-law claims as well as maritime claims arising from a single transaction, but
    (2) chooses to file an in personam suit in state court rather than an in rem suit in a federal forum, the plaintiff's forum and choice-of-law selections may not be circumvented by removal by the defendant to federal court unless federal jurisdiction is proper on grounds other than the maritime or admiralty claims arising from the events that are the subject of the suit.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •