It was worth
a look.
I was born in Colorado. So I think that must go on the theory and some limited definitions about the territorial US being limited to the District?
That's the tricky thing about definitions of the United States - even according to the Supreme Court there are three. So what you might do is explore around that section of code and see if you can bring us the applicable definition for the US?
The method of identification I describe can be found in law. Abatement for
misnomer, or prolonging arraignment (pleading) until the prosecution gets nervous enough to dismiss. A Refusal for Cause would only be based on your God-given unalienable rights and if you identify yourself with the legal name, you show
prima facie evidence you have accepted the fiduciary responsibility for the charges against the FULL or LEGAL NAME on the card. If you identify yourself properly the officer will not likely proceed against a different name than that of the
CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST.
It is possible for the court to proceed against the man in his true name. I have not heard of it happening though. As for my persecution about the $20M lien, the officer lied on the
Affidavit of Probable Cause so it could never get to trial, because the only alleged witness committed perjury about how I identified myself.
The way I remember it:
JACOBSEN: What is your name?
David Merrill: David Merrill.
JACOBSEN: What is your last name?
David Merrill: (Silence.)
JACOBSEN: What is your last name?
David Merrill: Nobody can be compelled to incriminate himself.
The perjury there is that JACOBSEN said I would not tell him who I was. I am David Merrill and I told him my name.
Regards,
David Merrill.