1. Recognise the linguistic-nurances and be COGNIZANT of the jurisdictional-jargons:
➜ The word «jurisdiction» ultimately means «authority» and the MEANING of «authority» is loosely about the chain-of-command as to who is supposed to follow whose orders or directions.
➜ In the «jurisdiction» known as COMMON-LAW, a «crime» is defined as activity where there is factual injury or harm or suffering or damage done/inflicted onto person or property, ultimately requiring a victim, but, via statutory legalese and regulations... a «crime» is arbitrarily decided based on moral-relativism where you could be forced into homelessness by the very same people/groups who then decide to legislate that homelessness is illegal and declare you a criminal for being homeless. One jurisdiction is obviously far more moral and ethical and logically consistent than the other.
2. KNOW how to PROPERLY establish «jurisdiction...»
➜ One of the ways in which I helped a young boy in the past «establish jurisdiction» over the decisions of his family was to teach him how to use a scheduling calendar in order to set appointments and stick with his appointments to keep himself busy with already scheduled activities that he wants to do so that anybody who wished for his time would be required to set an appointment with him, plus the fact that he had Straight-A's in school, wherein the logic was used that it makes more logical-sense to follow and listen to the one with the Straight-A's in the house-hold... turned out that his family really did default to listening to him as a result and started following his recommendations as a result.
➜ He who does the ASKING is AS the KING; do not make statements in the court-room but simply ask questions in a proper specific-sequence that forces those clerks masquerading as judges and magistrates into a box of their own requirements that they themselves are required to follow, such as whether they have a properly filed and bonded Oath-of-Office, whether the «court» that your alleged PERSON has been summoned into happens to be a Article 3 Common-Law Court-of-Record or if it happens to be one of those Article 1 Maritime/Admiralty Kangaroo-Courts of Administration, always being prepared for how to respond WHEN they start threatening to hold you in contempt of court for asking such questions or even uttering anything that sounds like the word: Constitution...
➜ KNOW Your Case-Law and FILE THE RELEVANT-INFORMATION INTO THE RECORDS:
« Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit... includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary toward the public,... and if he deliberately conceals material information from them he is guilty of fraud»
Donnelly v. Dechristoforo, 1974.SCT.41709 ¶ 56; 416 U.S. 637 (1974) McNally v. U.S., 483 U.S. 350, 371-372, Quoting U.S. v Holzer, 816 F.2d. 304, 307
i.e.: «The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative
agency and all administrative proceedings.»
«“A judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the defendant is void. It is a nullity.”» -Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533.
«The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.»
Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan. App 2d 573, 576-7, 840 P. 2d 553 (1992) rev. denied 252 Kan. 1093(1993)
«Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and “Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.» -Main v Thiboutot, 100 S Ct. 2502(1980)
«Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.»
-Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
«Where a court's power to act is controlled by statute, the court is governed by the rules of limited jurisdiction, and courts exercising jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the structures of the statute." "The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedure, absent contract." see, Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, “...every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.»
-Stock v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 289 In Interest of M.V., 288 Ill.App.3d
300, 681 N.E.2d 532 (1st Dist. 1997)
«"... the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts,as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument." "In declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank". "All law (rules and practices) which are repugnant to the Constitution are VOID". Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states "NO State (Jurisdiction) shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights, privileges, or immunities of citizens of the United States nor deprive any citizens of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, ... or equal protection under the law", this renders judicial immunity unconstitutional.»
-Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137, 180 (1803)
«Note: By law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person). When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the Judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges' orders are not voidable, but VOID, and of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States."»
-Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974)
3. KNOW the «traps» that cause you to «submit» to THEIR «jurisdiction...» over YOU:
➜ Providing any «Driver's Licenses» from the State or City in Question is Evidence of Jurisdiction
➜ Providing a ZIP-Code is Evidence of THEIR «Jurisdiction» Over YOU!
➜ Referring to yourself as a «Resident» of the State/City/County is Evidence of Jurisdiction
➜ Providing a DOB is Evidence of of THEIR «Jurisdiction» Over You
➜ ANY «Government-Issued I.D.» is Evidence of THEIR «Jurisdiction» Over You
➜ Signing their papers, such as Traffic-Tickets, is evidence of THEIR «Jurisdiction» over YOU
➜ Giving Them Your DNA Causes the «Bad ETs» to Gain Even MORE CONTROL over YOU!
Time-Stamp: 030TL09m17d/01h41Z (True Light Calendar; 030TL = 2026CE)