FIDES PUBLICA PER LEGEM NATURAS
Public Trust through the Law of Nature

ASSERTION OF TRUTH

I. Introduction

This Assertion of Truth sets forth the inherent fraudulence and legal inconsistencies within administrative law, government operations, and associated mechanisms, including the exploitation of personal sovereignty through legal fictions and economic manipulation. This document draws upon legal doctrines, historical principles, and moral imperatives to challenge these practices.

II. Legal Foundations and Violations

  1. Chevron Deference: The doctrine of Chevron deference, as established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), allows administrative agencies significant leeway in interpreting statutes. This deference undermines the judicial branch's role, effectively enabling agencies to create and enforce laws beyond their original legislative intent, thus violating the separation of powers doctrine.

  2. Nunc Pro Tunc: The misuse of the legal concept "nunc pro tunc," meaning "now for then," often serves to retroactively legitimize administrative or judicial actions that were otherwise procedurally flawed. This practice erodes the integrity of legal proceedings, undermining due process and the right to a fair trial.

  3. Natural Law and Individual Sovereignty: As articulated by Frédéric Bastiat, the natural rights of "individuality, liberty, and property" are God-given and precede human legislation. The current administrative framework disregards these principles, infringing upon personal sovereignty through excessive regulation and legal plunder.

  4. Unconstitutional Delegation and Jurisdiction: Administrative agencies exercise powers that are constitutionally reserved for the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, violating the separation of powers doctrine. This is evident in the way these agencies promulgate regulations, enforce laws, and adjudicate disputes without direct legislative oversight.

  5. Strawman All Caps Name: The creation of a legal fiction, often referred to as the "strawman," is symbolized by the use of an individual's name in all capital letters. This practice, rooted in commercial law, falsely assumes a contractual relationship between the individual and governmental entities. It operates under the premise that individuals unknowingly consent to administrative jurisdiction and liabilities through this strawman entity, thereby circumventing constitutional protections.

III. Fraudulent Monetary Systems

  1. SSN Fraud and Minimum Contact: The Social Security Number (SSN) system is used to establish jurisdiction and create implied contractual relationships under the pretext of providing benefits. This system enforces economic and legal obligations on individuals without their informed consent, constituting fraud. The minimum contact doctrine, derived from International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945), is misapplied to justify the jurisdiction of federal and state authorities over individuals based on minimal or tenuous connections, infringing upon their sovereignty.

  2. Credit Theory of Money: The transition from commodity-based money to a debt-based monetary system has enabled a form of financial tyranny where private banks create money through credit issuance, leading to economic manipulation and societal inequities.

  3. Legal and Economic Implications: The reliance on fiat currency, backed by governmental decree rather than tangible assets, perpetuates inflation and devalues the currency. This system of legalized economic control serves to benefit a select few while disenfranchising the majority.

IV. Government Overreach and Legal Plunder

  1. Bastiat’s Critique of Legal Plunder: Bastiat's observations on the perversion of law highlight the transition of governmental roles from protectors of individual rights to agents of legalized theft. This is achieved through mechanisms like progressive taxation, welfare programs, and subsidies that redistribute wealth under the guise of public welfare.

  2. Constitutional Violations: The enforcement of unconstitutional statutes and codes, often under the pretense of public good, has led to widespread legal and moral corruption. Cases like Loan Association v. Topeka illustrate the judiciary’s acknowledgment of such governmental overreach.

  3. Allodial Title and Property Rights: The suppression of allodial title exemplifies governmental overreach in property rights. True ownership, free from governmental encumbrances, is systematically replaced by fee simple holdings subject to taxation and eminent domain, contradicting the foundational principles of property ownership.

V. Moral and Religious Context

  1. Divine Law and Justice: As Proverbs 1:7 states, "The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge". The current legal and administrative systems, by deviating from divine justice, have fostered an environment where moral and ethical considerations are subordinated to bureaucratic and economic interests.

  2. Ethical Responsibility and Accountability: Individuals bear a moral duty to resist legal and economic systems that undermine fundamental rights. The pervasive use of legal fictions, economic manipulation, and administrative overreach calls for a reaffirmation of ethical governance.

VI. Conclusion

  1. The administrative law system and associated governmental practices are fundamentally fraudulent, rooted in unconstitutional doctrines like Chevron deference, the misuse of legal fictions such as the strawman, and economic manipulations through SSN fraud and the credit monetary system. This document asserts the need for a return to constitutional governance, the protection of individual sovereignty, and the dismantling of systems that perpetuate legal and economic injustices.

Declaration

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Date: [Date]
Signature: [Your Signature]
Name: [Your Full Name]

I've been working up a little travel guide. Just need to sort out the fee schedule for rights violations+perhaps some language about the auto being held in a private trust, with a UCC1 filing on it+something about the DOT#+MCO. A good start though? Statement of My Right to Travel in a Private Conveyance This document serves to assert and clarify my lawful right to travel within the United States in my private conveyance, as recognized by the U.S. Constitution, statutory law, and judicial precedent. It further establishes the use of a valid U.S. passport as lawful identification. 1. The Fundamental Right to Travel The right to travel freely within the United States is a well-established constitutional principle: • Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments – Due Process Clauses: The liberty protected under these amendments includes the right to move freely without undue interference. • “The right to travel is part of the ‘liberty’ which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law.” (Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 1958). • Privileges and Immunities Clause (Article IV, Section 2): Protects the ability of citizens to travel freely between and within states. • “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” • Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868): The Supreme Court held that free movement is an inherent right tied to federal citizenship. • “The right to move freely from one state to another… is essential to the free flow of commerce and the personal liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.” This right applies not only to interstate travel but also to intrastate travel, as part of a broader principle of freedom of movement. 2. Use of a Valid U.S. Passport as Identification A valid U.S. passport is a federally recognized and universally accepted form of identification. It is sufficient for proving identity when required by law enforcement or other entities. Legal Basis for Passports as Identification • 22 U.S. Code § 2705 – Documentation of Citizenship: • A U.S. passport is defined as “proof of United States citizenship and identity.” This statute ensures that a passport serves as valid identification both domestically and internationally. • Judicial Support • “A passport is both proof of identity and evidence of the right to travel internationally and domestically.” (Zemel v. Rusk, 381 U.S. 1, 1965). 3. Legal Definitions of “Driving” and “Motor Vehicle” The legal terms “driving” and “motor vehicle” pertain specifically to commerce. Their definitions establish the distinction between regulated commercial activity and personal travel: Driving • Black’s Law Dictionary (6th Edition): Defines “driver” as: • “One employed in conducting or operating a vehicle as part of commerce or for hire.” • Texas Transportation Code § 521.001(6): • “Driver” refers to a person operating a motor vehicle. However, the application of this term is primarily in the context of regulated activities. Motor Vehicle • 49 U.S. Code § 30102(a)(6): Defines a “motor vehicle” as: • “A vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways and used in commerce.” 4. Traveling in a Private Conveyance vs. Driving a Motor Vehicle The distinction is fundamental: • Traveling: • A constitutionally protected right that involves personal movement in a private conveyance for non-commercial purposes. • Not subject to licensing or registration requirements as it is not a regulated activity. • Driving: • A term of art within transportation law, referring to the operation of a motor vehicle in a commercial or regulated capacity. Case Law Supporting the Distinction: • Thompson v. Smith, 155 Va. 367, 154 S.E. 579 (1930): • “The right of a citizen to travel upon public highways and transport property thereon is not a mere privilege, but a common right.” • Chicago Motor Coach v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22 (1929): • “The use of highways for travel and transportation is not a mere privilege but a common and fundamental right.” • Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906): • “The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen… He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him.” 5. Liability for Violating the Right to Travel Single Officer Liability • 42 U.S. Code § 1983 – Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights: Any law enforcement officer who, under color of law, infringes upon the right to travel may be held personally liable for violating constitutional protections. • “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State… subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen… to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured.” Conspiracy by Multiple Officers • 42 U.S. Code § 1985 – Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights: If two or more officers act in concert to infringe on the right to travel, it constitutes a conspiracy to violate civil rights. • “If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire… for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws… the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages.” 6. Notice of Tort Liability Against Officer Bonds Each law enforcement officer is bonded or insured to ensure accountability. Any unlawful infringement upon my rights, including interference with my lawful right to travel, may result in a tort claim being filed against the officer’s personal bond or insurance policy. • Legal Basis for Tort Claims: • Law enforcement officers have a fiduciary duty to act in good faith and uphold constitutional rights. A failure to do so can result in personal liability for damages. • Relevant Precedent: • “The individual officer acts at his own peril when enforcing laws that violate constitutional rights.” 7. Holder in Due Course and Secured Party Creditor Notice I hereby notify all parties that I am acting as a Holder in Due Course under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC § 3-302) and retain all rights, titles, and interests in my private property, including my private conveyance. As a Secured Party Creditor, I assert my standing under UCC Article 9, having established a lawful security interest in my property and rights therein. Any attempt to infringe upon my rights or property without proper legal authority constitutes a violation of commercial and constitutional law, subject to immediate recourse and remedy. • UCC § 3-305: Protects holders in due course against defenses and claims. • UCC § 9-609: Prohibits unauthorized seizure of property without a valid security interest and due process. This notice serves to preserve all rights and remedies at law or in equity. Prepared By: