No, Governments only have the powers the citizens give to their government. We are not the governments citizens, we are the citizens of our government.
The founders fought over a 3% trade tariff. We pay 30% income tax not counting states tax for many. Plus taxes on every single goods and services you use and people think it’s acceptable. People in US territories pay that tyrannical tax and they don’t even get representation in government. It’s time for America 2.0 but the people are too pacified now
So your argument is exactly what I already said. You commented as opposed and argued what I said...the founders didn’t allow uneducated people to vote and this is why
One derivative takeaway from this case is unless you have the money to finance this kind of protracted litigation, you are effectively denied access to justice.
From Lil Giant That statement is true even of simple traffic cases. If you cannot afford to pay a traffic fine of up to $200 OR to claim not guilty and pay the added court costs above the flat $200, then you cannot afford a ticket. Traffic court means that if you plead “not guilty” they AUTOMATICALLY find you guilty. They will not allow you to speak in your own defense (A three second answer, preferably consisting of a simple yes or no is required.) NO extenuating circumstances are allowed unless you bring an attorney (and then HE, not you, gets to speak). If you cannot afford a (required) guilty fine for a ticket, or an attorney to misrepresent you, then you cannot drive a car in Illinois. Go to any traffic court in Illinois. There is a traffic jam for those pleading guilty and 1) a few citizens obviously inexperienced with the “shut up” style of the court system, recognizable by their effort to get in more than the standard three seconds allowed 2) PLUS SEVERAL WEALTHIER GUYS WITH THEIR LAWYERS who either get off, or get consequences so minimal it is obvious they paid their lawyer quite a bit of money. For instance, a guy arrested in his garage for DUI because he was having an argument with his wife and finally, in disgust, went out to his car in his own, private, closed door garage to get out of her presence. He had had two hard drinks during the argument and he was a small man. He went to sleep and woke up to the police standing over him. His wife had called the police and claimed he was drunk and sleeping in the garage. The breathalyzer test showed EXACTLY the legal limit for drinking and driving. He was NOT driving and was on his own property, but that made NO difference. He was charged with DUI and spent the next three years unable to work as a truck driver because of the DUI. He worked low-paying jobs with no transportation because he could not afford to pay the few thousand dollars it takes to have a defective breathalyzer installed and monitored, in order to start the car. The fines were so much he had NO food budget and could not get a second job due to the lack of transportation. He was able to get transportation during the third year without being required to get a breathalyzer, and find another part-time job to help him pay the mounting unpaid fines. He was pretty doggone skinny by then. The only silver lining in this whole dark story is he lost the house the very first year and his wife could not keep it, she divorced him and there was no alimony due to his low income, and she found some other sucker to marry her. (She was quite beautiful, but very nasty.) He is now doing better, but I wonder where a guy with only high school is going to get another career without more education. BECAUSE HE HAD TWO DRINKS, WAS MARRIED TO A WITCH, AND WAS SLEEPING IN HIS CAR IN THE GARAGE, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD NOT LEFT THE HOUSE THE ENTIRE DAY. HE WAS NOT DRIVING. The whole DUI is just a money-making scheme. They do not care if you are innocent or not-just as long as they get paid. Betcha’ the judges get a kickback for all those defective breathalyzers. That contrasts nicely with the wealthy guys accused of DUI who usually end up paying a fine and court costs, but due to a nice expensive lawyer they end up with a reduced charge with no DUI record and no jail time and total ability to drive, and/or getting off with probation or a short confinement at home, during which they probably hire someone to drive them around or get their wife to help. Must be nice to be rich. No inconvenience and no consequences. Traffic court is a breeze.
Yes, just don't lop off the provision in the quote every time YOU feel, think or whatever so-called "injustice" becomes so-called "law". THEN resistance becomes a duty is what Jefferson meant. Further, without context, the quote becomes less than useless and subject to being misapplied entirely, as are the fraud criminal/traitors/riotous/anarchists, so-called "peaceful" "civilly disobedient" mobsters so-called "dutifully resisting" so-called "laws" by rioting, looting, and all measure of amoral opportunism without a shred of cohesive reasoning or indisputable evidence supporting ANY of their actions - unlike ANYTHING I know of in history - except, maybe the biblical account of the siege of Jericho, i.e., "sound and fury signifying nothing."
@@jeffwalther3935 You missed the point, the anarchist, criminals are not obeying the constitution as are the politicians. If you can read then you know this quote is correct for the context...
@@kenkarish826 No sir, TJ was talking about monarchial English, foreign, alien rule establishing that law, . . . Historical and issue context is what is meant by context. To compare any protestations about our government today to our colonial masters two and a half centuries ago IS so misleading, out of context it is offensive to their memory, our values and strugggles, heritage and, apparently what America's past, present and future is about too, that such false claims of affinity become as inflammatory as secular, heretical blasphemy against America and Americans, imho, so I commented as such.
It wasn't the state but several years ago in my home town a kayaker was arrested by city police for kayaking on the river through town, his defense was that the river was listed as navigable, case was thrown out. They tried to tack on a "inciting public panic" charge but witnesses said the only people panicking were the cops, that charge was thrown out as well.
@@willcollier6623 You did not read my post so comment to this. Here is the answer that they are NOT telling you about what is really going on. When you hire a lawyer or an attorney to " RE - PRESENT " you in court you loose your rights, why ? Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client: The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, - not to the client, - and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, - the former must yield to the latter. - - Clients are also called "wards" of the court - in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. ( This is because you don't know the law like you are supposed to and are considered an " INFANT " not capable of understanding . GET WITH IT PEOPLE ! ) Corpus Juris Secundum - assumes - courts will operate in a lawful manner. ( REALY ? ) If the accused makes this assumption, he may learn, to his detriment, through experience, that certain questions of law, - including the question of personal jurisdiction, " may never be raised and addressed, especially when the accused is represented by the bar. " - ( This is why you don't get justice in court ! ! ! ! ! ! B A R stands for " British Accreditation Registry " . bar-registrars.org/ projectspeak.net/the-history-of-the-british-accreditation-registry (Sometimes licensed counsel appears to take on the characteristics of a fox guarding the hen house.) Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. ( NOT THE ATTORNEY ) Exercise your Right To TraveL KENT ET AL. v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE. 357 U.S. 116 (1958) No. 481. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 10, 1958. Decided June 16, 1958. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Paragraph 15. The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. So much is conceded by the Solicitor General. In Anglo-Saxon law that right was emerging at least as early as the Magna Carta.[12] Chafee, 126*126 Three Human Rights in the Constitution of 1787 (1956), 171-181, 187 et seq., shows how deeply engrained in our history this freedom of movement is. Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, may be necessary for a livelihood. It may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. See Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 44; Williams v. Fears, 179 U. S. 270, 274; Edwards v. California, 314 U. S. 160. "Our nation," wrote Chafee, "has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases." Id., at 197. Freedom of movement also has large social values. As Chafee put it: There are TWO sides of the Law. First is the Common Law, dealing with Flesh and Blood Men and Women / Individuals , and then there is Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, dealing with Commerce, Corporation Law, Trust, Estate, Equity law, ect. Men and Women , or the people, have Rights protected by the Constitution of the United States FOR The United States of America in our preamble and in our first ten ammendments or Natural Rights. Corporations are Artifical Entities and HAVE NO RIGHTS , but are goverened by Rules, Regulations, Statutes and Codes. HALE v. HENKEL. 201 U.S. 43 (1906) No. 340. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 4, 5, 1906. Decided March 12, 1906. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. ( Paragraph 50 ? ) Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of the corporation with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. 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. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. Driving is for Commercial purposes. F E D E R A L 18 U.S. Code Part 1, Ch. 2, § 31 - Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and “used for commercial purposes” on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo. (10) Used for commercial purposes.- The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. 49 U.S. Code TRANSPORTATION SUBTITLE VI-MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS (§§ 30101 - 33118) PART B-COMMERCIAL (§§ 31100 - 31708) CHAPTER 313-COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS (§§ 31301 - 31317) § 31301. Definitions (13) (D) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not obtained a commercial driver’s license; (E) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual does not have in his or her possession a commercial driver’s license unless the individual provides, by the date that the individual must appear in court or pay any fine with respect to the citation, to the enforcement authority that issued the citation proof that the individual held a valid commercial driver’s license on the date of the citation; (F) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not met the minimum testing standards- (i) under section 31305(a)(3) for the specific class of vehicle the individual is operating; or (ii) under section 31305(a)(5) for the type of cargo the vehicle is carrying; and In Black's Law Dictionary 8th ed. there are two distinct definitions. 1. Capitis Demunito. A. Maxima, B. Minima, C. Minor. This is for Artificial Entities. This is a must read ! ! ! Look at your NAME on your drivers license, ALL CAPITOL LETTERS. 2. right of family integrity. This is for We The People. This is a must read ! ! ! The only TYRANNY here is your IGNORANCE of the LAW. Ignorance of the law is no excuse ! Law Maxim. Want to know more ? Nothing is a secret , you just haven't pursued the TRUTH .
@@jeffpricefamily3905 so you are saying that the ninth circuit is well within their jurisdiction to run rampant over most men just because they represent the majority within themselves and unless we know every facet of the law we stand no chance of justice? Common (sense) law should take presidency over all other because of our constitution. Other wise one should take the law into ones own hands and no one should wonder why they do.
@@willcollier6623 There is so much more to this than a little snippet can reveal but, you are correct, a judge can only rule on what is put before them and if you are ignorant of the law then you will think that what you say and do are right when you are actually putting yourself under Admiralty / Maritime Jurisdiction - Military Law - there are no rights in military law. The common language we use is what is tought in public schools and yet the people think it is just common language when it is Admiralty / Maritime language, so when you go to court you are already under Martial Law just by the language you use, easy pickings. I don't have a drivers license, I don't pay income taxes because I don't get involved in commercial contracts. Everything is a contract and we the people have a right to or not to contract.
This is even more clear when likened to the private shuttle vans operated by every hotel in the nation near an airport. This is simply an absurd overreach by the state. Thank you IJ
@@kellikelli4413 When it comes to elected officials and non elected officials there is no left or right. There's not Two Parties. They give the illusion that they're opposing parties to keep us divided and fighting each other. All the while they ALL are corrupt, captured and controlled by the same Corporate Cartels. "We have but One Evil Party but with Two Names."
I had to listen a few times because I'm flabbergasted. I live on a major international and interstate waterway system. I know people who live on the islands. Washington state is causing undue hardship to its own citizens. It's nothing short of tyranny.
Not tyranny, Ignorance. Here is what I posted. Here is the answer that they are NOT telling you about what is really going on. When you hire a lawyer or an attorney to " RE - PRESENT " you in court you loose your rights, why ? Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client: The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, - not to the client, - and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, - the former must yield to the latter. - - Clients are also called "wards" of the court - in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. ( This is because you don't know the law like you are supposed to and are considered an " INFANT " not capable of understanding . GET WITH IT PEOPLE ! ) Corpus Juris Secundum - assumes - courts will operate in a lawful manner. ( REALY ? ) If the accused makes this assumption, he may learn, to his detriment, through experience, that certain questions of law, - including the question of personal jurisdiction, " may never be raised and addressed, especially when the accused is represented by the bar. " - ( This is why you don't get justice in court ! ! ! ! ! ! B A R stands for " British Accreditation Registry " . bar-registrars.org/ projectspeak.net/the-history-of-the-british-accreditation-registry (Sometimes licensed counsel appears to take on the characteristics of a fox guarding the hen house.) Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. ( NOT THE ATTORNEY ) Exercise your Right To TraveL KENT ET AL. v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE. 357 U.S. 116 (1958) No. 481. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 10, 1958. Decided June 16, 1958. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Paragraph 15. The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. So much is conceded by the Solicitor General. In Anglo-Saxon law that right was emerging at least as early as the Magna Carta.[12] Chafee, 126*126 Three Human Rights in the Constitution of 1787 (1956), 171-181, 187 et seq., shows how deeply engrained in our history this freedom of movement is. Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, may be necessary for a livelihood. It may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. See Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 44; Williams v. Fears, 179 U. S. 270, 274; Edwards v. California, 314 U. S. 160. "Our nation," wrote Chafee, "has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases." Id., at 197. Freedom of movement also has large social values. As Chafee put it: There are TWO sides of the Law. First is the Common Law, dealing with Flesh and Blood Men and Women / Individuals , and then there is Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, dealing with Commerce, Corporation Law, Trust, Estate, Equity law, ect. Men and Women , or the people, have Rights protected by the Constitution of the United States FOR The United States of America in our preamble and in our first ten ammendments or Natural Rights. Corporations are Artifical Entities and HAVE NO RIGHTS , but are goverened by Rules, Regulations, Statutes and Codes. HALE v. HENKEL. 201 U.S. 43 (1906) No. 340. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 4, 5, 1906. Decided March 12, 1906. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. ( Paragraph 50 ? ) Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of the corporation with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. 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. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. Driving is for Commercial purposes. F E D E R A L 18 U.S. Code Part 1, Ch. 2, § 31 - Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and “used for commercial purposes” on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo. (10) Used for commercial purposes.- The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. 49 U.S. Code TRANSPORTATION SUBTITLE VI-MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS (§§ 30101 - 33118) PART B-COMMERCIAL (§§ 31100 - 31708) CHAPTER 313-COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS (§§ 31301 - 31317) § 31301. Definitions (13) (D) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not obtained a commercial driver’s license; (E) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual does not have in his or her possession a commercial driver’s license unless the individual provides, by the date that the individual must appear in court or pay any fine with respect to the citation, to the enforcement authority that issued the citation proof that the individual held a valid commercial driver’s license on the date of the citation; (F) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not met the minimum testing standards- (i) under section 31305(a)(3) for the specific class of vehicle the individual is operating; or (ii) under section 31305(a)(5) for the type of cargo the vehicle is carrying; and In Black's Law Dictionary 8th ed. there are two distinct definitions. 1. Capitis Demunito. A. Maxima, B. Minima, C. Minor. This is for Artificial Entities. This is a must read ! ! ! Look at your NAME on your drivers license, ALL CAPITOL LETTERS. 2. right of family integrity. This is for We The People. This is a must read ! ! ! The only TYRANNY here is your IGNORANCE of the LAW. Ignorance of the law is no excuse ! Law Maxim. Want to know more ? Nothing is a secret , you just haven't pursued the TRUTH .
The 9th circuit court's reasoning that States can restrict the use of navigable water ways within the States boundaries and that the Right only pertains to use between States or countries is flawed on it's face. If a State can prevent a citizen from using a navigable water way then how is a traveller of that waterway supposed to navigate to another State or country in order to fully realize their Right to begin with?
That ruling is completely wrong I get that they are applying the purpose of federal rights but the northwest territories act prohibited all future states west of the Mississippi from preventing people from freely traveling it wasn't limited to only going from one state to another but anywhere reasonable!
The US has "traded one tyrant, three thousand miles away, for three thousand tyrants, one mile away" I am paraphrasing a line from the movie The Patriot.
At this point, Id forget about the supreme court! They don't do hard cases anymore! The Country hangs by a thread and they refuse to deal with hard answers!
Without a functional legal system (which we don't have) few options remain, some of our legislators recognize this that's why they're acting like scared tyrants (instead of restoring what makes our society work).
Now can you imagine how this would be applied to your local car dealer or repair shop not being allowed to shuttle their customers to and from their business.
So the ranchers can shuttle by bus to the ferry dock, but no further. And the court acknowledge that Lake Chelan is a Federal navigable water, but because it is a lake entirely within the State of Washington this doesn't apply. How come I'm not a lawyer and just came across this issue, but I could easily decide?
@@danepcarver4951 You're missing the point. What you've "decided" is against the rights of the American citizen. This govt overreach is above and beyond what can be considered acceptable. This is getting ridiculous. For almost a decade, they have done nothing but waste the time of these brothers! Let them shuttle their customers for God Sakes! Why the hell should they have to go through this???
@@zariballard My point IS the brothers should have the right to transport their customers over the State highways AND Lake Chelan. Giving one business monopolistic power to operate a ferry on the lake is wrong, just as it would to only allow Greyhound to operate a bus service on the highway.
@Mike Mack The "Kenyan" came out of a white woman from Wichita, Kansas... That makes him a born US citizen regardless of his father being a foreign national was or where he was born. You want to talk about fraud, complain about how the son of a white woman, with an Indonesian step-father, raised partly by his white grandparents, who grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia, sure took full advantage of playing the race card in politics despite his "blackness" being shallow & superficial.
@@Kieselmeister Not true. He may have derived or acquired citizenship from his mother (Jus Sanquinis,) but he would not be a natural born citizen (Jus Soli) for eligibility for the Presidency, if he was born in Kenya to an American mother. That was why Obama’s birth certificate was such a big deal. It’s also why John McCain’s eligibility to run for President was questioned.
@@willybones3890 though that was a violation of both amendments, what I was referring to was the gross amount of areas of public and private life in which the Federal Government assumes to itself powers not granted to it by the Constitution, in violation of both the 9th and 10th Amendments. The current shutdowns in many states now are violations of the 9th Amendment. If one reads our Constitution and then observes our government, the two do not reconcile.
Not to mention a citizen has to pay $10M and wait 10 years just to get a state to stop violating his constitutional rights???? Good thing this is a free country.....
This issue is important to about 20% of Alaska residents! I live in Alaska and MANY people live in towns which are only accessible by water or air, and air access is not safe much of the time due to Mountains, fog or wind/weather.
I have been up Lake Chelan years ago, very pretty and nice place to go. It appears that some company has the State Government in their back pocket to limit the access to Lake Chelan.
Bull Gates has his property on Lake Washington. He has his mega yacht. I don't think he is getting in the way of Chelan use. I have friends and Microsoft friends. A lot have 2nd places. This is the state being dicky. You can just run up to Stehican. Many moons ago. The road went out there. To hard to keep open. landslides and snow.
Until people are ready to actually donate their blood for the freedoms we have as a country, the government (no matter how incompetent), will rule over you. (Tyranny) Stand your ground and start showing up at your state representative office. And your senators too. 👍🇺🇸
It is, therefore, possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on nearby computer moniter or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be embedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory Resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with Subliminal Intensity! US Patent 6 5 0 61 48 B2 .....
This reminds me of the case where Pan Am had exclusive rights for international flights. TWA owned by Howard Hughs wanted to compete and a corrupt congress stopped them from getting permission.
Or like the time everyone figured out Teflon caused cancer and had contaminated 99% of liquid water on our planet. Thereby poisoning people for generations. The EPA only fined them $150,000 for poisoning the would and its people. When people started to wonder why the fine was so little, it turned out those that ran the EPA were the same people who ran the companies doing to poisoning.
So let me see if I have this straight, it's okay to walk for miles and miles through the mountains but it's not okay to canoe through the mountains!. I don't really see the difference. Simply two different ways to get to the same place. Somebody's getting some Kick back here.
As far as I can tell there are more lawyers in this country than plumbers. Why not put some to work reviewing and clearing out the deadwood of the statute books?
Pres Biden tried to do that with rich people's tax returns. Wanted to hire accountants who would end up paying for their wages by catching ultra rich cheaters. US citizens allowed themselves to fall for the maga threats that they'll go after a regular citizen. 😅 Who would think that would make billions?
So you can spend the 9 1/2 years in jail while paying $10 M in legal fees instead of working your business raising the $10 M for the legal fees? Good thing this is a free country that respects the Constitution.... 😔 And who said marvin heemeyer was wrong?
That court is no longer Supreme. Just another impotent political fraud. True challenge will come when good law abiding citizens have had enough and no longer believe in the rule of law. 🔥
The laws are very old and so now everybody in the US knows what First Nations People and African American people had to deal with - the laws were mainly passed to prevent them from freedom. Now you're finding out. 🇨🇦
Here's a thought all judges and congressmen shall be prohibited from owning any stocks and bonds and any bank deposits over 1000 dollars shall be public knowledge
Since transport on the lake is a recognized passage on the pacific crest trail, it would fall under the national trails act, thus giving superiority to federal law over state law even though the lake doesn't cross a state boundary. The national scenic trail does. A walking/equestrian trail is just as much a route of free travel/ commerce as an interstate highway. Just a couple holes in the states case.
So how do we get rid of a SUPREME COURT that is only SUPREME in being SUPREMELY wrong on most important issues. The justices have an oath of office that they feel free to violate at THEIR whim, rather than the LAWS OF THE LAND.
In this case the city took Land, an entire city neighborhood, away from the people under eminent domain. This was designed to build roads, schools etc. In this case the city took it to sell to a developer to build a Mall! It was fought. The people living there lost at SCOTUS. The houses were demolished. The developer went bankrupt and the mall was never built. Last time I checked nothing had been done. caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/323/214.html
SCOTUS should have overturned Slaughter-House and given teeth to the P&I clause in McDonald v Chicago. Justice Thomas ruled that way in that case. It's a stain on our Courts and Constitution that it hasn't been corrected already. It is a relic of the Jim Crow days of the US. How any Judge or Justice can honestly support Slaughter-House in 2021 is unforgivable.
competition is a good thing. our government needs to understand that. Our government is so bloated and overbearing that they cannot see that it is the government sticking there nose in every aspect of our lives That they are causing the problem.
And the right to travel. Are we limited to travel just on roadways and sidewalks. If the deep lakes and rivers are restricted then what stops the government from restricting all travel.
Corporate monopolies are here to stay. 3 media companies for the whole of america, 2 mobile carriers, etc etc. All hail the age of the corporate dystopia. You really have no choice.
Your mobile carrier information is incorrect, as there are three very large carriers (AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile/Sprint) and a myriad of smaller carriers. BTW, those large mobile carriers owe very few of the mobile towers your phone talks to as most are owned by others and the carriers lease the towers and equipment.
@@Supersonicff-dw6bs Nice try, but I consider two companies that profit-share to be one company. And all those, "smaller carriers" are owned by "parent companies" who actually control their operation. My old neighbor held a high position in a communications company, she only worked 3 days a week and oversaw seminars and retreats every couple months. I had never seen a 60+ year old woman giggle until I asked her about the rampant profitsharing-monopolizing in the communications sector. She actually giggled and said, "My company does that" with a grin.
@@johnnymcblaze So you're trying to tell me AT&T, Verizon, and T-mobile/Sprint aren't 3 separate companies? Did your neighbor tell you the Earth is flat as well? Yes, the big 3 also own so of the other smaller market share brands but there are numerous providers that are not subsidiaries of the big 3. Here is your proof that even the top 3 providers own very few cellular towers in the US and lease the towers and equipment from other companies. www.airwaveadvisors.com/blog/cell-tower-companies/
It would be nice to see this resolved with public access. It differs from state to state. The Louisiana Supreme Court has pretty much excluded the public from certain navigable waters which go through private property....annual flood waters....open tidal marshes.
The federal government is violating the United states CONSTITUTION. In this case and a number of nationwide issues. The primary roll of the federal government is to make sure states aren't violating the United states CONSTITUTION. No here we are the federal government doing just that violating the United states CONSTITUTION!
The Soviet of Washington is using these same tactics to force small tug boat companies out of business in the Puget Sound area. I finally gave up fighting with them and sold my tug boat for next to nothing and left the soviet state.
Again the political class restricts commerce probably to the benefit of their friends. It wasn’t stated here but I suspect the ferry company operating on the lake is politically connected.
NOBODY OWNS THE DAMN WATER AND ALL STATES, ARE FICTION, EXISTING ONLY ON PAPER. STATES CAN NOT OWN WHAT THE PEOPLE OWN BY RIGHT. STATES ARE CREATED BY THE PEOPLE, MAKING THEM OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY. THINK WELL OUTSIDE THE DAMN BOX PEOPLE!
I just had a idea, everyone that voted for President Trump should send him a letter to confirm that they voted for him . Thank you and thank him for his service.
This is exactly like the case when Robert Fulton had an exclusive government granted license to ferry passengers on the Hudson river. Cornelius Vanderbilt snuck in and competed with Fulton with no public money and a much lower cost. See the Tom Woods talk on this here: ruclips.net/video/BbIIPtLEVbA/видео.html (Its all good but pertinent info starts at 2:15)
Get Chelan County involved and let them flex their county rights! The 1st. Amendment should defeat the onerous regulation of an authoratrian government infringing on individual rights. Individual rights are covered pretty well in Art.1, Section 1 in the WA ST Constitution, also!
Anyone who really believes the nonsense that federally navigable waterways and the right to use them only applies to interstate and international navigation is not a real American. Absolutely any body of water connected with the oceans or any other federally navigable waterway is itself a federally navigable waterway. Any water and its floor below the high tide mark belongs to the people and may not be regulated, taxed, or access limited by any entity, public or private. This means that beaches and the access to those beaches belongs to the people. So does any body of water connected in any manner with the seas or major rivers of the USA. No private landowner may land lock the public from beaches adjoining their property. Private landowners may only designate and separate from the rest of their property a right of way connecting the beach to the nearest public road. Nor may any state or local government restrict anchoring or mooring rights of boat or ship owners other than to maintain federal navigation channels or markers. Only the US Coast Guard has the right to regulate or restrict the use of the seas and waterways connected with the seas. It is time for We The People to force our rights down the throats of those traitors who disagree with this, strip them of their US citizenship, and exile them to Communist China, North Korea, or some other totalitarian hellhole.
You correctly state the majority of the law regulating waterways however, please note, there are exceptions (i.e. the “Sand Hole” in Lloyd Neck, NY where the navigational and underwater rights were given to private individuals under King George before the USA was a nation, and then which were later upheld, see page 1 paragraph 1 of the first Supreme Court).
@@elizabethreichelt5173 , Yes, their are private plots of land whose deed goes back to before the founding of the USA as a nation. Our founders saw fit to include a clause which barred the impairment of existing contracts in order to garner votes from those delegates who owned such land when the Constitution was up for ratification, in much the same way that the 3/5 compromise was struck to prevent slave states from leaving the nascent USA. The slave issue was settled in the Civil War. That was good. The ban on impairment of contracts which left mini fifedoms was not settled and is a mixed blessing. So, as you stated, we are left with plots of land such as the "Sand Hole" in Lloyd Neck, NY, with deeds which go back to King George the III. Those lucky enough to own such plots are exempt from being forced to pay local taxes in most cases, and are exempt from a lot of other potential burdens such as eminent domain seizures and other illicit land grabs. Sometimes we must take the bad with the good. Perhaps the rest of the nation should be forced to observe the ban on the obligation to pay real property taxes since they are arbitrary and capricious, tax one's inalienable right to own what one has purchased (the power to tax equals the power to destroy as per the case which overturned all poll taxes and literacy tests as applied to voting rights), and enable all sorts of corruption mostly by local government. Eminent domain seizure as it was expanded to way unconstitutional limits under the evil and corrupt Kelo decision must also be reversed and restricted to the plain black and white English of the Constitution which limits such seizure to government only seizure for direct public use as spelled out in the Constitution. The language contortions used by the thin minority to justify Kelo were laughable at best and a bastardization of the real intent by the founders to prevent exactly what the Kelo majority allowed- the illicit theft of property by government on behalf of private entities who don't feel obligated to play by the same rules of capitalism they defend so vociferously when things go their way. The prior cases used by the thin majority in Kelo involved among others the Hawaiian transfer of land owned by greedy aristocrats to the people and had nothing to do with the sort of unconstitutional seizure enabled by Kelo. Kelo must be reversed. Our founders had every intent to force greedy private land grabbers to pay what the seller wants or don't purchase the property, no matter what. No private entity ever has the right to seize the property of another by any means, including the use of bribed government officials. Public use means public use, not some potential tax benefit or potential job benefit as envisioned by big corporate. "Use" is a very different word than "benefit." If the founders meant benefit, they would have said "benefit" and not "use." It is interesting how things that benefit the rich such as deeds for the "Sand Hole" in Lloyd Harbor, NY are interpreted literally as they are supposed to be, but when the rich want to take from the rest of us, courts go out of their way to twist, contort, and bend the letter and intent of the Constitution to mean whatever the rich want it to mean. That is called bribery and influence peddling at its worst. It must be stopped. That is what the rich and the powerful fear the most, and that is why gun control is pushed by the rich and the powerful at our expense. We know that this is true because the gun grabbers keep going after so called assault weapons which account for about 0.5% of all gun murders while pistols account for 98% of all gun murders. Other types of long guns such as hunting rifles and shotguns only account for another 1.5% of all gun murders. One is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with fists and feet than shot with an assault weapon. So, the real reason for so called assault weapons bans is due to the threat posed by those who have these weapons to the rich and the bodyguards who protect them from angry citizens. Ultimately, the rich and their bodyguards want to be the only armed civilians in the nation. Add illicit land grabs enabled by the evil and corrupt Kelo decision to the rampant destruction of and theft from the middle class by the rich and one can easily see why the rich fear the rest of us. Keep in mind that the rich and powerful and those who guard them will always be able to obtain permits for exactly the kind of so called assault weapons which they don't want the rest of us to have for "our safety." Gun control is not about our safety. Gun control is about the safety of those wealthy and powerful people who abuse their wealth and power to steal from and abuse the rest of us. Just as the US Constitution recognizes the validity of existing contracts and the courts uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution, we must force our government to uphold the letter and spirit of our Constitution on all other matters. And yes, the 4th amendment really does ban private search and seizure every bit as much as government search and seizure, on all private property, not just the curtilage. That is because the amendment makes no distinction between government and private, not location on one's property. All language manipulations to the contrary are again, void and are just used by the courts to roll back our rights in a manner that must have the founders rolling over and over in their graves.
@@keepseak_ret7772 I thought the Indian Nation is a captive nation inside of a nation (America) as such how does America have any right to tax a product produced in their (Indian ) nation ??
But this would require people, children to be taught about their Founders and their belief and faith in the Creator God. Who has given us those rights, unthinkable.
I remember a very similar story about an ambulance service that was being barred from servicing an area near by because of a cities contract with another company further away.... instead of waterway it was public roadways I guess.
Nine years and millions of billable dollars later, this is the best we've got. The 14th Amendment and the Slaughterhouse case, really? Even RBG knew there was a problem with the 14th Amendment. You know, Congress hadn't the lawful quorum to pass it, nor did the Citizenry vote for it's ratification... privileges and immunities can be granted or denied, see the problem? National Citizenship or Federal citizenship? Whatever became of the Citizen's of the United States, you know, the only ones mentioned in the Constitution?
Justice (or at least a decision) delayed is justice denied. The system drags it out so people will give up. That's how the 'system' takes over, takes liberty and takes the pursuit of happiness. A thousand cuts...
Thomas Jefferson expanded our nation on navigable waters. Who knew the state of Washington would even exist while the Corps of Discovery explored and navigated the upper Missouri and Columbia River Basins.
How about explaining why it takes over 2 years to even get your case heard. What happened to the right of a speedy trial?. Is that just for criminal cases???
Could the Courtney Bros. fly their customers to the location or can the state regulate the air transportation of customers. As I understand it flight would be a federally regulated activity and the state can not limit that. If so then why would the state be allowed to infringe upon the federal governments rights?
Flying people is highly costly and if it's a float plane its even higher due to the limited amount of people. The cost of aviation fuel. Pilot and service cost. Boat's are less cost . safe and possible could be sailing boats as well.
My point was that despite the obvious cost considerations. Why would a state government be allowed to infringe upon an area in which the federal government clearly has jurisdiction, and also if the state cannot limit air transport why allow them to limit water transport. Would this allow the state to disallow certain airlines in their state?
At least the politicians involved are honest and are consistent in opposing the ability to transport after accepting the bribe. In New Jersey they are dishonest and will take the money but not stay paid off!
Still requires licensing unfortunately. Coast Guard and states operating permits. Thats the crux of the case no matter how you look at it. Its about control and $$. Look at all the bars, restaurants salons and gyms at the mercy of the licensing boards controlled by the tyrant governors.
Between pro-bono work, like the IJ is doing here, and the possibility that these brothers have deep pockets...it’s pretty easy to wrap around that ability.
Isn't it disgusting that"we" the people even have to have discussions, videos, counsel about this..,............ This Earth is beyond corrupt I can't wait for Jesus to come back
I feel What makes United States of America unique over other countries is our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution and it says in very clear print these rights shall not be infringed! Why isn't the government helping to protect these people rights?
![Resolved: The Supreme Court Should Overrule Qualified Immunity [21st Annual Faculty Conference]](/img/1.gif)
Government can do anything they want as long as citizens continue to allow them to do so
You r so right i think people have become robots obey obey
Yes they can even steal elections
No, Governments only have the powers the citizens give to their government. We are not the governments citizens, we are the citizens of our government.
The founders fought over a 3% trade tariff. We pay 30% income tax not counting states tax for many. Plus taxes on every single goods and services you use and people think it’s acceptable. People in US territories pay that tyrannical tax and they don’t even get representation in government. It’s time for America 2.0 but the people are too pacified now
So your argument is exactly what I already said. You commented as opposed and argued what I said...the founders didn’t allow uneducated people to vote and this is why
One derivative takeaway from this case is unless you have the money to finance this kind of protracted litigation, you are effectively denied access to justice.
From Lil Giant That statement is true even of simple traffic cases. If you cannot afford to pay a traffic fine of up to $200 OR to claim not guilty and pay the added court costs above the flat $200, then you cannot afford a ticket. Traffic court means that if you plead “not guilty” they AUTOMATICALLY find you guilty. They will not allow you to speak in your own defense (A three second answer, preferably consisting of a simple yes or no is required.) NO extenuating circumstances are allowed unless you bring an attorney (and then HE, not you, gets to speak). If you cannot afford a (required) guilty fine for a ticket, or an attorney to misrepresent you, then you cannot drive a car in Illinois.
Go to any traffic court in Illinois. There is a traffic jam for those pleading guilty and 1) a few citizens obviously inexperienced with the “shut up” style of the court system, recognizable by their effort to get in more than the standard three seconds allowed 2) PLUS SEVERAL WEALTHIER GUYS WITH THEIR LAWYERS who either get off, or get consequences so minimal it is obvious they paid their lawyer quite a bit of money.
For instance, a guy arrested in his garage for DUI because he was having an argument with his wife and finally, in disgust, went out to his car in his own, private, closed door garage to get out of her presence. He had had two hard drinks during the argument and he was a small man. He went to sleep and woke up to the police standing over him. His wife had called the police and claimed he was drunk and sleeping in the garage. The breathalyzer test showed EXACTLY the legal limit for drinking and driving. He was NOT driving and was on his own property, but that made NO difference. He was charged with DUI and spent the next three years unable to work as a truck driver because of the DUI. He worked low-paying jobs with no transportation because he could not afford to pay the few thousand dollars it takes to have a defective breathalyzer installed and monitored, in order to start the car. The fines were so much he had NO food budget and could not get a second job due to the lack of transportation. He was able to get transportation during the third year without being required to get a breathalyzer, and find another part-time job to help him pay the mounting unpaid fines.
He was pretty doggone skinny by then. The only silver lining in this whole dark story is he lost the house the very first year and his wife could not keep it, she divorced him and there was no alimony due to his low income, and she found some other sucker to marry her. (She was quite beautiful, but very nasty.) He is now doing better, but I wonder where a guy with only high school is going to get another career without more education. BECAUSE HE HAD TWO DRINKS, WAS MARRIED TO A WITCH, AND WAS SLEEPING IN HIS CAR IN THE GARAGE, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD NOT LEFT THE HOUSE THE ENTIRE DAY. HE WAS NOT DRIVING. The whole DUI is just a money-making scheme. They do not care if you are innocent or not-just as long as they get paid. Betcha’ the judges get a kickback for all those defective breathalyzers.
That contrasts nicely with the wealthy guys accused of DUI who usually end up paying a fine and court costs, but due to a nice expensive lawyer they end up with a reduced charge with no DUI record and no jail time and total ability to drive, and/or getting off with probation or a short confinement at home, during which they probably hire someone to drive them around or get their wife to help. Must be nice to be rich. No inconvenience and no consequences. Traffic court is a breeze.
@@henryvalero9235 Rule 308 may sky.
Not so, read my post.
@@timburke4837 From Lil Giant I have no idea what your response, Rule 308 may sky means.
@@jeffpricefamily3905 From Lil Giant. Do not know what you mean by Not so. Read my post. Do not see any post by you. Maybe it was deleted.
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.”
― Thomas Jefferson
Yep!
SIC SEMPER EVELLO MORTUM TYRANUS!
Yes, just don't lop off the provision in the quote every time YOU feel, think or whatever so-called "injustice" becomes so-called "law". THEN resistance becomes a duty is what Jefferson meant. Further, without context, the quote becomes less than useless and subject to being misapplied entirely, as are the fraud criminal/traitors/riotous/anarchists, so-called "peaceful" "civilly disobedient" mobsters so-called "dutifully resisting" so-called "laws" by rioting, looting, and all measure of amoral opportunism without a shred of cohesive reasoning or indisputable evidence supporting ANY of their actions - unlike ANYTHING I know of in history - except, maybe the biblical account of the siege of Jericho, i.e., "sound and fury signifying nothing."
@@jeffwalther3935 You missed the point, the anarchist, criminals are not obeying the constitution as are the politicians.
If you can read then you know this quote is correct for the context...
@@kenkarish826 No sir, TJ was talking about monarchial English, foreign, alien rule establishing that law, . . . Historical and issue context is what is meant by context.
To compare any protestations about our government today to our colonial masters two and a half centuries ago IS so misleading, out of context it is offensive to their memory, our values and strugggles, heritage and, apparently what America's past, present and future is about too, that such false claims of affinity become as inflammatory as secular, heretical blasphemy against America and Americans, imho, so I commented as such.
It wasn't the state but several years ago in my home town a kayaker was arrested by city police for kayaking on the river through town, his defense was that the river was listed as navigable, case was thrown out.
They tried to tack on a "inciting public panic" charge but witnesses said the only people panicking were the cops, that charge was thrown out as well.
That is a ridiculous set of police officers who scared up that trouble.
Every judge on the Ninth circuit should be not only thrown off the court but also thrown in jail and sued beyond recognition.
Not so, read my post.
@@jeffpricefamily3905 yes so...the ninth is corrupt
@@willcollier6623 You did not read my post so comment to this.
Here is the answer that they are NOT telling you about what is really going on. When you hire a lawyer or an attorney to " RE - PRESENT " you in court you loose your rights, why ?
Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client:
The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, - not to the client, - and wherever the duties
to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice,
- the former must yield to the latter. -
- Clients are also called "wards" of the court - in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. ( This is because you don't know the law like you are supposed to and are considered an " INFANT " not capable of understanding . GET WITH IT PEOPLE ! )
Corpus Juris Secundum - assumes - courts will operate in a lawful manner. ( REALY ? )
If the accused makes this assumption, he may learn, to his detriment, through experience, that certain questions of law,
- including the question of personal jurisdiction, " may never be raised and addressed, especially
when the accused is represented by the bar. " -
( This is why you don't get justice in court ! ! ! ! ! ! B A R stands for " British Accreditation Registry " .
bar-registrars.org/
projectspeak.net/the-history-of-the-british-accreditation-registry
(Sometimes licensed counsel appears to take on the characteristics of a fox guarding the hen house.)
Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction.
The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. ( NOT THE ATTORNEY )
Exercise your Right To TraveL
KENT ET AL.
v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE.
357 U.S. 116 (1958) No. 481.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued April 10, 1958.
Decided June 16, 1958.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT.
Paragraph 15.
The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. So much is conceded by the Solicitor General. In Anglo-Saxon law that right was emerging at least as early as the Magna Carta.[12] Chafee, 126*126 Three Human Rights in the Constitution of 1787 (1956), 171-181, 187 et seq., shows how deeply engrained in our history this freedom of movement is. Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, may be necessary for a livelihood. It may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. See Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 44; Williams v. Fears, 179 U. S. 270, 274; Edwards v. California, 314 U. S. 160. "Our nation," wrote Chafee, "has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases." Id., at 197.
Freedom of movement also has large social values. As Chafee put it:
There are TWO sides of the Law. First is the Common Law, dealing with Flesh and Blood Men and Women / Individuals , and then there is Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, dealing with Commerce, Corporation Law, Trust, Estate, Equity law, ect.
Men and Women , or the people, have Rights protected by the Constitution of the United States FOR The United States of America in our preamble and in our first ten ammendments or Natural Rights. Corporations are Artifical Entities and HAVE NO RIGHTS , but are goverened by Rules, Regulations, Statutes and Codes.
HALE
v. HENKEL.
201 U.S. 43 (1906)
No. 340.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued January 4, 5, 1906.
Decided March 12, 1906.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
( Paragraph 50 ? )
Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of the corporation with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. 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. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
Driving is for Commercial purposes.
F E D E R A L 18 U.S. Code Part 1, Ch. 2, § 31 - Definitions
(6) Motor vehicle.
The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and “used for commercial purposes” on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.
(10) Used for commercial purposes.-
The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or
other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.
49 U.S. Code TRANSPORTATION
SUBTITLE VI-MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS (§§ 30101 - 33118)
PART B-COMMERCIAL (§§ 31100 - 31708)
CHAPTER 313-COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS (§§ 31301 - 31317)
§ 31301. Definitions
(13)
(D) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not obtained a commercial driver’s license;
(E) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual does not have in his or her possession a commercial driver’s license unless the individual provides, by the date that the individual must appear in court or pay any fine with respect to the citation, to the enforcement authority that issued the citation proof that the individual held a valid commercial driver’s license on the date of the citation;
(F) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not met the minimum testing standards-
(i)
under section 31305(a)(3) for the specific class of vehicle the individual is operating; or
(ii)
under section 31305(a)(5) for the type of cargo the vehicle is carrying; and
In Black's Law Dictionary 8th ed. there are two distinct definitions.
1. Capitis Demunito. A. Maxima, B. Minima, C. Minor. This is for Artificial Entities. This is a must read ! ! ! Look at your NAME on your drivers license, ALL CAPITOL LETTERS.
2. right of family integrity. This is for We The People. This is a must read ! ! !
The only TYRANNY here is your IGNORANCE of the LAW. Ignorance of the law is no excuse ! Law Maxim. Want to know more ? Nothing is a secret , you just haven't pursued the TRUTH .
@@jeffpricefamily3905 so you are saying that the ninth circuit is well within their jurisdiction to run rampant over most men just because they represent the majority within themselves and unless we know every facet of the law we stand no chance of justice? Common (sense) law should take presidency over all other because of our constitution. Other wise one should take the law into ones own hands and no one should wonder why they do.
@@willcollier6623 There is so much more to this than a little snippet can reveal but, you are correct, a judge can only rule on what is put before them and if you are ignorant of the law then you will think that what you say and do are right when you are actually putting yourself under Admiralty / Maritime Jurisdiction - Military Law - there are no rights in military law. The common language we use is what is tought in public schools and yet the people think it is just common language when it is Admiralty / Maritime language, so when you go to court you are already under Martial Law just by the language you use, easy pickings. I don't have a drivers license, I don't pay income taxes because I don't get involved in commercial contracts. Everything is a contract and we the people have a right to or not to contract.
This is even more clear when likened to the private shuttle vans operated by every hotel in the nation near an airport. This is simply an absurd overreach by the state. Thank you IJ
They are not actually going after real argument here. There is a difference between private (persoanl) use and commercial use.
@WebCity Films nor can we stop the state from holding a monopoly.
A lefty state‼️
@@markmitera4521 Wow! Fascist much? Study and learn non-revisionist world history specifically the rise of 20th century European dictatorships.
@@kellikelli4413 When it comes to elected officials and non elected officials there is no left or right.
There's not Two Parties. They give the illusion that they're opposing parties to keep us divided and fighting each other. All the while they ALL are corrupt, captured and controlled by the same Corporate Cartels.
"We have but One Evil Party but with Two Names."
That law screams of corruption. If you want to give your customer a ride, you don't need anyone's permission to do that.
This is why its an issue working its way through the court system. Hopefully SCOTUS will take it up. Interesting case.
@Saiyan Seeds caveat emptor you fascist fuck.
Welcome to the Totalitarian States of America.
@@willybones3890 SCOTUS denied the hearing on January 11, 2021.
@@ChrisPBacon-yz6nk So...they decided not to take it up because they believe the States rights holds precedence?
I had to listen a few times because I'm flabbergasted. I live on a major international and interstate waterway system. I know people who live on the islands. Washington state is causing undue hardship to its own citizens. It's nothing short of tyranny.
KA Fleury Exactly. I can't believe the govt has been putting these two brothers through this nonsense for ten years!!! Let them use the river! Wth???
Not tyranny, Ignorance. Here is what I posted.
Here is the answer that they are NOT telling you about what is really going on. When you hire a lawyer or an attorney to " RE - PRESENT " you in court you loose your rights, why ?
Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client:
The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, - not to the client, - and wherever the duties
to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice,
- the former must yield to the latter. -
- Clients are also called "wards" of the court - in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. ( This is because you don't know the law like you are supposed to and are considered an " INFANT " not capable of understanding . GET WITH IT PEOPLE ! )
Corpus Juris Secundum - assumes - courts will operate in a lawful manner. ( REALY ? )
If the accused makes this assumption, he may learn, to his detriment, through experience, that certain questions of law,
- including the question of personal jurisdiction, " may never be raised and addressed, especially
when the accused is represented by the bar. " -
( This is why you don't get justice in court ! ! ! ! ! ! B A R stands for " British Accreditation Registry " .
bar-registrars.org/
projectspeak.net/the-history-of-the-british-accreditation-registry
(Sometimes licensed counsel appears to take on the characteristics of a fox guarding the hen house.)
Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction.
The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. ( NOT THE ATTORNEY )
Exercise your Right To TraveL
KENT ET AL.
v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE.
357 U.S. 116 (1958) No. 481.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued April 10, 1958.
Decided June 16, 1958.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT.
Paragraph 15.
The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. So much is conceded by the Solicitor General. In Anglo-Saxon law that right was emerging at least as early as the Magna Carta.[12] Chafee, 126*126 Three Human Rights in the Constitution of 1787 (1956), 171-181, 187 et seq., shows how deeply engrained in our history this freedom of movement is. Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, may be necessary for a livelihood. It may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. See Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 44; Williams v. Fears, 179 U. S. 270, 274; Edwards v. California, 314 U. S. 160. "Our nation," wrote Chafee, "has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases." Id., at 197.
Freedom of movement also has large social values. As Chafee put it:
There are TWO sides of the Law. First is the Common Law, dealing with Flesh and Blood Men and Women / Individuals , and then there is Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, dealing with Commerce, Corporation Law, Trust, Estate, Equity law, ect.
Men and Women , or the people, have Rights protected by the Constitution of the United States FOR The United States of America in our preamble and in our first ten ammendments or Natural Rights. Corporations are Artifical Entities and HAVE NO RIGHTS , but are goverened by Rules, Regulations, Statutes and Codes.
HALE
v. HENKEL.
201 U.S. 43 (1906)
No. 340.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued January 4, 5, 1906.
Decided March 12, 1906.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
( Paragraph 50 ? )
Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of the corporation with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. 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. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
Driving is for Commercial purposes.
F E D E R A L 18 U.S. Code Part 1, Ch. 2, § 31 - Definitions
(6) Motor vehicle.
The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and “used for commercial purposes” on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.
(10) Used for commercial purposes.-
The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or
other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.
49 U.S. Code TRANSPORTATION
SUBTITLE VI-MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS (§§ 30101 - 33118)
PART B-COMMERCIAL (§§ 31100 - 31708)
CHAPTER 313-COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS (§§ 31301 - 31317)
§ 31301. Definitions
(13)
(D) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not obtained a commercial driver’s license;
(E) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual does not have in his or her possession a commercial driver’s license unless the individual provides, by the date that the individual must appear in court or pay any fine with respect to the citation, to the enforcement authority that issued the citation proof that the individual held a valid commercial driver’s license on the date of the citation;
(F) driving a commercial motor vehicle when the individual has not met the minimum testing standards-
(i)
under section 31305(a)(3) for the specific class of vehicle the individual is operating; or
(ii)
under section 31305(a)(5) for the type of cargo the vehicle is carrying; and
In Black's Law Dictionary 8th ed. there are two distinct definitions.
1. Capitis Demunito. A. Maxima, B. Minima, C. Minor. This is for Artificial Entities. This is a must read ! ! ! Look at your NAME on your drivers license, ALL CAPITOL LETTERS.
2. right of family integrity. This is for We The People. This is a must read ! ! !
The only TYRANNY here is your IGNORANCE of the LAW. Ignorance of the law is no excuse ! Law Maxim. Want to know more ? Nothing is a secret , you just haven't pursued the TRUTH .
We have the right as citizens to freely travel they shouldn't interfere with this unless there is a compelling public interest!
that is exactly what it is all about control.
The 9th circuit court's reasoning that States can restrict the use of navigable water ways within the States boundaries and that the Right only pertains to use between States or countries is flawed on it's face. If a State can prevent a citizen from using a navigable water way then how is a traveller of that waterway supposed to navigate to another State or country in order to fully realize their Right to begin with?
That ruling is completely wrong I get that they are applying the purpose of federal rights but the northwest territories act prohibited all future states west of the Mississippi from preventing people from freely traveling it wasn't limited to only going from one state to another but anywhere reasonable!
The US has "traded one tyrant, three thousand miles away, for three thousand tyrants, one mile away"
I am paraphrasing a line from the movie The Patriot.
Not so ! Read my post.
Your first mistake was asking for permission. People in the boat?? There just friends visiting
@Javier N Easier to flip the bird than to obey devil worshiping tyrants.
At this point, Id forget about the supreme court! They don't do hard cases anymore! The Country hangs by a thread and they refuse to deal with hard answers!
SCOTUS = SOME CRAPPY OLD TOTALLY USELESS STUFF
14th Amendment
Without a functional legal system (which we don't have) few options remain, some of our legislators recognize this that's why they're acting like scared tyrants (instead of restoring what makes our society work).
That is exactly why we call it the 9th circus
Now can you imagine how this would be applied to your local car dealer or repair shop not being allowed to shuttle their customers to and from their business.
So the ranchers can shuttle by bus to the ferry dock, but no further. And the court acknowledge that Lake Chelan is a Federal navigable water, but because it is a lake entirely within the State of Washington this doesn't apply. How come I'm not a lawyer and just came across this issue, but I could easily decide?
@@danepcarver4951 You're missing the point. What you've "decided" is against the rights of the American citizen. This govt overreach is above and beyond what can be considered acceptable. This is getting ridiculous. For almost a decade, they have done nothing but waste the time of these brothers! Let them shuttle their customers for God Sakes! Why the hell should they have to go through this???
@@zariballard My point IS the brothers should have the right to transport their customers over the State highways AND Lake Chelan. Giving one business monopolistic power to operate a ferry on the lake is wrong, just as it would to only allow Greyhound to operate a bus service on the highway.
So the 9th circus overturned the 14th amendment...
Just call it as it is.
Certainly is the way I’m understanding it.
So goes the Republic.
@Mike Mack it’s funny how we not looking @ our legislators but play politics with figurer heads, be it Kenyan r English they r fukin is all!!!
@Mike Mack The "Kenyan" came out of a white woman from Wichita, Kansas...
That makes him a born US citizen regardless of his father being a foreign national was or where he was born.
You want to talk about fraud, complain about how the son of a white woman, with an Indonesian step-father, raised partly by his white grandparents, who grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia, sure took full advantage of playing the race card in politics despite his "blackness" being shallow & superficial.
@@Kieselmeister Not true. He may have derived or acquired citizenship from his mother (Jus Sanquinis,) but he would not be a natural born citizen (Jus Soli) for eligibility for the Presidency, if he was born in Kenya to an American mother. That was why Obama’s birth certificate was such a big deal. It’s also why John McCain’s eligibility to run for President was questioned.
The 9th Circuit has completely gone off the rails.
Crazy judges. Will they ever learn that they do not own their own little private ant farm? We have a constitution.
Correction we DID have a constitution.
Which they redifine as they see fit....Left or Right. Both do it.
@@willybones3890 I'm still wondering when they'll remember the 9th and 10th Amendments.
@@frankmueller2781 Wasn't the affordable care act ruled as a "tax", therefore allowed to stand? Assuming that's what you were referring to?
@@willybones3890 though that was a violation of both amendments, what I was referring to was the gross amount of areas of public and private life in which the Federal Government assumes to itself powers not granted to it by the Constitution, in violation of both the 9th and 10th Amendments. The current shutdowns in many states now are violations of the 9th Amendment. If one reads our Constitution and then observes our government, the two do not reconcile.
0:22 - Justice delayed is justice denied. You've already lost.
Not to mention a citizen has to pay $10M and wait 10 years just to get a state to stop violating his constitutional rights???? Good thing this is a free country.....
@@rosebarnes9625 payback is a ..... the legal system is like a doubling pot card game.. those that can fight against the system can reap great reward.
This issue is important to about 20% of Alaska residents! I live in Alaska and MANY people live in towns which are only accessible by water or air, and air access is not safe much of the time due to Mountains, fog or wind/weather.
we can only ignore people/states violating our rights for so long before we stand up and take them back. This is going to get bloody
Maybe hang in there help coming
I agree that these abuses could become bloody.
I have been up Lake Chelan years ago, very pretty and nice place to go. It appears that some company has the State Government in their back pocket to limit the access to Lake Chelan.
Bill gates?
Washington State should legalize prostitution cause all their politicians are WHORES
Bull Gates has his property on Lake Washington. He has his mega yacht. I don't think he is getting in the way of Chelan use. I have friends and Microsoft friends. A lot have 2nd places. This is the state being dicky. You can just run up to Stehican. Many moons ago. The road went out there. To hard to keep open. landslides and snow.
Under the treaty with the Sealth Indians, all navigable waters are public roads. Any stream or river which runs year round is a public right of way.
And Indian treaties are afforded the utmost respect by the US government?
@@TheUllrichjI think that treaty favours the US government or they would not have agreed.
Until people are ready to actually donate their blood for the freedoms we have as a country, the government (no matter how incompetent), will rule over you. (Tyranny) Stand your ground and start showing up at your state representative office. And your senators too. 👍🇺🇸
My wife is a retired judge/current attorney. This state is run by lawyer who have a god complex.
It is, therefore, possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on nearby computer moniter or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be embedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory Resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with Subliminal Intensity!
US Patent 6 5 0 61 48 B2
.....
J S yes. Another tactic with a more simple application is the plant the idea of disease and individuals will slowly acquire the symptoms.
J S that sounds like something I would write. :)
Just Moi these criminals will be placed into hard labor prison to work the rest of their natural lives.
I am glad I stuck around to listen to “Now for the rest of the story.” Something so simple has such major implications. Thanks.
This reminds me of the case where Pan Am had exclusive rights for international flights.
TWA owned by Howard Hughs wanted to compete and a corrupt congress stopped them from getting permission.
Or like the time everyone figured out Teflon caused cancer and had contaminated 99% of liquid water on our planet. Thereby poisoning people for generations. The EPA only fined them $150,000 for poisoning the would and its people. When people started to wonder why the fine was so little, it turned out those that ran the EPA were the same people who ran the companies doing to poisoning.
@@johnnymcblaze covid? Remdesiver(sp?)
More Regulations! Higher Taxes!
This is a case that needs to be won.
NS,
A mediocre comment.
It Will be one, by one side or the Other ! ...
So let me see if I have this straight, it's okay to walk for miles and miles through the mountains but it's not okay to canoe through the mountains!. I don't really see the difference. Simply two different ways to get to the same place. Somebody's getting some
Kick back here.
Please keep the good work up. 🤠
Make your business a lake tour. A big lake tour with a stop over at select locations.
The 9th Circuit Court must be smoking some powerful stuff to make a ruling like that. Overturn this BS. Thank you for doing the right thing.
As far as I can tell there are more lawyers in this country than plumbers. Why not put some to work reviewing and clearing out the deadwood of the statute books?
My plumber asks for more than my attorney. They can all go pound sand. Electrician is on watch also.
Pres Biden tried to do that with rich people's tax returns. Wanted to hire accountants who would end up paying for their wages by catching ultra rich cheaters.
US citizens allowed themselves to fall for the maga threats that they'll go after a regular citizen. 😅
Who would think that would make billions?
Go get'em IJ!
Sounds like Washington law as normal, mess with the people as much as you can.
Perhaps they should have started shuttling and let them prove you were breaking a law?
Interesting. I like that idea.
So you can spend the 9 1/2 years in jail while paying $10 M in legal fees instead of working your business raising the $10 M for the legal fees?
Good thing this is a free country that respects the Constitution.... 😔
And who said marvin heemeyer was wrong?
@@rosebarnes9625 killdozer
@@walkingman8943 More like fast attack boat.
America is so screwed. Basic freedoms need to be challenged in the Supreme Court.
That court is no longer Supreme. Just another impotent political fraud.
True challenge will come when good law abiding citizens have had enough and no longer believe in the rule of law. 🔥
@@kickingagainstthepricks4059 Marvin Heemeyer?
The laws are very old and so now everybody in the US knows what First Nations People and African American people had to deal with - the laws were mainly passed to prevent them from freedom. Now you're finding out.
🇨🇦
Here's a thought all judges and congressmen shall be prohibited from owning any stocks and bonds and any bank deposits over 1000 dollars shall be public knowledge
What a great organization. Keep up the good fight. Wish I could work with you.
Slaves shouldn't expect justice.....
Thank you for tenacity!
Keep Pressing!!!
9 th Circuit Court? What else can we expect form that outfit?
Top notch, gentlemen, thanks from all Americans! Subscribed.
Since transport on the lake is a recognized passage on the pacific crest trail, it would fall under the national trails act, thus giving superiority to federal law over state law even though the lake doesn't cross a state boundary. The national scenic trail does. A walking/equestrian trail is just as much a route of free travel/ commerce as an interstate highway. Just a couple holes in the states case.
So how do we get rid of a SUPREME COURT that is only SUPREME in being SUPREMELY wrong on most important issues.
The justices have an oath of office that they feel free to violate at THEIR whim, rather than the LAWS OF THE LAND.
Dred Scott.
Buck vs Bell 1927
Forced sterilization.
In this case the city took
Land, an entire city neighborhood, away from the people under eminent domain.
This was designed to build roads, schools etc.
In this case the city took it to sell to a developer to build a Mall!
It was fought. The people living there lost at SCOTUS.
The houses were demolished.
The developer went bankrupt and the mall was never built.
Last time I checked nothing had been done.
caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/323/214.html
I thought you wanted bad decisions not ones that upheld the language in the bill of rights and the common law prior to the revolution.
DallasStarsFan citizens United....
SCOTUS should have overturned Slaughter-House and given teeth to the P&I clause in McDonald v Chicago. Justice Thomas ruled that way in that case. It's a stain on our Courts and Constitution that it hasn't been corrected already. It is a relic of the Jim Crow days of the US. How any Judge or Justice can honestly support Slaughter-House in 2021 is unforgivable.
Keep up the good fight for justice!
competition is a good thing. our government needs to understand that. Our government is so bloated and overbearing that they cannot see that it is the government sticking there nose in every aspect of our lives That they are causing the problem.
Kirk, I think the government needs some healthy competition!
It seems to be their sole purpose to criminalize everyone.
Oxymorons of the decade: Washington Superior Court and Washington Supreme Court.
Liking and posting for the Al Gore Rhythm! Staying for the great commentary!
Don't you just love the Ninth Circus?!
This is also happening in Utah on the Colorado and Green River
9th Circuit, that explains the ridiculous nature of the court’s decisions.
them and SDNY (Southern District of New York)
Ask for volunteers to escort the new ferry. These escorts can be armed to defend it from thugs and potential robbers.
And the right to travel. Are we limited to travel just on roadways and sidewalks. If the deep lakes and rivers are restricted then what stops the government from restricting all travel.
Oh that’s coming. No vaccine papers? No travel.
You have the right to travel only by for everything else courts have ruled its a privilege imo it makes no sense
SNAFU Radio on RUclips has a lot of good information on exactly how each citizen can hold government officials accountable.
Courts just drag things out in hopes you run out of money & give up...
We need to occupy our government back
Didn't I see you in the Capitol building the other day. 😎
Corporate monopolies are here to stay. 3 media companies for the whole of america, 2 mobile carriers, etc etc. All hail the age of the corporate dystopia. You really have no choice.
Your mobile carrier information is incorrect, as there are three very large carriers (AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile/Sprint) and a myriad of smaller carriers. BTW, those large mobile carriers owe very few of the mobile towers your phone talks to as most are owned by others and the carriers lease the towers and equipment.
@@Supersonicff-dw6bs Nice try, but I consider two companies that profit-share to be one company. And all those, "smaller carriers" are owned by "parent companies" who actually control their operation. My old neighbor held a high position in a communications company, she only worked 3 days a week and oversaw seminars and retreats every couple months. I had never seen a 60+ year old woman giggle until I asked her about the rampant profitsharing-monopolizing in the communications sector. She actually giggled and said, "My company does that" with a grin.
@@johnnymcblaze So you're trying to tell me AT&T, Verizon, and T-mobile/Sprint aren't 3 separate companies? Did your neighbor tell you the Earth is flat as well? Yes, the big 3 also own so of the other smaller market share brands but there are numerous providers that are not subsidiaries of the big 3. Here is your proof that even the top 3 providers own very few cellular towers in the US and lease the towers and equipment from other companies. www.airwaveadvisors.com/blog/cell-tower-companies/
@@johnnymcblaze Excalty let alone T Mobile, Version and Sprint have bought up all the small companies and two of the large companies have merged.
@@Supersonicff-dw6bs T mobile and Sprint are one company now and have metro pcs and others under them.
It would be nice to see this resolved with public access. It differs from state to state. The Louisiana Supreme Court has pretty much excluded the public from certain navigable waters which go through private property....annual flood waters....open tidal marshes.
The federal government is violating the United states CONSTITUTION. In this case and a number of nationwide issues. The primary roll of the federal government is to make sure states aren't violating the United states CONSTITUTION. No here we are the federal government doing just that violating the United states CONSTITUTION!
However this turns out, me, as a taxpayers loses to these type of leeches, lawyers or private citizens
The Soviet of Washington is using these same tactics to force small tug boat companies out of business in the Puget Sound area. I finally gave up fighting with them and sold my tug boat for next to nothing and left the soviet state.
Again the political class restricts commerce probably to the benefit of their friends. It wasn’t stated here but I suspect the ferry company operating on the lake is politically connected.
NOBODY OWNS THE DAMN WATER AND ALL STATES, ARE FICTION, EXISTING ONLY ON PAPER.
STATES CAN NOT OWN WHAT THE PEOPLE OWN BY RIGHT.
STATES ARE CREATED BY THE PEOPLE, MAKING THEM OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THINK WELL OUTSIDE THE DAMN BOX PEOPLE!
I just had a idea, everyone that voted for President Trump should send him a letter to confirm that they voted for him . Thank you and thank him for his service.
And tell him to go to hell.
Interesting case. Hope this family wins. Does the IJ look at cases relating to Native American rights?
Hmm
It seems little different than a Hotel on land having a Shuttle van for its Customers.
Best Wishes! M.H.
That lawyer got grey hair from working on this case for so long.
This is exactly like the case when Robert Fulton had an exclusive government granted license to ferry passengers on the Hudson river. Cornelius Vanderbilt snuck in and competed with Fulton with no public money and a much lower cost. See the Tom Woods talk on this here: ruclips.net/video/BbIIPtLEVbA/видео.html
(Its all good but pertinent info starts at 2:15)
Get Chelan County involved and let them flex their county rights! The 1st. Amendment should defeat the onerous regulation of an authoratrian government infringing on individual rights. Individual rights are covered pretty well in Art.1, Section 1 in the WA ST Constitution, also!
I hope this blows up
I hope these guys win!
Shame on government 😱!
Wow, how fu$ked is that! Thank god I don't live there!
States seem to be able to bar me from leaving my house and going to work.
Anyone who really believes the nonsense that federally navigable waterways and the right to use them only applies to interstate and international navigation is not a real American. Absolutely any body of water connected with the oceans or any other federally navigable waterway is itself a federally navigable waterway. Any water and its floor below the high tide mark belongs to the people and may not be regulated, taxed, or access limited by any entity, public or private. This means that beaches and the access to those beaches belongs to the people. So does any body of water connected in any manner with the seas or major rivers of the USA.
No private landowner may land lock the public from beaches adjoining their property. Private landowners may only designate and separate from the rest of their property a right of way connecting the beach to the nearest public road. Nor may any state or local government restrict anchoring or mooring rights of boat or ship owners other than to maintain federal navigation channels or markers. Only the US Coast Guard has the right to regulate or restrict the use of the seas and waterways connected with the seas. It is time for We The People to force our rights down the throats of those traitors who disagree with this, strip them of their US citizenship, and exile them to Communist China, North Korea, or some other totalitarian hellhole.
You correctly state the majority of the law regulating waterways
however, please note, there are exceptions (i.e. the “Sand Hole” in Lloyd Neck, NY where the navigational and underwater rights were given to private individuals under King George before the USA was a nation, and then which were later upheld, see page 1 paragraph 1 of the first Supreme Court).
@@elizabethreichelt5173 ,
Yes, their are private plots of land whose deed goes back to before the founding of the USA as a nation. Our founders saw fit to include a clause which barred the impairment of existing contracts in order to garner votes from those delegates who owned such land when the Constitution was up for ratification, in much the same way that the 3/5 compromise was struck to prevent slave states from leaving the nascent USA. The slave issue was settled in the Civil War. That was good. The ban on impairment of contracts which left mini fifedoms was not settled and is a mixed blessing.
So, as you stated, we are left with plots of land such as the "Sand Hole" in Lloyd Neck, NY, with deeds which go back to King George the III. Those lucky enough to own such plots are exempt from being forced to pay local taxes in most cases, and are exempt from a lot of other potential burdens such as eminent domain seizures and other illicit land grabs. Sometimes we must take the bad with the good.
Perhaps the rest of the nation should be forced to observe the ban on the obligation to pay real property taxes since they are arbitrary and capricious, tax one's inalienable right to own what one has purchased (the power to tax equals the power to destroy as per the case which overturned all poll taxes and literacy tests as applied to voting rights), and enable all sorts of corruption mostly by local government.
Eminent domain seizure as it was expanded to way unconstitutional limits under the evil and corrupt Kelo decision must also be reversed and restricted to the plain black and white English of the Constitution which limits such seizure to government only seizure for direct public use as spelled out in the Constitution. The language contortions used by the thin minority to justify Kelo were laughable at best and a bastardization of the real intent by the founders to prevent exactly what the Kelo majority allowed- the illicit theft of property by government on behalf of private entities who don't feel obligated to play by the same rules of capitalism they defend so vociferously when things go their way. The prior cases used by the thin majority in Kelo involved among others the Hawaiian transfer of land owned by greedy aristocrats to the people and had nothing to do with the sort of unconstitutional seizure enabled by Kelo. Kelo must be reversed.
Our founders had every intent to force greedy private land grabbers to pay what the seller wants or don't purchase the property, no matter what. No private entity ever has the right to seize the property of another by any means, including the use of bribed government officials. Public use means public use, not some potential tax benefit or potential job benefit as envisioned by big corporate. "Use" is a very different word than "benefit." If the founders meant benefit, they would have said "benefit" and not "use."
It is interesting how things that benefit the rich such as deeds for the "Sand Hole" in Lloyd Harbor, NY are interpreted literally as they are supposed to be, but when the rich want to take from the rest of us, courts go out of their way to twist, contort, and bend the letter and intent of the Constitution to mean whatever the rich want it to mean. That is called bribery and influence peddling at its worst. It must be stopped.
That is what the rich and the powerful fear the most, and that is why gun control is pushed by the rich and the powerful at our expense. We know that this is true because the gun grabbers keep going after so called assault weapons which account for about 0.5% of all gun murders while pistols account for 98% of all gun murders. Other types of long guns such as hunting rifles and shotguns only account for another 1.5% of all gun murders. One is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with fists and feet than shot with an assault weapon.
So, the real reason for so called assault weapons bans is due to the threat posed by those who have these weapons to the rich and the bodyguards who protect them from angry citizens. Ultimately, the rich and their bodyguards want to be the only armed civilians in the nation. Add illicit land grabs enabled by the evil and corrupt Kelo decision to the rampant destruction of and theft from the middle class by the rich and one can easily see why the rich fear the rest of us. Keep in mind that the rich and powerful and those who guard them will always be able to obtain permits for exactly the kind of so called assault weapons which they don't want the rest of us to have for "our safety." Gun control is not about our safety. Gun control is about the safety of those wealthy and powerful people who abuse their wealth and power to steal from and abuse the rest of us.
Just as the US Constitution recognizes the validity of existing contracts and the courts uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution, we must force our government to uphold the letter and spirit of our Constitution on all other matters. And yes, the 4th amendment really does ban private search and seizure every bit as much as government search and seizure, on all private property, not just the curtilage. That is because the amendment makes no distinction between government and private, not location on one's property. All language manipulations to the contrary are again, void and are just used by the courts to roll back our rights in a manner that must have the founders rolling over and over in their graves.
14. AMENDMENT. , PROTECT.
OUR < WE THE PEOPLE > RIGHTS
If you learned what natural rights are, you wouldn't be confused.
Is that you F.A. Hayek? Haha! Sounds like you came back from the dead.
This isn't a property rights issue at all. But the complaint should probably in love challenges based on the second half of the clause...
@@keepseak_ret7772 I thought the Indian Nation is a captive nation inside of a nation (America) as such how does America have any right to tax a product produced in their (Indian ) nation ??
But this would require people, children to be taught about their Founders and their belief and faith in the Creator God. Who has given us those rights, unthinkable.
@@keepseak_ret7772 Thank you for your thoughts on this subject !
Hey, Institute for Justice !
After telling a corrupt deputy his actions were CRIMINAL, I spent FIVE DAYS AND NIGHTS IN A CAGE with NO bond.
So the courts have declared the Constitution unconstitutional?
I remember a very similar story about an ambulance service that was being barred from servicing an area near by because of a cities contract with another company further away.... instead of waterway it was public roadways I guess.
It is every americans duty to break every unjust law
We have been sleeping so long and unengaged in our system the Federal Government has put chains on everything
Nine years and millions of billable dollars later, this is the best we've got. The 14th Amendment and the Slaughterhouse case, really?
Even RBG knew there was a problem with the 14th Amendment. You know, Congress hadn't the lawful quorum to pass it, nor did the Citizenry vote for it's ratification... privileges and immunities can be granted or denied, see the problem?
National Citizenship or Federal citizenship? Whatever became of the Citizen's of the United States, you know, the only ones mentioned in the Constitution?
I’ll tell you what happened, we got a bunch of scumbag politicians in the supreme court’s posing as judges.
Are you saying that 14th Amendment rights legally stand by adverse possession?
Justice (or at least a decision) delayed is justice denied. The system drags it out so people will give up. That's how the 'system' takes over, takes liberty and takes the pursuit of happiness. A thousand cuts...
Thomas Jefferson expanded our nation on navigable waters. Who knew the state of Washington would even exist while the Corps of Discovery explored and navigated the upper Missouri and Columbia River Basins.
Our country is a Republic. States are like their own little countries when it comes to their jurisdiction.
just one more example of why our governments need to be gutted and remodeled after the original intent.
raze and rebuild
How about explaining why it takes over 2 years to even get your case heard. What happened to the right of a speedy trial?. Is that just for criminal cases???
Could the Courtney Bros. fly their customers to the location or can the state regulate the air transportation of customers. As I understand it flight would be a federally regulated activity and the state can not limit that. If so then why would the state be allowed to infringe upon the federal governments rights?
I'm sure they could if money was no object to them. Planes are even bigger money pits than boats are.
Flying people is highly costly and if it's a float plane its even higher due to the limited amount of people. The cost of aviation fuel. Pilot and service cost.
Boat's are less cost . safe and possible could be sailing boats as well.
My point was that despite the obvious cost considerations. Why would a state government be allowed to infringe upon an area in which the federal government clearly has jurisdiction, and also if the state cannot limit air transport why allow them to limit water transport. Would this allow the state to disallow certain airlines in their state?
Because this is about regulation of business, not the right of navigation.
Government should only do what citizens and private businesses can not do on their own.
This sounds strange
I thought you could just pay someone off
Thats the problem, the corporations are paying the politicians off, and you can't out bribe them
@@johnnymcblaze and the unions
At least the politicians involved are honest and are consistent in opposing the ability to transport after accepting the bribe.
In New Jersey they are dishonest and will take the money but not stay paid off!
Institute for Justice what excuse has the state used for not allowing private conveyances as such?
THE JUDGES AND THE STATE WAS PAID OFF!
It has already barred us from Breathing !!!!
The brothers should include boat navigation instruction as part of their services. Their not transporting passengers. They're training students 🙄
Still requires licensing unfortunately. Coast Guard and states operating permits. Thats the crux of the case no matter how you look at it. Its about control and $$. Look at all the bars, restaurants salons and gyms at the mercy of the licensing boards controlled by the tyrant governors.
Thank you.
Now wrap your head around a family who has ability to keep this in litigation for a decade.
Between pro-bono work, like the IJ is doing here, and the possibility that these brothers have deep pockets...it’s pretty easy to wrap around that ability.
We need to put these traitors in government in their place
Isn't it disgusting that"we" the people even have to have discussions, videos, counsel about this..,............
This Earth is beyond corrupt
I can't wait for Jesus to come back
Er well you can and will
I feel What makes United States of America unique over other countries is our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution and it says in very clear print these rights shall not be infringed! Why isn't the government helping to protect these people rights?