I am giving away these two chapters of my second book simply because the information in the second attached chapter relating to ordinances is so wide-spread and pervasive in every single Union State.
Please read them carefully and compare what is written to your own sovereign state’s constitution and see if you notice the same irregularities in what your pretend representatives have been doing to you for the last several decades of deceit and betrayal in which they have all engaged at some point or other.
It works very much like the “good cop” problem, there are no “good cops” because they won’t arrest and charge the bad ones out of self-preservation for their own careers. And no less is true of the politicians you have allowed to occupy your public offices. Even when things are done that violate law, ethics, morality, and the constitutional prohibitions making it unlawful, they do nothing to expose and call out their corrupt fellows to be held publicly accountable.
Screw the ‘thin blue line,’ the ‘code of silence,’ and the ‘chain of command’ if any or all of them require or allow corruption and abuse of power and authority to win the day over right and justice. Don’t any of you dare stand there and call your actions or inactions ‘good’ when you see evil things being perpetrated and do nothing to stop, prevent, or publicly expose it just so you don’t risk losing a paycheck. Nothing is more pathetic and hypocritical than that.
What I have written about here is everything that we are all having to experience and survive in our modern police state and over-regulated society and way of living, and it needs to stop. But only by knowing and educating others can we hope to do that. So please, take the time to read what is contained in the attached document, especially if you are an attorney or personally know one that would appreciate the information (good luck on that one….).
I was asked about how to respond to a notice of some alleged ordinance violation in some city here in Texas, and so I thought I would present an answer for the edification of all, regardless of your state republic. READ your state constitutions and Bill of Rights people! It was put there for a REASON, and only YOU can enforce it for yourself. But first, you have to know what is there and how it ties into the few things that you actually authorized your public servants to do!
==============================================
Ordinances are NOT and CANNOT be enforced as public law in Texas. Check your individual state constitutions on exactly to WHOM the power to create binding public law was delegated. That body CANNOT re-delegate that power unless the state constitution specifically authorizes it to do so, or individually empowers some other office to create binding public law for some specific purpose.
NOWHERE does the Texas Constitution authorize ANY OTHER body to create public law outside of the Texas Legislature. In fact, the term ordinance appears exactly ONCE each in Arts. 9 (counties) and 11 (municipalities). And NEITHER time is it addressed as being LAW or binding upon the public as such.
In fact, any such action would be a direct violation of the Texas Constitution. How do we know this? We READ!!
Within Art. 11, Sec. 5 we find the following “The adoption or amendment of charters is subject to such limitations as may be prescribed by the Legislature, AND NO CHARTER OR ANY ORDINANCE PASSED UNDER SAID CHARTER SHALL CONTAIN ANY PROVISION INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE, or of the general laws enacted by the Legislature of this State.”
In other words, Art. 11, Sec. 5, Texas Constitution, specifically FORBIDS a municipality from granting themselves the power to MAKE any binding public law. Nor can the legislature delegate such power to them or authorize any such powers through a statutory scheme. This is precisely why I assert that ordinances can be binding upon ONLY those ‘persons’ internally employed by, contracted with, authorized/created by, or that knowingly and willingly consent to being bound by such acts.
In Art. 3, Secs. 1 and 2 we read this:
“Sec. 1. SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The Legislative power of this State shall be vested in a Senate and House of Representatives, which together shall be styled “The Legislature of the State of Texas.”
Sec. 2. MEMBERSHIP OF SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The Senate shall consist of thirty-one members. The House of Representatives shall consist of 150 members. ”
Does a city council meet ANY of these criteria as the constitutionally designated public law-making body in Texas? Just in case you’re reading this and are one of those Statist libtards with below average reading and comprehension skills, the definitive answer is FUCK NO, they DO NOT!!
Again, how do we argue that this is the case and make it stick? The same way we did before, we READ!
In Art. 3, Secs. 1 and 2 we read this:
“Sec. 19. INELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS HOLDING OTHER OFFICES. NO judge of any court, Secretary of State, Attorney General, clerk of any court of record, or any PERSON HOLDING A LUCRATIVE OFFICE UNDER the United States, or THIS STATE, or any foreign government SHALL DURING THE TERM FOR WHICH HE IS ELECTED OR APPOINTED, BE ELIGIBLE TO THE LEGISLATURE.”
So, if we paraphrase it down to its essence, we can plainly read:
“Sec. 19. INELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS HOLDING OTHER OFFICES. NO … PERSON HOLDING A LUCRATIVE OFFICE UNDER … THIS STATE, … SHALL DURING THE TERM FOR WHICH HE IS ELECTED OR APPOINTED, BE ELIGIBLE TO THE LEGISLATURE.”
So, if a municipal attorney wants to argue over it, we do it this way:
1) By what form of official mechanism did the members of the [CITY NAME] city council obtain their individual offices?
2) If they are elected to their office, and are allegedly functioning as a political subdivision thereof, i.e. as state actors performing official state acts, then why are you arguing that they are NOT a “PERSON HOLDING A LUCRATIVE OFFICE UNDER … THIS STATE,” and, thus, are ineligible to be sitting in the Texas Legislature at the same time they are sitting as paid members of the city council?
3) Okay, I agree then that they are NOT acting as members of the Legislature nor are they acting under ANY constitutionally delegated state authority when acting solely as members of the [CITY NAME] city council for the purposes of THIS ordinance, therefore, it would be constitutionally impossible for it to have the force and effect of binding public law as that power is delegated ONLY to the Texas Legislature, who CANNOT re-delegate it to someone else through legislation pursuant Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Texas Constitution within the People’s, meaning MY PERSONAL, Bill of Rights.
Sec. 29. PROVISIONS OF BILL OF RIGHTS EXCEPTED FROM POWERS OF GOVERNMENT; TO FOREVER REMAIN INVIOLATE. To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare that everything in this “Bill of Rights” is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void.
4) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 29 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 29. ENACTING CLAUSE OF LAWS. The enacting clause of all laws shall be: “Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas.”
5) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 30 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 30. LAWS PASSED BY BILL; AMENDMENTS CHANGING PURPOSE. No law shall be passed, except by bill, and no bill shall be so amended in its passage through either House, as to change its original purpose.
6) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 31 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 31. ORIGINATION IN EITHER HOUSE; AMENDMENT. Bills may originate in either House, and, when passed by such House, may be amended, altered or rejected by the other.
7) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 32 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 32. READING ON THREE SEVERAL DAYS; SUSPENSION OF RULE. No bill shall have the force of a law, until it has been read on three several days in each House, and free discussion allowed thereon; but four-fifths of the House, in which the bill may be pending, may suspend this rule, the yeas and nays being taken on the question of suspension, and entered upon the journals.
8) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 33 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 33. REVENUE BILLS. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.
9) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 34 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 34. DEFEATED BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS. After a bill has been considered and defeated by either House of the Legislature, no bill containing the same substance, shall be passed into a law during the same session. After a resolution has been acted on and defeated, no resolution containing the same substance, shall be considered at the same session.
10) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 35 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 35. SUBJECTS AND TITLES OF BILLS.
(a) No bill, (except general appropriation bills, which may embrace the various subjects and accounts, for and on account of which moneys are appropriated) shall contain more than one subject.
(b) The rules of procedure of each house shall require that the subject of each bill be expressed in its title in a manner that gives the legislature and the public reasonable notice of that subject. The legislature is solely responsible for determining compliance with the rule.
(c) A law, including a law enacted before the effective date of this subsection, may not be held void on the basis of an insufficient title.
11) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 36 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 36. REVIVAL OR AMENDMENT BY REFERENCE; RE-ENACTMENT AND PUBLICATION AT LENGTH. No law shall be revived or amended by reference to its title; but in such case the act revived, or the section or sections amended, shall be re-enacted and published at length.
12) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 37 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 37. REFERENCE TO COMMITTEE AND REPORT. No bill shall be considered, unless it has been first referred to a committee and reported thereon, and no bill shall be passed which has not been presented and referred to and reported from a committee at least three days before the final adjournment of the Legislature.
13) Does the alleged ordinance enactment fully comply and comport with Art. 3, Sec. 38 of the Texas Constitution and remain inviolate of Art. 1, Sec. 29 of the Bill of Rights within same?
Sec. 38. SIGNING BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS; ENTRY ON JOURNALS. The presiding officer of each House shall, in the presence of the House over which he presides, sign all bills and joint resolutions passed by the Legislature, after their titles have been publicly read before signing; and the fact of signing shall be entered on the journals.
So, Mr./Ms. City Attorney, if I understand your position correctly, the city ordinance that you are attempting to subject me to in my private capacity, as one of the People of Texas, being fully protected from illegal and unconstitutional actions by my public servants in violation thereof, was not and is not in any way compliant with a single provision of any section of Art. 3, Secs. 29-38 of the Texas Constitution in order to have ANY force and effect of law pursuant Art. 3, Sec. 32 of same. Is THAT your position on this matter? If so, then I am forced to challenge your ordinance in federal court on grounds of knowing and willful violations of innumerable state and federal constitutional protections while acting under color of lawful authority as a political subdivision of the state.
Now, Mr./Ms. City Attorney, here’s your napkin, and please tell me how you would like to eat this shit pie you cooked up, one slice at a time or by me shoving the whole thing right down your throat?
Tao of Law 
Thanks for all your hard work brother. I intend to put this info to work if it proves to be viable for use here in Missouri. I highly suspect it will.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think I love you…
LikeLike
Cool stuff I too thank you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
[…] https://taooflaw.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/no-matter-what-the-courts-tell-you-county-and-municpal-ord… […]
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for sharing your knowledge. We all need to LEARN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!
LikeLiked by 1 person
No offense, but that is part of the overall problem. To many people believing they have constitutional rights. This exemplifies perfectly how the usurpers have manipulated the masses into a totally upside down belief about where rights come from. Rights are natural and inherent to all. A birthright gift from our Creator. The constitution is a contract imposed on the government by the people. It was designed to set specific limits on the government, not on the people. Just a little change in the use of the word constitutional to constitutional protections rather than constitutional rights, in the long, could help people begin to realize who is actually in charge.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We need to learn that we have inherent human rights. Privileges are a subset of rights, and are granted by the governing body via constitution and legislation. True rights that are not granted but inherent, are the most important ones to guard.
Glad you are learning about this stuff!
LikeLike
Sadly, I’m going to state unequivocally that there is NO SUCH THING as constitutional rights. What we do have is a reasonable expectation that municipal corporations and their public policy enforcers won’t act in contravention to clearly established law to violate our natural rights inherent to us all from birth.
LikeLiked by 2 people
not going so well here in new York
Municipalities are given the ability to define their own Misdemeanors by grant from the Legislature of ” Municipal Home Rule”
LikeLike
What is your point, because that is precisely what they have tried to do here?
What does your state Constitution say is what you should be asking first and foremost, THEN you can say “Hey, the New York state Constitution says you can’t do any of that!!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s how municipal corporations work in texas (similarly in other states):
Municipal corporations are created by:
1) (a) virtue of Art. XI, Sec. 5 of the Constitution for Texas, and (b) Art. 1165 of Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes (collectively referenced hereinafter as “Charter and Creation Provisions”); and
2) the charter (in law, the constitution of a corporation) that created the corporation, which charter is subservient to the aforesaid “Charter and Creation Provisions.”
Municipal corporations operate in a dual capacity: governmental and private. See Yett v. Cook (1926), 115 Tex. 205, 281 S.W. 837(13) (citing numerous authorities).
In its governmental capacity, a municipal corporation is (1) a political subdivision of the State (see Texas National Guard Armory Board v. McCraw (1939), 132 Tex. 613, 126; S.W.2d 627 (23, 24) (citing numerous authorities)), (2) acting as the state’s agents, (3) acting as agent in custody of public property (see See Yett v. Cook (1926), 115 Tex. 205; S.W. 837 (13)), (4) granted by the State the privilege of exercising a portion of the State’s power, (5) subject to state control, and (6) in exercise of state judicial power in the name of the state.
In its private capacity, a municipal corporation is (1) a for-profit corporation, (2) not acting as agent of the state, and (3) in exercise of corporate judicial power by contractual consent – either express, or implied by adhesion, tacit agreement and/or acquiescence.
The aforesaid “Charter and Creation Provisions” impose that “no charter or any ordinance passed under said charter shall contain any provision inconsistent with the Constitution of the State, or of the general laws enacted by the Legislature of this State.” The charters of municipal corporations are obliged to recognize that such corporations are created under the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas as they existed in 1924 when the “Home Rule Charter” was adopted.
Read this one carefully: No “Home Rule City” corporation or “Municipal Corporation” has any power that is not explicitly incorporated into its charter. Davis v. City of Taylor, 123 Tex. 29, 67 S.W.2d 1033; Zachry v. City of San Antonio, 296 S.W.2d 299 (Tex.Civ. App.1957), affirmed 157 Tex. 551, 305 S.W. 2D 558.
So a municipal corporation (1) CANNOT have any power that is in consistent with state constitution, and (2) DOES NOT have any power that is not explicitly stated and spelled out in its charter.
The rampant problem is that municipal corporations attempt to exercise certain powers against people, but, when I look at the corporations’ charters, the attempted powers are not even mentioned anywhere in the charters (thus the powers don’t exist pursuant to stare decisis of the Texas Supreme Court).
You say, “Municipalities are given the ability to define their own Misdemeanors by grant from the Legislature of ”Municipal Home Rule”.” I bet that if you look carefully into where the legislature is granted that power, you will never find such a grant (because one doesn’t exist).
LikeLike
I did catch your show discussing administrative warrants in Austin…
the claim is, at least here, that you are bound to the Code as a result of owning ” real property” “in this STATE”
the STATE Constitution ..??
which one ..??
New York has about 4 ..
including the one that has no provision to be amended .. the Constitution of new York state
I have been fighting this issue here for 5 years
the first hurdle not overcome is a Court that will hear a ” constitutional ” complaint
and of course
the money to get there.. beyond the reach of most folks that are attacked in a local court of criminal jurisdiction
LikeLike
ARE YOU REFERRING TO “ADMINISTRATIVE INSPECTION WARRANTS”??? If you ARE, can you PLEASE send me which show this was??? I really, really, REALLY need to listen to this and hear what Eddie has to say about these so-called “administrative warrants”. Private message me with a link if that’s possible. Thank you!!
LikeLike
hey, anyways, Eddie ..
when can I buy this new book ..?
been waiting … 🙂
LikeLike
We are going to enjoy all the inherent and unalienable rights we retain in this world for I no not of you, but I shall die free in the face of hostile adversity or overcome the extensive perversity that has permeated the modern law enforcement community, through logic and love or force of arms if such becomes necessary !
Freedom is not free, and nor shall serving tyranny be!
J. Jaffa
LikeLike
Eddie, this is in response to your site banner, which, at the time of this writing, reads, “Your case against the officers and other employees of the STATE is hereby dismissed. I can’t very well let you sue or prosecute the very people that protect me in my efforts to overthrow the Constitution and make myself and those of my fraternity the ruling class, now can I?”
The words of your banner are in line with the sentiments of Gerry Spence (a criminal defense lawyer – and the only honorable lawyer I know of – for more than 60 years, who has never lost a case).
“The function of the law is not to provide justice or to preserve freedom. The function of the law is to keep those who hold power in power.” – Gerry Spence
“The myth is that there is liberty and justice for all. There is liberty and justice if you know the right people and have the right amount of money to buy the right kind of lawyer, and you might be able to get a little liberty and a little justice under those circumstances if it’s due to you. But, if it’s otherwise, one day you wake up and you have to face this thing called the American justice system, and you think “I’m presumed innocent, and they have to prove their case against me beyond a reasonable doubt, and there’s liberty and justice for all,” and suddenly you’re faced with the proposition that this is all a wild kind of empty story that the people have been fed.” – Gerry Spence
“[T]he justice system of this country is severely broken, and does not offer anything except a promise – a[n] empty promise to people of liberty and justice for all. It is not there. People can’t get justice in this country. People believe they can get justice until they need it and then they can’t get it. I’ve been involved in the trial of cases against governments, and defending people — little people, and even occasionally big people — and I have never — hear me — I have never once been in a single case, over a period of sixty years in the courtrooms of this country, that the government hasn’t violated the law or misused its power. Never one case — not one. And they [the government] brag about a 98% conviction rate, and you can imagine why. They have this huge power and they use it against little people.” – Gerry Spence
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gerry, I agree with everything you wrote. Given the enormity of websites and groups on this subject it doesn’t appear to a great majority of the public that this corruption is any big secret which everyone is enraged about. I know people from many groups try filing their own motions (who can afford lawyers only to lose anyway) to try and get the justice the law cites they are entitled to but to date I’ve seen few – if any be successful. It would be good if a central clearinghouse per say was formed which all of these sites and groups could become a part of. Politicians would take issues contacted by such a large group seriously and judges may think twice before making any ruling that is obviously not on fact or law if known they were being watched. I think many are trying to fight corruption but when we continue to elect lawyers to the government and the press is too afraid themselves to expose such powerful people committing it that its going to be a hard hill to climb to see anything change.
LikeLike
I’m not Gerry (I’m a long-time follower of his work). I was just quoting him.
You’re correct that the public knows something is wrong, but (1) they don’t truly understand exactly what it is (what’s at the roots of what they see outwardly), and (2) they don’t know exactly what to do about it (a lot of which comes down to playing politics and exposing hypocrisy as a matter of public record). When you “bring that which has been done in darkness into the light,” they will scatter just like cockroaches do when you turn on the kitchen light in the middle of the night (not insinuating that you have cockroaches — you get the point). There is an art to it, but it is one of the most powerful tools I’ve seen. They have secrets that they don’t want generally known. When you start asking questions (in the right way), and those questions let them know, “I know your secrets, and I’m very close to spilling them on the record and in front of all these people *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*,” they tend to find “better things to do” than continuing hassling you.
“Politicians would take issues contacted by such a large group seriously…” I doubt they would take it seriously because (1) they are part of the problem, and (2) historically, they have relentlessly demonstrated that they don’t take anyone but themselves seriously. Sure, they’ll put on an outward appearance of looking into things and cracking down — a façade — but that would be only to shut people up. It’s what they do. “…and judges may think twice before making any ruling that is obviously not on fact or law if known they were being watched.” They can know YOU are watching them, when every time they violate the code of judicial conduct you file a judicial misconduct complaint in the right way, and when every time they violate due process you file criminal complaints with state and federal grand juries in the right way.
“I think many are trying to fight corruption but when we continue to elect lawyers to the government and the press is too afraid themselves to expose such powerful people committing it that its going to be a hard hill to climb to see anything change.” Yes, indeed, many are trying to fight corruption, but they don’t truly understand what the corruption actually is. People keep hacking off twigs and branches but leaving the roots alone — that will always futile and never-ending. Also, politicians, judges, lawyers, cops and (most of) the (mainstream) press are all owned by the same handlers and are on the same team (and it’s not your team). No one truly “elects” any of them (although that is the show they put on).
I have been in this arena for quite a while. One unfortunate but obvious truth has become undeniable to me. There is never going to be a mass awakening while it still matters. People are never going to band together en masse to fight this fight. Ultimately, it is an individual path. Yes, we can, and we must, help each other and collaborate, but that’s what people are supposed to do anyway — no official organizations needed.
Also, when people start forming organized groups, (1) it is easier to subvert and control, or discredit, the groups, and (2) many new organizations will pop up that espouse things that sound good, but that are intentionally misleading (in order to confuse people). Hitler knew that it was easier to control entire populations and societies than to control individuals. Conversely, though, imagine what would happen if we all just learned, and learned from each other, and put it all into practice on our own — not as part of any group or organizations, but just as individuals like we’re supposed to be doing anyway. “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of the body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.” — Thomas Jefferson. That is what Eddie does — enlightens the people generally.
LikeLiked by 1 person
thank you soooo much. I could’nt stop reading this.
LikeLike