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?
Leave a Reply to Andrea Dgeorge Cancel reply