Bureau of Land Management vs Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, and the US Constitution

[Camp]

I probably know better, but I'll bite. What do you mean by no Art. III Courts?

1. U.S. Constitution

Article III

Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.


Article III created an impartial and independent judiciary with LIMITED SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

We have is a corrupt impostors, biased who are spineless and whose main task is to increase the power of the federal government.


.

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

 

[Camp]

1. U.S. Constitution

Article III

Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.


Article III created an impartial and independent judiciary with LIMITED SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

We have is a corrupt impostors, biased who are spineless and whose main task is to increase the power of the federal government.


.

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

 

[Skylar]

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

Yeah, but Cont doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. I'm just making him demonstrate it with a giant font.

 

[Contumacious]

1. U.S. Constitution

Article III

Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.


Article III created an impartial and independent judiciary with LIMITED SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

We have is a corrupt impostors, biased who are spineless and whose main task is to increase the power of the federal government.


.

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

 

[Skylar]

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

Both Oregon and the Feds agree that it was.

Prove them wrong.

 

[bendog]

Well, look, maybe there's a plot of BLM land that was leased for years with 60 head of cattle, now BLM says no more than 20.

But to say the Fed Cts don't have jurisdiction in a court action between the BLM and a rancher is just full retard, and that is really insulting people with developmental disabilities.

 

[Contumacious]

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL (1787) AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT **FOREIGN****AFFAIRS INCLUDING WITH THE INDIAN NATIONS AND TO PREVENT THE STATES FROM RESTRICTING INTERSTATE COMMERCE


THAT'S ALL FOLKS.


.

 

[Contumacious]

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

Both Oregon and the Feds agree that it was.

Prove them wrong.

PROVE THEM RIGHT

 

[bendog]

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL (1787) AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT **FOREIGN****AFFAIRS INCLUDING WITH THE INDIAN NATIONS AND TO PREVENT THE STATES FROM RESTRICTING INTERSTATE COMMERCE


THAT'S ALL FOLKS.


.

Well, you got the cartoon part right.

 

[Syriusly]

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

If the lands were not acquired lawfully- then they are not part of the United States.

Is that what you really want?

Because then those armed men were occupying a foreign country......

 

[Skylar]

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

Both Oregon and the Feds agree that it was.

Prove them wrong.

PROVE THEM RIGHT

So you're going ignore Oregon on its *own* jurisdiction?

Remember, there's no party to this dispute who says that the feds don't have jurisdiction. Both Oregon and the Feds agree that the feds have jurisdiction. Its just you that says otherwise.

Make your argument.

 

[Skylar]

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL (1787) AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT **FOREIGN****AFFAIRS INCLUDING WITH THE INDIAN NATIONS AND TO PREVENT THE STATES FROM RESTRICTING INTERSTATE COMMERCE


THAT'S ALL FOLKS.


.

See the Property Clause, Cont.

You can ignore it. But it doesn't make it magically disappear.

 

[Contumacious]

Well, look, maybe there's a plot of BLM land that was leased for years with 60 head of cattle, now BLM says no more than 20.

But to say the Fed Cts don't have jurisdiction in a court action between the BLM and a rancher is just full retard, and that is really insulting people with developmental disabilities.

YO DINGLE BERRY

I DID NOT SAY THAT WHAT YOU CALL FEDERAL COURTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO VENTILATE A CASE STYLED " WE THE PEOPLE VS THE BLM"

I AM SAYING THAT CONGRESS HAS MADE SURE THAT THE "JUDGES" THAT THEY HAVE CHOSEN WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE GOVERNMENT PREVAILS

THEY HAVE CHOSEN INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SWORE TO ENLARGE THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY

.

 

[Syriusly]

This thread reminds me of the people who insist that the Income Tax is unconstitutional- and not in effect- and also that the 14th Amendment was never ratified.

Meanwhile, in the real world- persons who tried to evade law enforcement, and almost killed an officer in the effort, were lucky to escape with most of their lives.

 

[Camp]

You forgot sec 2

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

How is Section 2 relevant?

But please note that the Founding Fathers specifically delineated the courts subject matter jurisdiction.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—

So where the fuck did the get the authority to consider criminal cases where the authority was not specifically enumerated by the Constitution?

.

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

SO the motherfuckers inside the DC beltway can't go in and declare state lands to be federal lands willy nilly.

Remember , socialist comrade, we are using actual law, not your Communist Manifesto.


.

Using big fonts will not convince anyone your words are any less nonsense. The lands in question never belonged to the state. They were lands acquired via international treaties and later, treaties with native tribes. Jurisdiction of these lands was kept by the federal government when Oregon became a state.They have been protected and maintained at the expense of the federal government and taxpayers ever since.

USING SMALL FONTS WILL NOT CONVINCE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE LIKE CONTUMACIOUS THAT YOUR WORDS ARE ANY LESS SOCIALIST NONSE.

NOW PROVIDE A LINK THAT SHOWS THAT THE LANDS WERE ACQUIRED LAWFULLY, IE, CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787)


.

history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/oregon-territory

 

[Contumacious]

Check out the Property clause. And who gets to make the rules on Federal property.

Then check the passage you cited again. Specifically, the 'Law of the United States' part. With 'conspiracy' being one of those federal laws.

Remember, Cont....we're using the actual law here. Not what you imagine the law to be.

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL (1787) AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT **FOREIGN****AFFAIRS INCLUDING WITH THE INDIAN NATIONS AND TO PREVENT THE STATES FROM RESTRICTING INTERSTATE COMMERCE


THAT'S ALL FOLKS.


.

See the Property Clause, Cont.

You can ignore it. But it doesn't make it magically disappear.

READ THE CONSTITUTION (1787) AND THE DEBATES

You can ignore them. But it doesn't make them magically disappear.

 

[Skylar]

Well, look, maybe there's a plot of BLM land that was leased for years with 60 head of cattle, now BLM says no more than 20.

But to say the Fed Cts don't have jurisdiction in a court action between the BLM and a rancher is just full retard, and that is really insulting people with developmental disabilities.

YO DINGLE BERRY

I DID NOT SAY THAT WHAT YOU CALL FEDERAL COURTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO VENTILATE A CASE STYLED " WE THE PEOPLE VS THE BLM"

I AM SAYING THAT CONGRESS HAS MADE SURE THAT THE "JUDGES" THAT THEY HAVE CHOSEN WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE GOVERNMENT PREVAILS

THEY HAVE CHOSEN INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SWORE TO ENLARGE THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY

.

Were the judges not nominated and confirmed by constitutional processes? If no, then you're merely disagreeing with their findings. Which is irrelevant. As your agreement isn't required.

 

[Syriusly]

[
THEY HAVE CHOSEN INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SWORE TO ENLARGE THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY

.

They have chosen individuals who have all sworn to protect the Constitution of the United States.

 

[Skylar]

HUH?

Ohhhhh, its you.

Let me remind you that Oregon and the rest of the region are STATES

Let me remind you that the federal property within that State are under Federal law. As per the Property Clause.

Try again, Cont.

This person will continue to argue until eventually he admits he just does not believe the federal government has any right to do anything.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL (1787) AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT **FOREIGN****AFFAIRS INCLUDING WITH THE INDIAN NATIONS AND TO PREVENT THE STATES FROM RESTRICTING INTERSTATE COMMERCE


THAT'S ALL FOLKS.


.

See the Property Clause, Cont.

You can ignore it. But it doesn't make it magically disappear.

READ THE CONSTITUTION (1787) AND THE DEBATES

You can ignore them. But it doesn't make them magically disappear.

The Property Clause is in the constitution. And where in the debates is the Property clause voided?

Specifically.

 

[bendog]

Well, look, maybe there's a plot of BLM land that was leased for years with 60 head of cattle, now BLM says no more than 20.

But to say the Fed Cts don't have jurisdiction in a court action between the BLM and a rancher is just full retard, and that is really insulting people with developmental disabilities.

YO DINGLE BERRY

I DID NOT SAY THAT WHAT YOU CALL FEDERAL COURTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO VENTILATE A CASE STYLED " WE THE PEOPLE VS THE BLM"

I AM SAYING THAT CONGRESS HAS MADE SURE THAT THE "JUDGES" THAT THEY HAVE CHOSEN WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE GOVERNMENT PREVAILS

THEY HAVE CHOSEN INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SWORE TO ENLARGE THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY

.

You asshat. No citizen has the legal standing to assert he may join me in his suit against the fed govt without first showing I share some grievance with him.

Bundy or Al can sue the govt in federal court to their heart's content. But, they have to have a claim. And claiming the fed govt doesn't own the land doesn't make it.