Motion — United States v. Maurice Fayne (Dkt. 33, N.D. Ga. No. 1:20-cr-00228, GAND 278523)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL · Doc. 33 · 2020-07-20 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

FILED IN CLERK’S OFFICE
U.S DC Atlanta
UNITED STATES DISTRiCT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
JUL 20 ZOZO
A11L~
By:
UNITED STATES OFAMERICA
)
CASE NO. 1:20-CR-228
Plaintiff,
a
)
CASE NOs. I :20-MJ-370, 364,361
)
360, 355 and I :20-MC-X33
v.
)
)
MOTION TO DISMISS
)
PURSUANT TO ALL RIGHTS
MAURICE FAIRE
)
RESERVED
Defendant,
)
Judicial Notice ofAdjudicative Facts
COMES NOK~ by Specia Appearance, t e Entitlement Holder, that the office of my ap
pointment delegates as Beneficial Owner (in said properties ), pursuant to my unalienable power
of appointment, J am that I am,”
maurice Johnson fayne-eI©”, nom deguerre:” Slauuice
.Johnson Fa~ iwO “, hereby nominate: Walker, linda T., D.b.a.: HON. LINDA T. WALKER,
D.b.a.: UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, D.b.a.: (UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA, CASE NO. 1 :20-CR-228, & CASE
NOs. I:20-MJ-370, 364,361,360,355 and I:20-MC-833 J as trustee, to receive this NOTICE
as trustee of this matter, in good faith, to make known my intent as it relates to the Adjudicative
Facts regarding: “Fayne, Maurice, JohnsonO “, corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE© “,
FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSONO “, eorp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE© “, as a MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
1. WHEREAS, Affiant is domiciled at the Moorish Empire, and receiving mail through a
private 3rd Party Agent at a Commercial Mail Receiving Agency, situated at: do 6608 N
Western Ave # 1307, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma [73116], Affiant is not within the “Federa
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
I of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 1 of 55

Area” as defined at [ US. Code § 110. Same; defmnitions/.
(e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of
the United States or any department, establishment, or agency, of the United States; and any
Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State,
shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State. Which is hereby Con.ctitut,on
ally challenged by cons/itutlanai question.
2. WHEREAS, Affiant is an aniyunwiya Moorish American National, [Please see Exhib
it I, which is SelfAuthenticating Evidence, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule
902. (6) Newspapers and Periodicals. Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or peri
odical. ], Affiant is not a 14th Amendment citizen of the United States as defined at [ 28 U.S.
Code § 3002. Definitions, (15) “ILniteiStates” means—(A) a Federal corporation;.) Which is
hereby Onzstitutionaily challenged by constitutional question.
3. WHEREAS, Affiant is an aniyunwiya Moorish American National, [Please see Exhib
it 1, which is SelfAuthenticating Evidence, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule
902. (6) Newspapers and Periodicals. Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or peri
odical. ], Affiants true name is” maurice johnson faync-clt “, nom deguerre:” Maurice
.Jolinson Faync©”, it is not “ MAURICE FAYNE”, it is also not “MAURICE FAYNE, a/
k/a Arkansas Mo”, as expressed inside of the records of this cause of action. Thereby be
ing repugnant to the Constitution and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 17.
Plaintiff and Defendant; Capacity; Public Officers, (a) Real Party in Interest. (1) Designation
in GeneraL An action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. Which is
hereby Constitutionally challenged by constitutional question.
4. WHEREAS, Afflant is an aniyunwiya Moorish American National, [Please see Exhib
it 1, which is Self Authenticating Evidence, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
2 of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 2 of 55

902. (6) Newspapers and Periodicals, Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or peri
odical. j, [Pursuant to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 1.10,
Right of visit “ Fayne, Maurice, Johnson© “, corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE© “, “ FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON@ “, corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE© “, is NOT: (a) engaged in piracy; (b) engaged in the slave trade; (c) engaged in
unauthorized broadcasting; (d) without nationality;or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refus
ing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. Affiant here
by Notices all interested parties that any further encroachment regarding said properties shall
be deemed an egregious act ofPIRACY, in bad faith. Which is hereby Constitutionally chal
lenged by constitutional question.
5. WHEREAS, Affiant is an aniyunwiya Moorish American National, [Please see Exhib
it 1, which is Self Authenticating Evidence, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule
902. (6) Newspapers and Periodicals. Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or peri
odical. j, Pursuant to the 59th Congress, 2d Session, CITIZENSHIP OF THE UNITED
STATES, EXPATRIATION, AND PROTECTION ABROAD, [Please see Exhibit 2]” There
are, strictly speaking, no Moroccan laws relating to citizen ship ofMoorish subjects in Moroc
co. The fundamental laws of this non-Christian country are based entirely upon the Islamitic
code, no part of which treats of the subject of citizenship. here are, however, numerous treaties
and conventions between the various Christian countries and the Moorish Empire, by means
of which citizenship in this country is defined; but, as I understand, from the above-acknowl
edged instructions, that it is not the desire of the Department to call for a report upon such
lines, I will therefore confine these remarks to general conditions existing, which may possi
bly be of some use in connection with the information desired. (1) Citizenship in Morocco
may be said to be governed by the laws pertaining to the same in other countries, with the ex
ception that all persons resiing in Morocco who can not prove foreign citizcnship or protection
are considered ipso jure as Moorish subjects. (2 and 3) Moorish subjects lost their nationality
only by becoming naturalized in, or protected by, another country having treaty relations with
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
3 of 8
ALL RIGhTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 3 of 55

the Moorish Empire. Afflant has never been naturalized from the dejure Nationality of
aniyunwiya Moorish American National. Which is hereby Constitutionally challenged by con
stitutional question.
6. WHEREAS, [Pursuant to the PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 90TH
CONGRESS FIRST SESSION, VOLUME 113-PART 12, JUNE 12, 1967, TO JUNE 20,
1967], the 14th Amendment was never properly lawfully adopted, [Please see Exhibit 3 ], Af
liant hereby Constitutionally challenges its applicability to this said matter.
7. WHEREAS, [Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedurel all” Charging In
struments “, on this cause of action, is hereby declared to be Unconstitutional. Not limited to
but including; any and all WARRANTS, iNDICTMENTS, SUMMONS, REPORTS etc., as
they were not executed [Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rules 3] as
there is not a Judges signature on Any Warrant, also there was never a Constitutional WAR
RANT issued used to seize Affiants property, as it was not served upon any party present at
the moment of SEIZURE. All said documents also do not possess the required seals for them
to be lawfully executed. Affiant hereby Constitutionally challenges, by Constitutional question
any and all charging instruments used on this said cause.
8. WHEREAS, Affiant’s natural Mother affirmed by Affidavit, the unconscionable is
suance of the BIRTH CERTIFICATE for” MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE” etc., having oc
cuffed while she was under legal disability, and was not in a lawful capacity to contract in
good faith with a meeting of the minds [Please see Exhibit 4 j.
9. WHEREAS, Affiant has recently acquired beneficial interest in the Unincorporated
Foreign Entities, D.b.a.: 1. “MAURICE FAYNE© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
4 of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVEb
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 4 of 55

3612856585,2. “MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856041,3. “FAThE, MAURICE JOHNSON© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856042, Afflant is entitled to: [Article IV, Section 1, of the Constitution for the united
States ofArnerica:] Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts,
Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. [Please see ExhibitS
I 0.WHEREAS, Affiant has recently acquired beneficial interest in the Unincorporated
Foreign Entities, D.b.a.: I. “MAURICE FAYNE© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856585,2. “MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNEC “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856041,3.” FAYNE, MAURICE JOFINSON© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856042, Pursuant to [Public Law 97-116 Please see Exhibit 3] SEC. 12. Subsection (b)
(fl(A) “(A) no conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction ofbusi
ness as a common carrier shall be forfeited under the provisions ofthis section unless it shall
appear that the owner or other person in charge of such conveyance was a consenting party or
privy to the illegal act; and “(B) no conveyance shall be forfeited under the provisions of this
section by reason of any act or omission established by the owner thereof to have been com
mitted or omitted by any person other than such owner while such conveyance was unlawfully
in the possession of a person other than the owner in violation of the criminal laws of the
United States or of any State.
WI-TEREAS, Affiant was not in possession of said ENTITIES, at the time of the commis
sion of a violation, and was not a consenting party, or privy to an illegal act, Affiant hereby
moves the court to DISMISS this cause of action, with prejudice.
11. WHEREAS, 1. “MAURICE FAYNEC “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856585,2. “MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856041,3. “FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON© “, Oklahoma Secretary of State #
3612856042, are Unincorporated Foreign Trade names, Affiant has met the Margin Require-
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
5 of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 5 of 55

ments to have, to obtain, receive, or enjoy the beneficial use of a loan or other extension of
credit from any lender, as defined at [15 U.S. Code § 78g (f)].
12. WHEREAS, affiant is an aniyunwiya Moorish American National, Pursuant to Sec
tion 2. of the Constitution for the united States of America, 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 ambas
sadors, other public ministers and consuls; Article 111, entitled “Commercial Paper,” applies to
all drafts, checks, certificates of deposit and notes as de- fined in section 3-104 of the Code. T.
QUINN, QUThN’S UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE COMMEN- TARY AND LAW DI
GEST § 3-103[Aj (1978). Pursuant to [50 U.S. Code § 4305. (b)(2)Any payment, con
veyance, transfer, assignment, or delivery ofproperty or interest therein, made to or for the
account of the United States, or as otherwise directed, pursuant to this subdivision or any rule,
regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder shall to the extent thereof be a Mi acquit
tance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same; and no
person shall be held liable in any court for or in respect to anything done or omitted in good
thith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and in reliance on, this sub
division, or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder.
Pursuant to: [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 1. Scope and Purpose, These rules
govern the procedure in all civil actions and proceedings in the United States district courts, ex
cept as stated in Rule 81. They should be construed, administered, and employed by the court
and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and pro
ceeding.
And;
Pursuant to: [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 46. Dismissing Cases, 1. At any
stage of the proceedings, whenever all parties file with the Clerk an agreement in writing that a
case be dismissed, specif5’ing the terms for payment of costs, and pay to the Clerk any fees then
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
6 of S
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 6 of 55

due, the Clerk, without further reference to the Court, will enter an order of dismissal. 2. (a) A
petitioner or appellant may file a motion to dismiss the case, with proof of service as required by
Rule 29, tendering to the Clerk any fees due and costs payable.
Afflant does not understand any allegations as it relates to a “CRIME” having been
committed on this case, and hereby reserves the right, NOT AS AN ADMISSION OF GUILT,
but as Accord and Satisfaction of this cause of action, Specially Deposits Money Order # 369 to
DISMISS said case with prejudice. [Please see Exhibit 6]
Signed in the presence of:
Counw
__________________________________
State
Signed and affi
to before me, a Notary on this [
~0 j.
Notaiy~ublic
My Commission Expires
\ o
¶ m
In testimony whereof, I, Ex parte: maurice johnson fayne-ela
, certify under penalty of
perjury, that the statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my honor, knowledge
customs, and beliefs. I have hereunto caused my appellation to be subscribed this [ 20th day of
July, 2020].
lamthatlam: ~ ~
c.
~-
aniyunwij~a moorish american
All Rights Reserved
Without Prejudice
Deo Volente
Jus Cogens
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO
7 of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 7 of 55

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Maurice Fayne Johnson certif5’ that I have this day served the Clerk of Court, James N.
Flatten, United States Attorney Byung J. Pak, Assistant United States Attorney Bernita
Malloy, Assistant United States Attorney John Russell Phillips, Assistant United States
Attorney Michael John Brown and Court Appointed Attorney Caitlyn Wade with this No
tice to Dismiss and Dismissal of Court Appointed Attorney via hand delivery, Fax,
email and or by United States Postal Service Certified Mail H
De
livery thereon to ensure delivery: Dated this ~Üth~
day of July, 2020.
by:
(iUItL?
,~ 4
maurice johnson faync_elt
All natural rights reserved.
James N. Flatten Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRiCT OF GEORGIA
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
2211 United States Courthouse
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3309
(404)215- 1600
Attorney Bernita Malloy
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
United States Attorney’s Office
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW #600
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3309
(404) 581-6000
Email: Bernita.Malloy~usdoj.gov
Attorney Michael John Brown
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
United States Attorney’s Office
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW #600
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3309
Email: Michael.j Jwown2~usdoj.gov
Attorney John Russell Phillips
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
United States Attorney’s Office
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW #600
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3309
(404) 581-6000
Email: russe11.phillips~usdoj.gov
Attorney Caitlyn Wade
Federal Defender Program Inc.
101 Marietta St. NW Ste. 1500
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-2727
(404) 688 -7530
Email: Caitlyn Wadc~fd.org
Attorney Byung J. Pak
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
United States Attorney’s Office
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW #600
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3309
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANTTO
8 of 8
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 8 of 55

EXHIBIT 1
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 9 of 55

•l.
•
-
in God We
rust
Declaration ci Nationality
Notice 01 Snecial Appearance. am that ani
- Maurice Johnson
Fayne~?
‘. in full tIe. ~ii proprin persona. so’ uris. in solo proprio,
by natural issue. lw buridicary and heir of:
‘ Payna. MniirirM
Johnson~
COIp sole Dbo.: “ Maurice Johnson Payrie~
FAYNE, M4UAICE JQHNSON~ ‘. corp.snIO Dba.: “ MAURICE
JOHNSON FAYNr’
tiaviflo reached the age of majority, being
aheriginal lottie i~ot1Iiwestein and southwestern shores ot Africa,
the Atlantic Lands. no continental Americas being duty certi
tied, hereby alfirms to declare my tribal intention to he as my
pedigree subscnhes. as an: aniyunwiya Moorish American Na
tonal, hut not a eli/en of the United Stales I declare permanent
and unalienable, allegiance to the Moorish Empire, Societas Re
publicac tEa Al Maurikar.uus Estados The Constitution for 11w
united States of America, Article ill Section 2 International Law
United Nations Declaiation on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,
and alt natuiat laws governing moors, and hereby declare and
proclaim ny nationality as an: aniyunwiya moorish american
moslem. lana hat tam:’ Maurice Johnson Fayne
‘. from this
day loiward, in harmony with my Nationa ity
Status
Jurisdic
tion4 shall be known as: “ maurice johnson fayne-el
“ Notice
of Merging of Legal ‘file with Equitable Title : This order is to
preserve legal and equilable titte and to reserve all rights, title,
and interest, in (he property, Re:’ Fayne, Maurice Johnson.
corp.sote Dba.: “ Maurice Johnson Fayne~”, “FAYNE, MAU
RICE JOHNSON~ “, corp.sole Dba,: “ MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE@ “, to the depositor:
‘ maurice johnson fayne-eI~” Alt
properly
, of the same issue and amount, In like kind and specie,
is to be returned fully intact
as a Special Deposit order of the
Depositor I Beneficiary / Bailor I Donor / Principal I Creditor’”
maurice johnson fayne-el
‘ as a special depos~ order ri aWILII
money, This special deposit is to be used exclusively for the hen
efit of: “ Fayne-el, Maurice Johnson Trust~i “, an Unincorporated
Divine Grantor Trust. This deposit is not to be commingled with
general assets of any bank
nor depositary / trustee / agent I
bailee / donee I debtor This deposit is not limited b
but incluci
Ag: discharge and set off 1 of any and all outstanding liabilibeg
as accord and satisfaction Any and All Attorneys with a License
from the DAFt Assuciatlon are explicitly prohibited from adminis
trating “Payne-el Maunce Johnson Trust~
‘, property without
hanrjwrjuen consent from each and every trustee, after said At
torneys have furnished their nationality, and Principal for whom’s
interest they are working, (pursuant to Public Law 75’683) to
trustees in plain writing All Rights Reserved
No, 13545
7-17-24-31 :8-7-2O-4t~
WE BUY JUNK riding &
push mowers and other
small engine equipment.
Call 870-588-7954. 4-24-
20-un
QL4,SSIFJ~P
D~AP
LINfi; GARAGE SALE
ADS AND ALL OTHER
CLASSIFIED LINE ADS
MUST BE SUBMITTED
SEFORE 4:00 P.M.
ON TUESDAYS
TO APPEAR IN
THAT
FRIDAY’S
PAPER.
ThLP~APLINL1QB
LEGAL_NQIIcflj~
1.0:00 A.M, FRIDAY
-
ThE
WEEK
BEFORE
IHgj4QIIc~LS TO AP
PEAR
•
a
OVER $1OK IN DEBT?
Be debt free in 24-48
months. Pay a fraction of
what you owe
A-i- BBS
rated, Call National Debt
~elfef 677-243-7692 10-
19-18-Ifa
VIAGRA
AND
CIALIS
USERS! 50 Pills SPECIAL
$99.00 FREE Shipping!
100% guaranteed. CALL
NOW! 855-685-54~, 5-i-
20-ftn
STILL PAYING too much
for your MEDICATION?
Save up to 90% on RX re
Iill! Order today and re
ceive tree shipping on 1st
order
- prescriptt~n re
44...
Legal Notice
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CROSS COUNTY, ARKANSAS
PROBATE DIVISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF
HAZEL KENNON deceased
CASE NO. 19PA.202056 3
Lasf known address’ 131 Hwy 64 McCrory Arkansas 721fli
quirect,
Call i$7t~in
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 10 of 55

EXHIBIT 2
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 11 of 55

CITIZENSHIP OF THE UNITED STATES, EXPATRIATION, ETC. 459
Cnmzn V—Temporary provisions.
ART. 1. Aliens who have acquired real estate, who have had chil
dren born to them in Mexico, or who have held any public office,
being those referred to in sections X, XI, and XII of article 1 of this
law, are bound to declare within six months after the promulgation
of this law, provided they have not done so previously, to the civil
authorities of their place of residence whether they wish to acquire
Mexican citizenship or to retain their own.
In the former case they
must immediately ask for their certificate of naturalization in the
form prescribed in article 19 of this law.
If they fail to make the
declaration in question, they shall be considered Mexicans, except in
those cases where there has been an official declaration on this point.
An. 2. Colonists residing in the country, being those referred to
in the last sentence of article 28 of this Ia;v, shall declare in the
manner prescribed by the preceding article under what nationality
they wish to be classed, and if it should be the Meñcan, they shall
also ask for their certificate of naturalization, as prescribed by the
preceding article.
An. 3. The Executive, in issuing the necessary regulations for the
execution of this law shall be careful to give the proper directions
in order that the local authorities, so far as they are concerned, may
duly execute it.
[Signed]
JtIAN Josñ l3sz, Deputy, President.
[Signed]
PEDRO SANCHEZ CASTRO, Senator, President.
[Signed]
ROBERTO NinlEz, Deputy, Secretary.
[Signed]
GILnAimo G&~rEz, Senator, Secretary.
Wherefore, I order it to be printed, published, circulated, and duly
executed.
Given in the national palace of Mexico, May 28, 1SSO.
Ponruno DIn.
To Citizen Icncio MARisCAIs~
Secretary of State and of the
Department of Foreign Relations.
In communicating it to you for your information and for the
necessary purposes, I assure you of my great consideration.
MAiusc2u4.
Monocco,
Mr. Philip, charge d’affaires, to Mr. Root, Secretary of State, August
8, 1900.
AMERIcAN LEGATLoic,
•
Tangier, August 8, 1900.
Sin:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
There are, strictly speaking, no Moroccan laws relating to citizen
ship of Moorish subjects in Morocco.
The fundamental laws of this
non-Christian country are based entirely upon the Islamitic code, no
part of which treats of the subject of citizenship.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 12 of 55

460
CITIZENSHIP OP THE UNITED STATES, EXPATRIATION, ETC.
There are, however, numerous treaties and conventions between the
various Christian countries and the Moonsh Empire, by means of
which citizenship in this country is defined; but, as I understand,
from the above-acknowledued instructions, that it IS Dot the desire
of the Department to call ~or a report upon such Imes, I will there
fore confine these remarks to general conditions existing, which may
possibly be of some use in connection with the information desired.
(1) Citizenship in Morocco may be said to be governed by the laws
pertaining to the same in other countries, with the exception that all
persons residing in Morocco who, can not prove foreign citizenship
or protection are considered ipso jure as Moorish sub1ects.
(2 and 3) Moorish subjects lost their nationality only by becoming
naturalized in, or
protected by, another country having treaty re
lations with the Moorish Empire.
It was established by the Convention of Madrid, concluded July 3,
1880, as follows:
AnTIOLE XV.
Any subject of Morocco who has
been naturalized In
a foreign country.
and who shall return to Morocco. shall, after having remalued for
a length
of time equal to that which shall have been regularly necessary for film to
obtain such naturalization, choose between entire submission to the laws of
the Empire and the obligation to quit Morocco, unless it shall be proved that
his naturalization in a foreign country was obtained with the consent of the
Government of Morocco.
Foreign naturallzatiou heretofore acquired by subjects of Morocco accord
ing to the rules established by the laws of each country, shall be continued
to hetrn as regards all its effects without any restriction.
The above ruling has never yet been acted upon, and should this
at any time be contemplated seriously, a large number of naturalized
people, American and others, residing in Morocco, would be affected
thereby.
(4 and 5j Residence in foreign parts does not affect the nation
ality of Moorish subjects, and the Moorish Government has no
means of protecting its subiects permanently residing in other coun
tries, with the exception o~ a so-called Moorish consul at Gibraltar
and a Moorish agent at Cairo, Egypt.
I am, etc.,
HOFFMAN PHILIP.
NETHERLANDS.
fEnclosurea in despateb from Mr. Hill, minister to the Netherlands, August 31, 1906.]
[Translation.]
LAW OF DECEMBER 12, 1892, REGARDING NETHERLANDS crnzENswp AND
RE5iOENT5HIP.
tOfficial Gazette No. 268.]
-
In the name of Her Majesty Wilhelmina, by God’s grace Queen of
We, Emma, Queen Dowager, Regent of the Kingdom, make known
the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, etc.
to all whom it may concern, that:
Having taken into consideration that it is desirable to establish
some general provisions concerning Netherlands iationality in sub-
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 13 of 55

EXHIBIT 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 14 of 55

UNITED STATES
OF
AMERICA
€onçjressionat Record
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
VOLUME
113—PART
12
JUNE 12, 1967, TO JUNE 20, 1967
(PAGES 15309 TO 16558)
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON, 1967
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 15 of 55

June 13, 1967
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
15641
groups from
other nations.
This bi
partisan organization is doing something
more than just talking about Interna
tional understanding—it is doing some
thing about it.
If mankind Is ever to abolish war from
the face of the earth, we first must
break down the barriers of mistrust and
suspicion
among
the
peoples
of
the
world. There is no better way to accom
plish this than through just such pro
grams
as this
one conducted by the
American
Council
of Young Political
Leaders.
These young people will be the lead
ers of the world in years to come. They
will be better leaders, more understand
ing and tolerant leaders, if they are able
to expand their knowledge of other na
tions, other peoples, and other political
systems.
This is why, Mr. Speaker, I am so
pleased with the work being done by
the American Council of Young Politi
cal Leaders. They have my wholehearted
support In
their program
to
further
world understanding.
THE
14TH
AMENDMENT—EQUAL
PROTECTION LAW OR TOOL OF
USURPATION
Mr.
PRYOR.
Mr.
Speaker,
I
ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Louisiana [Mr. RARIcIC] may ex
tend his remarks at this point In the
REcoRD and Include extraneous matter.
The SPRAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request or the gentleman
from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. RARICK. Mr. Speaker, arrogantly
Ignoring clearcut expressions In the Con
stitution of the United States, the de
clared Intent of its drafters notwith
standing, our unelected Federal judges
read out prohibitions of the Constitution
of the United States by adopting the
fuzzy haze of the 14th amendment to
legislate their personal ideas, prejudices,
theories,
guilt
complexes,
aims,
and
whims.
Through the cooperation of intellec
tual educators, we have subjected our
selves
to
accept
destructive
use
and
meaning
of
words
and
phrases.
We
blindly
accept
new
meanings
and
changed values to alter our traditional
thoughts.
We have tolerantly permitted the ha
bitual misuse of words to serve as a
vehicle to abandon our foundations and
goals. Thus, the present use and expan
sion of the 14th amendment Is a sham—
serving as a crutch and hoodwink to pre
cipitate a quasi-legal approach for over
throw of the tender balances and pro
tections of limitation found in the Con
stitution,
But, interestingly
enough,
the
14th
amendment—whether ratified or not—
was but the expression of emotional out
pouring of public sentiment following the
War Between the States.
Its obvious purpose and Intent was but
to free human beings from ownership as
a chattel by other humans. Its aim was
no more than to free the slaves.
As our politically appointed Federal
judiciary proceeds down their chosen
path of chaotic departure from the peo
ples’ government by substituting their
personal law rationalized under the 14th
amendment, their actions and verbiage
brand them and their team as seces
slonists_—rebels with
pens
instead
of
guns—seeking to divide our Union.
They must be stopped. Public opinion
must be aroused. The Union must and
shall be preserved.
Mr. Speaker, I ask to include In the
RECORD, following my remarks, House
Concurrent Resolution 208 of the Louisi
ana Legislature urging this Congress to
declare the 14th amendment illegal. Also,
I include in the RECORD an informative
and well-annotated treatise on the il
legality of
the
14th amendment—the
play toy of our secessionist judges—
which
has
been
prepared
by
Judge
Leander H. Perez, of Louisiana.
The material referred to follows:
N. CON. Ens. 208
A concurrent resolution to expose the un
constitutionality of the 14th admendment
to the Constitution of the United States;
to interpose the sovereignty of the State
of Louisiana against the execution of said
amendment in this State: to memorialize
the Congress of the United States to re
peal its joint resolution of July 28, 1868,
declaring that said amendment had been
ratified; and to provide for the distribu
tion of certified copies of this resolution
Whereas the purported 14th Amendment
to the United States Constitution was never
lawfully adopted in accordance with the re
quirements of the United States Constitu
tion because eleven states of the Union were
deprived cf their equal suffrage in the Sen
ate in violation of Article V. whea eleven
southern states, including Louisiana, were
excluded from deliberation and decision in
the adoption of the Joint Resolution pro
posing said 14th Amendment: said Resolution
was not presented to the President of the
United States in order that the same should
take effect, as required by Article 1, section
7;
the proposed amendment was not rati
fled by three-fourths of the states, but to
the
contrary
fifteen
states
of
the
then
thirty-seven ststes of the Union rejected the
proposed
14th
Amendment
between
the
dates of its submission to the states by the
Secretary of State on June
16,
1866
and
March
24,
1868,
thereby
nullifying
said
Resolution and making it impossible for rati
fication
by
the
constitutionaliy
required
three-fourths of such states; said southern
states which were denied their equal sill
frage in the Senate had been recognized by
proclamations of the President of the United
States to have duly constituted governments
with all the powers which belong to free
states of the Union, and the Legislatures or
seven of said southern states had ratified the
13th Amendment which would have railed
of ratification but for the ratification of said
seven southern states; and
Whereas the Reconstruction Acts of Con
gress
unlawfully
overthrew
their
existing
governments, removed their lawfully consti
tuted legislatures by military force and re
placed them with rump legislatures which
carried out military orders and pretended
to ratify the 14th Amendment; and
Whereas in spite of the fact that the Sec
retary of State in his first proclamation,
on July
20,
1865,
expressed doubt
as
to
whether three-fourths of the required states
had ratified the 14th Amendment, Congress
nevertheless adopted a resolution on July 28,
1868, unlawfully declaring that three-fourths
or the states had ratified the 14th Amend
ment and directed the Secretary of State to
so proclaim, said Joint Resolution of Con
gress and the resulting proclamation of the
Secretary of State included the purported
ratifications of the military enforced rump
legislatures
of
ten southern states
whose
lawful legislatures had previously rejected
said
14th
Amendment,
and
also included
purported ratifications
by the
legislatures
of the States of Ohio and New Jersey although
they had withdrawn their legislative rati
fications several months previously, all of
which
proves
absolutely
that
said
14th
Amendment was not adopted in accordance
with the mandatory constitutional require
ments set forth in Article V of the Constitu
tion and therefore the Constitution itself
strikes
with
nullity
the
purported
14th
Amendment.
Now therefore be it resolved by the Legis
lature of Louisiana, the House of Representa
tives and the Senate concurring:
(1) That the Legislature go on record as
exposing the unconstitutionality of the 14th
Amendment, and interposes the sovereignty
of the State of Louisiana against the execu
tion of said 14th Amendment against the
State of Louisiana and its people;
(2) That the Legislature of Louisiana op
poses the use of the invalid 14th Amend
ment by the Federal courts to impose further
unlawful edicts and hardships on its people:
(3) That the Congress of the United States
be memorialized by this Legislature to repeal
its unlawful Joint Resolution of July 28,
1868,
declaring that three-fourths of the
etates had ratified the 14th Amendment to
the United States Constitution;
(4) That the Legislatures of the other
states of the Union be memorialized to give
serious study and consideration to take sim
ilar action against the validity of the 14th
Amendment and to uphold and support the
Constitution of the United States which
strikes said 14th Amendment with nullity;
and
(5) That copies of this Resolution, duly
certified, together with a copy of the treatise
on “The Unconstitutionality of the
14th
Amendment” by Judge L. H. Perez, be for
warded to the Governors and Secretaries of
State of each state in the Union, and te the
Secretaries of the United States Senate and
House of Congress, and to the Louisiana Con
gressional delegation, a copy hereof to be
published in the Congressional Record.
VAIL M. DEtorir,
Speaker of the House of Representattvss.
C. C. Arcocx,
Lieutenant
Governor
and
President
of the Senate.
Thu l4rn AMENDMENT Is UNcoNstreunoim,
The purported
14th Amendment to the
United States Constitution is and should be
held to be Ineffective, invalid, null, void and
unconstitutional for the following reasons:
1. Thp Joint Resolution
prcposing
said
Amendment was not submitted to or adopted
by a Constitutional Congress. Article I, Sec
tion 3, and Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
2. The Joint Resolution was not submitted
to the President for his approval. Article I,
Section 7.
3. The proposed 14th Amendment was re
jected by more than one-fourth of all the
States then In the Union, and it was never
ratified by three-fourths of all the States in
the Union. Article V.
I. THE vNcoNsnrvrroNa coNcasso
The U.S. Constitution provides:
Article I, Section 3. “The Senate of the
United states shall be composed of two sen
ators from each state •
Article V provides: “No State, without its
consent, shall be deprived of its equal suf
frage in the Senate.”
The fact that 23 senators had been unlaw
fully excluded from the U.S. Senate, In order
to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of
the
Joint
Resolution
proposing
the
14th
Amendment is shown by Resolutions of pro-
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 16 of 55

15642
test adopted by the following State Legisla
tires:
The New Jersey Legislature by Resolution
of March 27, 1868, protested as follows:
“The said proposed amendment not having
yet received the assent of the three-fourths
of the states, which Is necessary to make it
valid, the natural and constitutional right
of
this
state
to
withdraw
its
assent
Is
undeniable ‘
“That it being necessary by the constitu
tion that every amendment to the
same
should be proposed by two-thirds of both
houses of
congress,
the
authors
of
said
proposition, for the purpose of eecuring the
assent of the requisite majority, determined
to, and did, exclude from the said two houses
eighty representatives front eleven states of
the union, upon the pretence that there were
no such states in the Union; but, finding
that two-thirds of the remainder of the said
houses could not be brought to assent to
the said proposition, they deliberately formed
and carried out the design of mutilating the
integrity of the United States senate, and
without any pretext or justification, other
than the possession of the power, without the
right, and in palpable violation of the consti
tution, ejected a member of their own body,
representing this state, and thus practically
denied to New Jersey its equal suffrage in
the senate, and thereby nominally secured
the vote of two-thirds of the said houses.”
The Alabama Legislature protested against
being deprived of representation in the Sen
ate of the U.S. Congress.’
The Texas Legislature by Resolution on
October 15, 1868, protested as follows:
“The amendment to the Constitution pro
posed
by this joint resolution
as Article
XIV is presented to tho Legislature of Texas
for its action thereon, under Article V of that
Constitution. This Article V. providing the
mode of making amendments to that instru
ment, contemplates the participation by an
the States through their representatives in
Congress, in proposing amendments. As rep
resentatives from nearly one-third of the
States were exciuded from the Congress pro
posing the amendments, the constitutional
requirement was not complied With~ it was
violated in letter and in spirit; and the pro
posing of these amendments to States which
were excluded from all participation In their
initiation in Congress, is a nullity.”
The Arkansas Legislature, by Resolution on
December 17, 1868, protested as follows:
“The Constitution authorized two-thirds
of both houses of Congress to propose amend
xnents; and, as eleven States were excluded
from deliberation and decision upon the one
now submitted, the conclusion is inevitable
that It is not proposed by legal authority,
but in palpable violation of the Constitu
tion,”4
The Georgia Legislature, by Resolution on
November 9, 1866, protested as follows:
“Since the reorganization of the State gov
ernment, Georgia has elected Senators and
Representatives. So has
every other State,
They have been arbitrarily refused admission
to their seats, not on the ground that the
qualifications of the members elected did not
conform to the fourth paragraph, second sec
tion, first article of the Constitution, but
because their right of representation was
denied by a portion of the States having
equal but not greater rights then themselves.
They have in fact been forcibly excluded;
and, inasmuch as all legislative power grant
ed by the States to the Congress is defined,
and this power of exclusion is not among the
powers expressly or by implication, the as
semblage, at the capitol, of representatives
from a portion of the States, to the exclusion
of the representatives of another portion,
‘New Jersey Acts, March 27, 1868.
N
‘Alabama Rouse Journal 1868, pp. 210—213.
‘Texas House Journal, 1866, p. 577.
‘Arkansas House Journal, 1866, p. 287.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
cannot be a constitutional Congress, when
the representation of each State forms an
integral part of the whole,
“This amendment Is tendered to Georgia
for ratification, under that power In the Con
stitution which authorizes two-thirds of the
Congress to propose amendments. We have
endeavored to establish that Georgia had a
right, in the first place, as a part of the Con
gress, to act upon the question, ‘Shall these
amendments be prcposed?’ Every other ex
cluded State had the same right.
“The first constitutional privilege has been
arbitrarily denied. Had these amendments
been submitted to a constitutional Congress.
they nevelwould have been proposed to the
States. Two-thirds of the whole
Congress
never would have proposed to eleven States
voluntarily to reduce their political power in
the Union, nnd at the same time, disfran
chise the larger portion of the intellect, in
tegrity and patriotism of
eleven co-equal
States.”5
The Florida Legislature, by Resolution of
December 5, 1866, protested as follows:
“Let this alteration be made in the organic
system and some new and more startling de
mands may or may not be required by the
predominant party previous to allowing the
ten States now unlawfully and unconstitu
tionally deprived of their right of represen
tation to enter the Halls of the National
Legislature. Their right to representation is
guaranteed by the Constitution of this coun
try and there is no act, not even that of
rebellion, can deprive them cf its exercise.”~
The South Carolina Legislature by Resolu
tion of November 27, 1866, protested as fol
lows:
“Eleven of the Southern States, including
South Carolina, are deprived of their repre
sentation in Congress. Although their Sena
tors
and Representatives have
been duly
elected
and
have
presented
themselves
for the purpose of taking their seats, their
credentials have, in most instances, been laid
upon the table without being read, or have
been referred to
a
committee,
who have
failed to make any report on the subject. In
short, Congress has refused to exercise Its
Constitutional functions, and decide either
upon the election, the return, or the quall
fication of these selected by the States and
people to represent us. Some of the Senators
and
Representatives
from
the
Southern
States were prepnred to take the test oath,
but even these have been persistently ig
nored, and kept out of the sests to which
they were entitled under the Constitution
and laws.
“Hence this amendment has not been pro
posed by ‘two-thirds of both Rouses’ of a
legally constituted Congress, and Is not, Con
stitutionally or legitimately, before a single
Legislature for ratification.”
The North Carolina Legislature protested
by Resolution of December 6, 1866 as follows:
“The Pederai Constitution declares, in eub
stance, that Congress shall consist of a Rouse
of
Representatives,
composed
of members
apportioned among the respective States in
the ratio of their population, and of a Sen
ate, composed of two members from each
State.
And in the Article which concerns
Anlendments, it is expressly provided that
‘no State, without it consent, shall be de
prived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.’
The contemplated Amendment was not pro
posed to the States by a Congress thus con
stituted. At the time of its adoption, the
eleven seceding States were deprived of repre
sentation both in the
Senate and Rouse,
although they all, except the State of Texas,
had
Senator!
and
Representatives
duly
elected and claiming their privileges under
‘Georgia House Journal, November 9, 1868,
pp. 66—67.
5plorida Rouse Journal, 1866, p. 76.
‘South Carolina House Journal, 1868, PP.
38 and 24.
Jtthze 13, 1967
the Constitution, In consequence of this,
these States had no voice on the important
question of proposing the Amendment. Had
they been allowed to give their votes, the
proposition would doubtless have failed to
command
the
required
two-thirds
ma
jority.
If the votes of these States are necessary to
a valid ratification of the Amendment, they
were equally necessary on the question of
proposing it to the States; for it would be
diffloult, in the opinion of the Committee, to
show by what process In logic, men of intelli
gence could arrive at a diaterent conclusion.”
H. JOINT RE5OVUtON INEH’ECrIVS
Article I, Section 7 provides that not only
every bill which shall have been passed by
the Rouse of Representatives and the Senate
of the United States Congress, but that:
“Every order, resolution. or vote to which
the concurrence of the Senate and House of
Representatives may
be
necessary
(except
on a question of adjournment) shall be pre
sented to the President of the United States;
and before the same shall take effect, shah
be approved by him, or being disapproved by
him shall be repassed by two-thirds of the
Senate and House
of Representatives, ac
cording
to the rules and limitations pre
scribed In the case of a bill.”
The Joint Resolution proposing the 14th
Amendment’ was never
presented to the
President of the United States for his ap
proval, as President Andrew Johnson stated
in his message on June 22, 1866.15 Therefore,
the Joint Resolution did not take effect.
lit.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT NEvER n&TlrmD Br
Tisars-Povurus Or THE STATES
1. Pretermitting the Ineffectiveness of said
resolution, as above, fifteen (15) States out
of the then thirty-seven (37) States of the
Union rejected the proposed 14th Amend
ment between the date of its submission to
the States by the
Secretary
of State
on
June
16, 1866 and March 24, 1868, thereby
further nullifying said resolution and mak
ing it Impossible for its ratification by the
constitutionally
required
three-fourths
of
such
States,
as
shown
by the
rejections
thereof by the Legislatures of the following
states:
Texas rejected the 14th Amendment on
October 27, 1666.”
Georgia rejected the 14th Amendment On
November 0, 1866.”
Florida rejected the 14th Amendment on
December 6, 1866.”
Alabama rejeoted the 14th Amenditeat on
December 7, 1866.”
North Carolina rejected the 14th Amend
ment on December 14, 1866.”
Arkansas rejected the 14th Amendment on
Deoember 17, 1866.15
South Carolina rejected the 14th Amend
ment on December 20, 1866.”
Kentucky rejected the 14th Amendment on
January 8, 1867.11
5
Carolina Senate Journal, 1866—67,
pp. 92 and 93.
‘14 Stat. 358 eta.
“Senate Journal, 39th Congress, 1st sessn.
p. 568, and Rouse Journal p.889.
“House Journal 1866, pp. 578—584—-Senate
Journal 1866. p. 471.
“House Journal 1866, p. 68—Senate Jour
nal 1866, p. 72.
“Rouse Journal 1866, p. 76—Senate Jour
nal 1866, p. 8.
“House Journal 1866, pp. 210—213—Senate
Journal 1866, p. 183.
‘~
Journal 1868—1867, p. 183—Senate
Journal 1866—1867, P. 138.
“House Journal 1866, pp. 288—291-—Senate
Journal 1886, p. 262,
‘7 House Journal 1866, p. 284—Senate Jour
nal 1866, p. 280.
“House Journal 1887, p. 60—Senate Jour
nal 1867, p. 62.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 17 of 55

June 13, 1967
Virginia rejected the 14th Amendment on
January 9, 1867.”
Louisiana rejected the 14th Amendment
on February 6, 1867.”
Delaware rejected the 14th Amendment on
February 7, 1867.~
Maryland rejected tho 14th Amendment on
March 23, 1867.”
Mississippi rejected the i4th Amendment
on January 31, 1867.”
Ohio rejected the
14th Amendment on
January 16, 1868.”
New Jersey rejected the 14th Amendment
on March 24,1888.”
There was no question that all cf the
Southern
states which
rejected
the
14th
Amendment had legally constituted govern
ments, were fltlly recognized by the federal
government, and were functioning as mem
ber states of the Union at the time of their
rejection.
President Andrew Johnson, in his Veto
message of March 2, 1867,” pointed out that:
“It is not denied that the States in ques
tion have each of them an actual govern
ment with all the powers, executive, judicial
and legislative, which properly belong to a
free State. They are organized like the other
States of the Union, and, like them, they
make,
administer,
and
execute
the
laws
which concern their domestic affairs.”
If further proof were needed that these
States were operating under legally consti
tuted governments as member States in the
Union, the ratification of the 13th Amend
ment by December 8, 1885 undoubtedly sup
plies
this
official
proof, If
the
Southern
States were not member States of the Union,
the lath Amendment would not have been
submitted to their Legislatures for ratifica
tion.
2. The
18th Amendment to the United
States Constitution was proposed by Joint
Resolution of Congress” and was approved
February 1, 1865 by President Abraham Lin
coln, as required by Article I, Section 7 of the
United States Constitution. The President’s
signature is athxed to the Resolution.
ma 13th Amendment was ratified by 27
states of the then 36 states of the Union.
including the Southern States of Virginia,
Louisiana, Arkansas,
South
Carolina, Ala
bama, North Carolina and Georgia. This is
shown by the Proclamation of the Secretary
of State December 18,
1965.20 Without the
votes of these 7 Southern State Legislatures
the
13th
Amendment would
have
failed.
There can be no doubt but that the ratifica
ton by these 7 Southern States of the 13th
Amendment again established the fact that
their
Legislatures
and
State
governments
were duly and lawfully constituted and func
tioning as such under their State Constitu
tions.
3. Furthermore, on April 2, 1866, President
Andrew Johnson issued a proclamation that,
“the insurrection which heretofore existed
in the States of Georgia, South Carolina, Vir
ginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama,
Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi and Florida
Is at an end, and is henceforth to be so re
garded.””
“House Journal 1966—1867, p. 108—Senate
Journal 1866—1867, p. 101.
20 McPherson, Reconstruction, p. 194; An
nuAl Encyclopedia, p. 452.
“Rouse Journal 1867, p. 228—Senate Jour
nal 1867, p. 176.
House
Journal
1867.
p.
1141—Senate
Journal 1867, p. 808.
“McPherson, Reconstruction, p. 194.
“
Journal
1868, Pp. 44—50—Senate
Journal 1868, pp. 33—38.
~ Minutes of the Assembly 1868, p. 743—
Senate Journal 1868, p. 856.
“House Journal, 89th Congress, 2nd Ses
sion. p. 568 etc.
27 13 Stat. p. 567.
2013 Stat. p. 774.
“Presidential Proclamation No. 153, (len
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
On
August
20,
1866,
President
Andrew
Johnson
issued
another
proclamationn
pointing out the fact that the House of Rep
resentatives and Senate had adopted identi
cal Resoluticns
on July 22nd” and July
25th,
1861,” that the Civil War forced by
disunionists of the Southern States, was not
waged for tho purpose of conquest or to
overthrow the rights and established insti
tutions of those States, but to defend and
maintain the supremacy of the Constitution
and to preserve the Union with all equality
and rights of the several states unimpaired,
and that as soon as these objects are accom
plished, the war ought to cease. The Presi
dent’s proclamatLon on June
13,
1865, de
clared the insurrection in the State of Ten
nessee
had
been
suppressed.’3 The Presi
dent’s proclamation on AprIl 2, 1886,” de
clared the insurrection in the other South
ern States, except Texas, no longer existed.
On August
20,
1866,20
the President pro
claimed that the insurrection in the State of
Texas had been completely ended; and his
proclamation continued:
“the insurrection
which heretofore
existed in the
State
of
Texas is at an end, and Is to be henceforth
so regarded in that State, as in the other
States before named in which the said in
surrection was proclaimed to be at an end
by the aforesaid proclamation of the second
day of April. one thousand, eight hundred
and sixty-six.
“And I do further proclaim that the said
insurrection is at an end, and that peace,
order, tranquility, and civil authority now
exist, in and throughout the whole of the
United States of America.”
4. When the State of Louisiana rejected
the 14th Amendment on February 6, 1867,
making the 10th state to have rejected the
same, or more than one-fourth of the total
number of 36 states Of the Union as of that
date, thus leaving less than three-fourths of
the states possibly to ratify the same, the
Amendment failed of ratification in fact and
in law, and it could not have boen revived
except by
a new Joint Resolution of the
Senate
and
House
of
Representatives
In
accordance with Constitutional requirement.
5. Faced with the positive failure of rati
fication of the 14th Amendment, both Houses
of Congress passed over the veto of the Presi
dent three Acts known
as Reconstruction
Aots, between the
dates of March
2
and
July 19, 1567, especially the third of said
Acts,
15 Stat. p. 14 etc., designed illegally
to remove with “Military force” the lawfully
constituted
State
Legisiatures
of
the
10
Southern States of Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama,
Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas.
Zn President Andrew Johnson’s Veto message
on the Retonstruction Act of March 2, 1867,”
he pointed out these unoonstitutionalities:
“If ever the American citizen should be
left to the free exercise of his own judgment,
it is when he is engaged in the work of form
ing the fundamental law under which he Is
to live. That work Is his work, and it can
not properly be taken out of his hands. All
this legislation proceeds upon the contrary
Assumption that the people of each of these
States shall have no constitution, except such
as may be arbitrsrariiy dictated by Congress,
and formed under the restraint of military
rule. A plain statement of facts makes this
evident.
eral
Records of the United States,
G.S.A~
National Archives and Records Service,
“14 Stat. p. 814.
“House Journal, 37th Congress, 1st Sessn.
p. 123 etc.
“Senate Journal, 37th Congress, 1st Sessn.
p. 91 etc.
“13 Stat. 763.
‘
14 Stat. p. 811.
“ 14 Stat 814.
“House Journal, 89th Congress, 2nd Sessn,
p. 563 etc.
15643
“In all these States there are existing con.
stitutions, framed in the accustomed way by
the people, Congress, however, declares that
these constitutions are not ‘loyal and repub
lican,’ and requires the people to form them
anew. What, then, in the opinion of Con
gress, is necessary to make the constitution
of a State ‘loyal and republican?’ The original
act answers the question: ‘It is universal
negro suffrage, a question which the federal
Constitution leaves exclusively to the States
themselves. All this legislative machinery of
martial law, military coercion, and political
disfranchisement is avowedly for that pur
pose and none other. The existing constitu
tions of the ten States conform to the ac
knowledged standards of loyalty and repub
licanism. Indeed, if there are degrees in re
publican forms of government, their constitu
tions are more republican now, than when
these States—four of which were members
of the original thirteen—first became mem
bers of the Union.”
In President Andrew Johnson’s Vato mes
sage on the Reconstruction Act on July 19,
1867,” he pointed out various unconstitu
tionalities as follows:
‘~The veto of the original bill of the 2d of
March was based on two distinct grounds.
the
interference
of
Congress
in
matters
strictly appertaining to the reserved powers
of the States, and the establishment of mili
tary tribunals for the trial of citizens in time
of peace.
S
S
S
S
“A singular contradiction is apparent here.
Congress declares these iocal State govern
ments to be illegal governments, and then
provides that these illegal governments shalt
be carried on by federal officers, who are to
perform tho very duties on its own officers
by this illegal State authority. It certainly
would be a novel spectacle If Congress should
attempt to carry on a legal State government
by the agency of its own officers. It is yet
more strange that Congress attempts to sus
tain and carry on an illegal State govern
ment by tie same federal agency.
*
S
S
*
“It Is now too late to say that these ten
political communities are not States of this
Union, Declarations to the contrary made in
these three acts are contradicted again and
again by repeated acts of legislation enacted
by Congress from the year 1861 to the year
1867.
“During that period, while these States
were in actuai rebellion, and after that re
bellion was brought to a close, they have
been again and agaia recognized as States
of the Union. Representation has been appor
tioned to them as States. They have been di
vided into judicial districts for the holding
of district and circuit courts of the United
States, as States of the Union only can be
districted. The last act on this subject was
passed July 23, 1866, by which every one of
these ten States was arranged into districts
and circuits.
“They have been called upon by Congress
to act through their legislatures upon at
least two amendments to the Constitution of
the United States. As States they have rati
fied one amendment, which required the
vote of twenty-seven States of the thirty-
six then composing the Union. When the
requisite twenty-seven votes were given In
favor of that amendment—seven of which
votes
were
given by
seven
of
these
ten
States—it was proclaimed to be a part of
the Constitution of the United States, and
slavery was declared no longer to exist within
the United States or any place subject to
their jurisdiction. If these seven States were
not legal States of the Union, it follows as
an Inevitable consequence that in some of
the States slavery yet exists. It does not exist
“40th Congress, 1st Sessn. House Journal
p. 232 etc.
CXIII—986--—Part 12
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 18 of 55

15644
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
June 18, 1967
in these seven States, for they have abolished
it also in their State constitutions; but Ken
tucky not having done so, it would stifl re
main in that State. But, in truth, if this
assumption that these States have no legal
State governments be true, then the aboli
tion of slavery by these illegal governments
binds no one, for Congress now denies to
these States the power to abolish slavery by
denying to them the power to elect a legal
State legislature, or to frame a constitution
for any purpose, even for such a purpose as
the abolition of slavery.
“As to the other constitutional amend
ment having referenco to suffrage, it hap
pens that these States have not accepted
it. The consequence is, that it has never been
proclaimed or understood, even by Congress,
to be a part of the Constitution of the United
States. The Senate of the United States has
repeatedly
given its sanction to
the ap
pointment of judges, district attorneys, and
marshals for every one of these States; yet,
if they axe not legal States, not one-of these
judges is authorized to hold a court. So, too,
both houses of Congress have passed appro’
priation bills to pay all these judges, at
torneys, and officers of the United States for
exercising their functions in these States.
Again, In the machinery of the internal rev
enue laws, all these States
are districted,
not as ‘Territories,’ but as ‘States.’
“So much for continuous legislative recog
nition, The instances cited, however, fall far
short
of
all
that might
be
enumerated.
Executive recognition, as is well known, has
been frequent and unwavering, The same
may
be
said
as
to
judicial
recognition
through the Supreme Court of the United
State,.
no
S
S
S
“To ms these considerations are conclusive
of the unconstitutionality of this part of the
bill now before me, and I earnestly commend
their consideration to the deliberate Judg
ment of Congress. [And now to the Ccurt.]
‘Within a period less than a year the legis
lation of Congress has attempted to strip the
executive department of the government of
some of its essential powers. The Constitu
tion, and the oath provided in it, devolve
upon the President the power and duty to
see that the laws are faithfully executed.
The Constitution, in order to carry out this
power, gives him the choice of the agents,
and makes them subject to his control and
supervision. But in the execution of tbese
laws the constitutional obligation upon the
President remains, but the powers to exer
cise that constitutional duty is effectually
taken away. The military commnnder is, as
to the power of appointment, made to take
the place of its President, and the General
of the Army the place of the Senate; and any
attempt on the part of the President to assert
his own constitutional power
may, under
pretence of law, be met by official insubordi
nation. It is to be feared that these military
officers, looking to the authority given by
these laws rather than to the letter of the
Constitution, wili recognize no authority but
the commander of the district and the Gen
era) of the army,
‘If there were no other objection than this
to
this
proposed
legislation, it would
be
sufficient.”
No one can contend that the Reconstruc
tion Acts were ever upheld as being valid and
constitutional.
They were brought into question, but the
Courts either avoided decision or were pre
vented by Congress from finally adjudicating
upon their constitutionality.
In Mississippi v. President Andrew John
son, (4 Wall. 476—502), where the suit sought
to enjoin the President of the United States
from enforcing provisions of the Reconstruc
tion Acts, the U.S. Supreme Court held that
the President cannot be enjoined because for
the Judicial Department of the government
to attempt to enforce the performance ef
the duties by the President might be justly
charaoterized, in the language of Chief Jus
tice Marshall, as “an absurd and excessive
extravagance.” The Court further said that
if the Court granted the injunction against
enforcement of the Reconstruotion Acts, and
if the President refused obedience, it is need
less to observe that the Court is without
power to enforce its process.
In
a joint action, the states of Georgia
and
Mississippi
brought suit
against the
President and the Secretary of war, (6 Wall.
50-48. 154 U.S. 554).
The Court said that:
“The bill then sits forth that the intent
and design of the Acts of Congress, as ap
parent on thier face and by their terms, are
to overthrow and annul this existing state
government, and to erect another and dif
ferent government in its place, unauthor
ized by the Constitution and in defiance of
its guaranties; and that, in furtherance of
this intent and design, the defendants, the
Secretary of war, the General of the Army,
and Major-General Pope, acting under orders
of the President, are about setting in mo
tion a portion of the army to take military
possession of the state, and threaten to sub
vert her government and subject her people
to military rule; that the state is holding
inadequate means to resist the power and
force of the Executive Department of the
United States; and she therefore insists that
such protection can, and ought to be afforded
by
a decree or order of his court in the
premises.”
The applications for injunction by these
two states to prohibit the Executive Depart
ment from carrying out the provisions of
the Reconstruction Acts directed to the over
throw of their government, including this
dissolution of their state legislatures, were
denied on the grounds that the organization
of the government into three great depart
ments, the executive, legislative and judicial,
carried limitations of the powers of each by
the Constitution. This case when the same
way
as
the
previous
case
of
Mississippi
against President Johnson and was dismissed
without
adjudicating
upon
the
constitu
tionality of the Reconstruction Acts.
In another case, ex parte William ii. Mc
Cardie (7 Wall. 506—515), a petition for the
writ of habeas corpus for unlawful restraint
by military force of a citizen not in the
military service of the United States was
befere
the United States
Supreme
Court,
After the case was argued and, taken under
advisement, and before conference in re
gard to the decision to be made, Congress
passed an emergency Act, (Act March 27,
1808.
15
Stat,
at L.
44),
vetoed
by the
President and repassed over his veto, re
pealing the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme
Court in such case. Accordingly, the Supreme
Court dismissed the appeal without passing
upon the constitutionality of the Recon
struction Acts, under which the non-military
citizen was held by the military without
benefit of writ of habeas corpus, in viola
tion of Section 9, Article I of the U.S. Con
stitution which prohibits the suspension of
the writ of habeas corpus,
That Act of Congress pieced the Recon
struction Acts beyond judicial recourse and
avoided tests or constitutionality.
It is recorded that one of the Supreme
Court Justices, Orier, protested against the
action of the Court as follows:
“This case was fully argued in the begin
ning of this month. It is a case which in
volves the liberty and rights, not only of
the appellant but of- millions of our fellow
citizens. The country and the parties had
a right to expect that it would receive the
immediate
and
solemn
attention
of
the
court. By the postponement of this case we
shall subject ourselves, whether justly or
unjustly, to the imputation that we have
evaded the performance of a duty imposed
on us by the Constitution, and waited for
Legislative interposition to
supersede
our
action, and relieve us from responsibility.
I am not willing to be a partaker of the
eulogy or opprobrium that may follow. I
can only say
.
.
. I am ashamed that such
opprobrium should be cast upon the court
and that it cannot be refuted.”
The ten States were organized into Military
Districts
under
the unconstitutional “Re
construotion Acts.” their lawfully constituted
Legislature illegally were removed by “mili
tary force,” and they were replaced by rump,
so-called Legislatures, seven of which carried
out military orders and pretended to ratify
the 14th Amendment, as follows:
Arkansas on April 6, i868;~
North Carolina on July 2, 1858;”
Florida on June 9, 1868;”
Louisiana on July 9, 1868;~’
South Carolina on July 9, 1858;~’
Alabama on July 13. 1868;” and Georgia
on July 21, 1868.”
0. Of the above 7 States whose Legislatures
were removed
and replaced by rump, so-
called Legislatures, six (8) Legislatures of the
States of Louisiana, Arkansas. South Caro
lina, Alabama, North Carolina and Georgia
had ratIfied the 13th Amendment, as shown
by the Secretary of State’s Proclamation of
December 18, 1865, without which 6 States’
ratifications, the 13th Amendment could not
and would not have been ratified because said
6 States made a total of 27 out of 36 States
or exactly three-fourths of the number re
quired by Article V of the Constitution for
ratification.
Furthermore, governments cf the States
of Louisiana and Arkansas had been re-estab
lished under a Proclamation issued by Presi
dent Abraham Lincoln December 8, 1863.’~
The government of North Carolina had
been re-established under
a Proclamation
issued by President Andrew Johnson dated
May 29, 1865,”
The government of Georgia had been re
established under a proclamation issued by
President Andrew Johnson dated June
17,
1865.”
The government of Alabama had been re
established under a Proclamation issued by
President Andrew Johnson dated June 21,
1865,0
The government of South Carolina
- had
been re-established under
a Proclamation
issued by President Andrew Johnson dated
June 30, 1865.”
These three “Reconstruction Acts”” under
which the above State Legislatures were ii-
legally removed and unlawful rump or pup
pet ac-called Legislatures were substituted
in a mock effort to ratify the 14th Amend
ment, were unconstitutional, null and void,
ab initic, and all acts done thereunder were
also nun and void, including the purported
ratification of the 14th Amendment by said
6
Southern
puppet
State
Legislatures
of
5Mcpherson, Reconstruction, p. 53.
SD Rouse Journal 1868, p. 15, Senate Journal
1868, p. 15.
“Rouse Journal 1868, p. 9, Senate Journal
1866, p. 8.
“Senate Journal 1868, p. 21.
“House Journal 1868, p. 50, Senate Jour
nal 1868, p. 12.
“
Journal,
40th
Congress,
2nd
Sessn. p. 725.
“Rouse Journal, 1868, p. 50.
“Vol. I, pp. 288406;
Vol. II, pp.
1429—
1446—”The
Federal
and
State
Constitu
tions,”
etc.,
compiled
under Act of Ccn
gress
on
June
30,
1900.
Francis
Newton
Thorpe. Washington
Government Printing
Office (1906).
“Same, Thorpe, Vol. V. pp. 2799—2800.
“Same, Thorpe, Vol. II, pp. 809—822.
“Same, Thorpe, Vol. I, pp.
116—132.
“Same, Thorpe, Vol. VI, pp. 3269—3281.
5014 Stat p. 428, etc. 15 Stat. p. 14, etc.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 19 of 55

June 13, 1967
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
15645
Arkansas, North Carolina, Louisiana, South
Carolina, Alabama and Georgia.
Those Reconstruction Acts of Congress and
all acts and things unlawfully done there
under were In violation of Article IV, Sec
tIon
4 of the United States Constitution,
which required the United States to guar
antee every State in the Union a republi
can form of government. They violated Arti
cle 1, Section 3, and Article V of the Con
stitution, which entitled every State in the
Union to two Senators, because under pro
visions of these unlawful Acts of Congress,
10 States were deprived of having two Sen
ators, or equal suffrage in the Senate.
7. The Secretary of State expressed doubt
as to whether three-fourths of the required
states had ratified the 14th Amendment, as
shown by his Proclamation of July 20, 1868.a
Promptly on July 21, 1868, a Joint Resolu
tion~’ was adopted by the Senate and House
of
Representatives
declaring
that
three’
fourths of the several States of the Union had
ratified the 14th Amendment. That resolu
tion, however, included purported ratifica
tions by the unlawful puppet Legislatures of
6 States, Arkansas, North Carolina, Louisiana,
South Carolina and Alabama, which had pre
vIously rejected the 14th Amendment by ac
tion of their lawfully constituted Legisla
tures, as above shown. This Joint Resolution
assumed to perform the function of the Sec
retary of State in whom Congress, by Act of
April 20, 1518, had vested the function of
issuing such proclamation declaring the rati
fication of Constitutional Amendments,
The Secretary of State bowed to the action
of Congress and issued his Proclamation of
July 28. 1868?’ in which he stated that he
was acting under authority of the Act of
April 20, 1810, but pursuant to said Resolu
tion of July 21, 1888. He listed three-fourths
or so of the then 37 states as having ratified
the
14th Amendment, including the pur
ported ratification of the unlawful puppet
Legislatures of the States of Arkansas, North
Carolina. Louisiana, South Carolina and Ala
bama, Without said
5 unlawful purported
ratifications there would have been only 25
states left to ratify out of 87 when a mini
mum of 28 states was required for ratification
by three-fourths or the States of the Union.
The Joint ResolutLon of Congress and the
resulting Proclamation of the Secretary of
State siso included purported ratifications by
the States of Ohio and New Jersey, although
the Proclamation recognized the fact that
the Legislatures of said states, several months
previously, had withdrawn their ratifications
and effectively rejected the 14th Amendment
in January, 1868, and April, 1888.
Therefore, deducting these two states from
the
purported
ratifications
of
the
14th
Amendment, only 23 State ratifications at
most could be claimed; whereas the ratifica
tion of
28 States, or three-fourths of 37
States in the Union, were required to ratify
the 14th Amendment,
From all of the above documented historic
facts, It is inescapable that the 14th Amend
ment never was validly adopted as an article
of the Constitution, that it has no legal
effect,
and It should
be
declared by the
Courts to be unconstitutional, and therefore
null, void and of no effect.
THE CONSrITUT:ON sYafl(Es THE 14TH AMEND
MENT WITH NULLITY
The defenders
of
the 14th
Amendment
contend that the U.S. Supreme Court has
finally decided upon its validity. Such is not
the ease.
In what is considered the leading case,
Coleman v. MIller, 307 U.S. 440, 59 5. Ct. 972,
the U.S. Supreme Court did not uphold the
validity of the 14th Amendment.
•1 15 Stat. p. 70G.
~ House Journal, 40th Congress, 2nd Sessn.
p. 1126 etc.
15 Stat. p. 708,
In that
case,
the Court brushed aside
constitutional questions as though they did
not exist. For instance, the Court made the
statement that:
“The legislatures of Georgia, North Caro
lina and South Carolnia had rejected the
amendment
in
November
and
December.
1866. New governments were erected In those
States (and In others) under the direction
of Congress. The nsw legislatures ratified
the amendment, that of North Carolina on
July 4,
1868, that of South Carolina on
July 0, 1868, and that of Georgia on July 21,
1868.’
And the Court gave no consideration to the
fact that Georgia, North Carolina and South
Carolina were three of the original states of
the Union with valid and existing constitu
tions on an equal footing with the other
original states and those later admitted into
the Union.
What constitutional right
did
Congress
have to remove those state governments and
their legislatures under unlawful military
power setup by the unconstitutional “Recon
struction Acts,” which had for their purpose,
the destruction and removal of these legal
state governments and the nullification of
their Constitutions?
Thefact that these three states and seven
other Southern States had existing Constitu,
tions, were recognized as states of the Union,
again and again; had been divided into judi
cial districts for holding their district and
circuit courts of the United States; had been
called upon by Congress to act through their
legislatures upon two Amendments, the 18th
and 14th, and by their ratifications had ao~
tually made possible the adoption of the 13th
Amendment;
as well as their state govern
ments
having
been
re-established
under
Presidential
Proclamations,
as
shown
by
President Andrew Johnson’s Veto
message
and proclamations, were all brushed aside
by the Court in Coleman by the statement
that:
“New governments
were
erected
in
those States (and in others) under the di
rection of Congress,” and that these new leg
islatures ratified the Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court overlooked that
it previously bad held that at no time were
these Southern States out
of the Union.
White v. Hart, 1871, 13 wall. 648, 854.
In Coleman, the Court did not adjudicate
upon the Invalidity of the Acts of Congress
which set aside those state Constitutions and
abolished their state legisiatures,—the Court
simply referred to the fact that their legally
constituted legislatures had rejected the 14th.
Amendment and that the “new legislatures”
had ratified the Amendment.
The Court overlooked the fact, too, that
the State of Virginia was also one of the
original states with its Constitution and Leg
islature in full
operation under its civil
government at the time.
The Court also ignored the fact that the
other six Southern States, which were given
the same treatment by Congress under the
unconstitutional “Reconstruction Acts”, all
had
legal constitutions
and
a republican
form of government In each state, as was
recognized by Congress by its admission of
those states into the Union. The Court cer
tainly must take judicial cognizance of the
fact that before a new state is admitted by
Congress into the Union, Congress enacts an
Enabling Act to enable the inhabitants of
the territory to adopt a Constitution to set
up a republican form of government as a
condition precedent to the admission of the
state Into the Union, and upon approval of
such Constitution, Congress then passes the
Act of Admission of such state.
All this was ignored and brushed aside
by the Court in the Coleman ease. However,
in
Coleman
the
Court inadvertently
said
this:
“Whenever official notice is received at the
Department of State that any amendment
proposed to the Constitution of the United
States has been adopted, according to the
provisions of the Constitution, the Secretary
of State shall forthwith cause the amend
ment to be published, with his certifloate,
specifying the States by which the same may
have been adopted, and that the same has
become valid, to all intents and purposes, as
a part of the Constitution of the United
States.”
in Hawke v. SmIth, 1920, 263 U.S. 221, 40 S.
Ct. 227, the U.S. Supreme Court unmistakably
held:
“The fifth article Is a grant of authority
by the people to Congress. The determina
tion of the method of ratification is the
exercise
of
a
national
power
specifically
ranted by the Constitution: that power is
conferred upon Congress, and Is limited to
two methods, by action of the Legislatures
of three-fourths of the states, or conven
tions in a like number of states. Dodge v.
Woolsey, 18 How. 331, 348, 15 L. Ed. 401. The
framers
of
the
Constitution might
have
adopted
a
different
method.
Ratification
might have been left to a vote of the people.
or to some authority of government other
than that selected. The language of the arti
cle is plain, and admits of no doubt in its
intrepretation. It
is not the function of
courts or legislative bodies, national or state,
to alter the method which the Constitution
has fixed.”
We submit that in none of the cases, in
which the Court avoided the constitutional
Issues involved In the composition of the
Congress which adopted the Joint Resolution
for the 14th Amendment, did the Court pass
upon the constitutionality of the Congress
which purported to adept the Joint Resolu
tion for the 14th Amendment, with 80 Rep
resentatives
and
23
Senators,
in
effect.
forcibly ejected or denied their seats and
their votes on the Joint Resolution propos
ing the Amendment, in order to pass the
same by a two-thirds vote, as pointed out in
the New Jersey Legislature Resolution on
March 27, 1868.
The constitutional requirements set forth
in Article V of the Constitution permit the
Congress to propose amendments only when
ever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it
necessary,—.that
is,
two-thirds
of
both
houses as then constituted without forcible
ejections,
Such a fragmentary Congress also violated
the constitutional requirements of Article V
that no state, without its consent, shall be
deprived of it~ equal suffrage in the Senate.
There is no such thing as giving life to an
amendment illegally proposed or never legal
ly ratified by three-fourths of the states.
There is no such thing as amendment by
laches;
no such
thing •as amendment by
waiver; no such thing as amendment by ac
quiescence; and no such thing as amend
ment by any other means whatsoever except
the means specified in Article V of the Con
stitution itself.
It does not suffice to say that there have
been hundreds of cases decided under the
14th Amendment to supply the constitutional
deficiencies in its proposal or ratification as
required by Article V. If hundreds of litigants
did not question the validity of the 14th
Amendment,
or questioned the same per
functorily without submitting documentary
proof of the facts of record which made its
purported adoption unconstitutional, their
failure cannot change the Constitution for
the millions in America. The same thing is
true of Inches; the same thing Is true of
acquiescence; the same thing is true of ill
considered court decisions.
To ascribe constitutional life to an alleged
amendment which never
came into
being
according to specific methods laid down in
Article V cannot be done without doing vio
lence to Article V Itself. This Is true, because
the
only question open to
the
courts
is
whether the alleged i4th Amendment be
came a part of the Constitution through a
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 20 of 55

15646
method required by Article V. Anything be
yond that which a court is called upon to
hold in order to validate an amendment,
would be equivalent to writing into Article V
another mode of the amendment which has
never been authorized by the people of the
United States.
On this point, therefore, the question is,
was the 14th Amendment proposed and rati
fled in accordance with Article U?
In answering this question, it is of no real
moment that decisions have been rendered
in which the parties did not contest or sub
mit proper evidence, or the Court assumed
that there was a 14th Amendment. If a stat
ute never in fact passed by Congress, through
some error of administration and printing
got into the published reports of the stat
utes, and if under such supposed statute
courts had levied punishment upon a num
ber of persons charged under it, and if the
error in the published volume was discovered
and the fact became known that no such
statute had ever passed in Congress, it is un
thinkable that the Courts would continue to
administer punishment in similar cases, on
a non-existent statute because prior decisions
had done so. If that be true as to a statute
we need only realize thc greater truth when
the principle is applied to the solemn ques
tion of the contents of the Constitution.
While the defects in the method of propos
ing and the subsequent method of comput
ing “ratification”
is
briefed
elsewhere, it
should be noted that tbe failure to comply
with Article V began with the first action by
Congress. The very Congress whIch proposed
the alleged 14th Amendment under the first
part of Article V was itself, at that very time,
violating the last part as well as the first
part of Article V of the Constitution. We
shall see how this was done,
mete is one, and only one, provision of
the Constitution of the United States which
is forever immutable—which
can never be
changed or expunged. The Courts cannot
alter it; the executives cannot change it; the
Congress cannot change it; the States them
selves—even all the States in perfect con
cert—cannot amend it in any manner what
soever, whether they act through conven
tions called for the purpose or through their
legislatures. Not even the unanimous vote of
every voter in the United States could amend
this provision. It is a perpetual fixture in
the Constitution, so perpetual and so fixed
that if the people of the United States de
sired to change or exclude it, they would be
compelled to abolish the Constitution and
start afresh,
The unalterable provision is this: “that
no State, without Sts consent, shall be de
prived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”
A state, by its own consent, may waive
this right of equal suffrage, but that is the
only legal method by which a failure to ac
cord this immutable right of equal suffrage
in the Senate can be justified. Certainly not
by forcible ejection and denial by a major
ity in Congress, as was done for the adoption
of the Joint Resolution for the 14th Amend
ment.
Statements by the Court in the Coleman
case that
Congress
was
left in
complete
control of the mandatory process, and there
fore it was a political affair for Congress to
decide if an amendment had been ratified,
does not square with Article V of the Con
stitution which shows no intention to leave
Congress in charge of deciding whether there
has been a ratification. Even a constitution
ally recognized Congress
is given but one
volition in Article V. that is. to vote whether
to propose an Amendment on its own initia
tive. The remaining steps by Congress are
mandatory. If two-thirds of both houses shall
deem it
necessary.
Congress shall propose
amendments; if the Legislatures
of two-
thirds of the States make application, Con
gress shall call a convention. For the Court
to give Congress any power beyond that to be
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
found in Article V Is to write the new mate
rial into Article V.
It would be inconceivable that the con
gress of the United
- States could propose,
compel submission to. and then give life
to an invalid amendment by resolving that
its effort had succeeded—regardless of com
pliance with the positive provisions of Ar
ticle V.
It should
need no further citations to
sustain
the
proposition that neither
the
Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amend
ment nor its ratification by the required
three-fourths of the States in the Union
were in compliance with the requirements
of Article V of the Constitution.
When
the mandatory provisions of the
Constitution are violated, the Constitution
itself strikes with nullity the Act that did
violence to its provisions. Thus, the Consti
tution strikes with nullity the
purported
14th Amendment.
The Courts, bound by oath to support the
Constitution, should review all of the evi
dence herein submitted
and measure the
facts proving violations of the mandatory
provisions of the Constitution with Articie
V.
and finally render judgment declaring
said purported Amendment never to have
been adopted as required by the Constitu
tion.
The Constitution mal~es it the sworn duty
of the judges to uphold the Constitution
which strikes with nullity the 14th Amend
ment.
And, as Chief Justice Marshall pointed out
for a unanimous Court In Marbury v. Madison
(1 Cranch 130 @ 179):
“The framers of the constitution contem
plated the instrument as a rule for the gov
ernment of courts, as well as of the legisla
ture,”
•
5
S
S
S
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his
duties agreeably to the constitution of the
United States, if that constitution fo,rms no
rule for his government?”
•
*
S
5
0
“If such be the real state of things, that
is worse than solema mockery. To prescribe,
or to
take this oath,
becomes
equally
a
crime.”
•
S
S
S
S
‘Thus, the particular phraseology of the
constitution of the United States confirms
and strengthens the principle, supposed to
be essential to all written constitutions
courts,
as well
as other departments, are
bound by that instrument.”
The federal courts actually refuse to hear
argument
on
the
invalidity
of
the
14th
Amendment,
even when the
issue
is pre
sented squarely by the pleadings and the evi
dence as above.
Only an aroused public sentiment in favor
or preserving the Constitution and our in
stitutions and freedoms under coastitutional
government, and the future security of our
country,
will
break
the
political
barrier
which now prevents judicial consideration
of the unconstitutionality of the 14th amend
ment.
THE rVUDEAST CRISIS—NOT BACK
WARD
TO
BELLIGERENCY
BUT
FORWARD TO PEACE
Mr.
PRYOR.
Mr.
Speaker, I
ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from New York EMr. TSNZER) may ex
tend his remarks at this point in the
REcoan and include extraneous matter.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman
from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. TENZER.
Mr. Speaker, the dis
tinguished Foreign Minister of the State
June U, 1967
of Israel, .Abba Eban, In his address to
the United Nations Security Council on
June 6, 1967, set the theme for a lasting
peace in the Middle East so much de
sired by all the peace-loving nations of
the
world.
His
address
was
entitled,
“Not Backward to Belligerency but For
ward to Peace.”
On June 7, 1967. following the first
United Nations resolution calling for a
cease-fire In the Middle East, I stated to
a distinguished group of Americans who
visited me in Washington as follows:
I deem it most imperative that the terms
of the agreement to follow the
cease fire
provide effective guarantees, to the end that
permanent peace may be established in the
Middle East.
The interests of world peace would best
be served if the terms provide:
1. For recognition of the validity of the
sovereignty of
the State of Israel by the
U.A.R. and other Arab states.
2. A reaffirmation that the Gulf or Aqaba
is an international waterway and will re
main open for free passage to shipping or all
nations through the Straits of ‘Tiran.
3. An opening of the Suez Canal to ship
ping of all nations.
4. An ending of terrorism and border raids
so that Israel may carry out its desire to live
in peace with its neighbors.
5. For direct negotiations between Israel
and her Arab neighbors for the resolution
of other pending issues.
Indeed, it is within the province of the
sovereign State of Israel to speak its
mind on the terms of the agreement to
follow the cease-fire——the terms which In
its
view
will
best
Insure
permanent
peace In the Middle East. We on the
other hand take the opportunity to make
suggestions which In our opinion will
best secure the peace of the world—
thereby also setving the best Interests
of the United States.
An elaboration of the five points sug
gested on June 7, 1966, is accordingly
in order.
I.
THE STATE
OW
ISRAEL
A SOvERnIGN
NATION
The State of Israel is a member of the
United Nations—a full-fledged member
of the family of nations. Though the in
tegrity of her borders were guaranteed
by the major powers—three times in 20
years—the State of Israel was obliged
to go to war to put a stop to the viola
tion of her boundary lines.
It is therefore basic to any plan for
permanent peace In the Middle East that
the sovereignty of the State of Israel be
recognized by her neighbors. This fact
cannot be questioned—this truth is and
should not be negotiable because its im
port was underlined by the events of the
past 10 days.
The foundation for a permanent peace
in the Middle East must be the absolute
and unqualified recognition by the Arab
States of the right of the State of Israel
to exist as a sove~eign state among other
sov~relgn states. When this foundation is
laid, then Israel and her Arab neigh
bors can, through direct negotiations,
begin to build the structure leading to
permanent peace.
II.
STRAIT
OF TIRAN
AN INrERNATI0NAT,
WATERWAY
SInce 1950, Egypt has repeatedly given
assurances
that
the
Strait
of
Tiran
would remain open for “innocent passage
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 21 of 55

Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 22 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1611
Public Law 97—116
97th Congress
An Act
To amend the immigration and Nationality Act, and for other purpoecs.
Dcc. 29, 1981
& it enacted I~’ the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assemble4 That (a) this Act
Immigration and
may be cited as the “Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments
of 1981
.
1981
(b) Except as specifically provided in this Act, whenever in this Act
S USC 1101 note.
an amendment or repeal is expressed as an amendment to, or repeal
of, a provision, the reference shall be deemed to be made to the
Immigration and Nationality Act.
SEc. 2. (a) Subsection (aXIS) of section 101. (8 U.s.c. 1101) is
amended—
(1) by striking out “institution of learning or other recognized
place of study” in subparagraph (F) and inserting in lieu thereof
‘college, university, seminary, conservatory, academic high
school, elementary school, or other academic institution or in a
language training program”; and
(2) by adding after subparagraph (L) the following new
subparagraph:
“CMXI) an alien having a residence in a foreign country which
he has no intention ofabandoning who seeks to enter the United
States temporarily and solely for the purpose of pursuing a full
course of study at an established vocational or other recognized
nonacademic institution (other than in a language training
program) in the United States particularly designated by him
and approved by the Attorney General, after consultation with
the Secretary of Education, which institution shall have agreed
to report to the Attorney General the termination of attendance
of each noniinmigrant nonacademic student and if any such
institution fails to make reports promptly the approval shall be
withdrawn, and (ii) the alien spouse and minor children of any
such alien if accompanying him or following to join Mm.’.
(b) Subsection (b) of such section is amended by striking out
“fourteen” in subparagraphs CE) and (F) and inserting in lieu thereof
“sixteen”.
Cc) Subsection Ct) ofsuch section is amended—
(1) by striking out paragraph (2); and
(2) by striking out “paragraphs (9), (10), and (28) of section
212(a)’ in paragraph (3) and inserting in lieu thereof “para
graphs (9) and (10) of section 212(a) and paragraph (23) of such
section (except as such paragraph relates to a single offense of
simple possession of 30 grams or less ofmarihuana)’.
SEc. 3. Section 204 (8 U.S.C. 1154) is amended by striking out
subsection (d) and by redesignating subsection Ce) as subsection Cd)
and the subsection (0, which was renumbered by section 3 of Public
Law 95—417, as subsection (e).
92 Stat. 917.
SEc. 4. Section 212(8 U.S.C. 1182) is amended—
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 23 of 55

95 STAT. 1612
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
(1) by inserting “and who seek admission within five years of
the date of such deportation or removal,” in subsection (aXl7)
after “section 242(b)7’;
(2) by striking out the second sentence of paragraph (6) of
subsection (d); and
(3) by striking out “paragraphs (9), (10), or (12) of this section”
in subsection (h) and inserting in lieu thereof “paragraphs (9),
(10), or (12) of subsection (a) or paragraph (23) of such subsection
as such paragraph relates to a single offense ofsimple possession
of30 grams or less ofmarihuana”.
SEc. 5. (aXi) Section 212(8 U.S.C. 1182) is amended by striking out
the semicolon at the end of paragraph (32) of subsection (a) and
inserting in lieu thereofa period and the following “For the purposes
ofthis paragraph an alien who is agraduate ofa medical school shall
be considered to have passed parts I and II of the National Board of
Medical Examiners enmination if the alien was fully and perma
nently licensed to practice medicine in a State on January 9, 1978,
and was practicing medicine in a State on that date;”.
(2) Subsection (jX1XB) ofsucb section is amended by striking out the
semicolon at the end thereof and inserting in lieu thereof a period
and the following: “For thepurposes of this subparagraph, an alien
who is a graduate of a medical school shall be considered to have
passed parts I and]! of the National Board of Medical Examiners
examination if the alien was fully and permanently licensed to
practice medicine in a State on January 9, 1978, and was practicing
medicine in a State on that date.”.
S 1350 1182 note
(3) Section 602 of the Health Professions Educational Assistance
Act of 1976 (Public Law 94—484), added by section 307(qXS) of Public
8 Usc 1 ~91. 1101
Law 95—88, is amended by striking out subsections (a) and (b).
note 1lb.~ note
(b) Subsection (j) ofsection 212 is amended—
(1) by inserting “as follows” after “education or training are”
in paragraph (1) in the matter beflre subparagraph (A);
(2) by striking out “(including any extension of the duration
thereof under subparapaph (13W’ in paragraph (1XC);
(3) by striking out ‘Commissioner of Education” and “Secre
tary of Health, Education, and Welfare” each place it açpears
and inserting in lieu thereof “Secretary of Education
and
“Secretary ofHealth and Human Services”, respectively;
(4) by striking out the semicolon at the end ofsubparagraph (A)
and “; and” at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting in lieu
thereofa period in each case;
Medical
(5) by amending subparagraph CD) of paragraph Cl) to read as
education,
follows:
“CD) The duration of the alien’s participation in the program of
graduate medical education or training for which the alien is
coming to the United States is limited to the time typically
required to complete such program, as determined by the Direc
tor of the International Communication Agency at the time of
the alien’s entry into the United States, based on criteria which
are established in coordination with the Secretary of Health and
Human Services and which take into consideration the published
requirements of the medical specialty board which administers
such education or training program; except that—
“(I) such duration is further limited to seven years unless
the alien has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director
that the country to which the alien will return at the end of
such specialty education or training has an exceptional need
for an individual trained in such specialty and
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 24 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1613
4~(jj) the alien may, once and not later than two years after
the date the alien enters the United States as an exchange
visitor or acquires exchange visitor status, change the alien’s
designated program of graduate medical education or train
ing if the Director approves the change and ifa commitment
and written assurance with respect to the alien’s new pro
gram have been provided in accordance with subparagraph
(C).”;
(6) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new
Affidavit.
subparagraph:
“(E) The alien furnishes the Attorney General each year with
an affidavit (in such form as the Attorney General shall pre
scribe) that attests that. the alien (i) IS in good standing in the
program ofgraduate medical education or training in which the
alien is participating, and (U) will return to the country of his
nationality or last residence upon completion of the education or
training for which be came to the United States.”;
(‘0(A) by strikiw out “(ii)” in paragraph (1XB) and inserting in
lieu thereof“(iiXI)’;
(B) by inserting, in paragraph (1XB), “UT)” before “has compe
tency”, “(III)” before 14w1111,e able to adapt”, and “(IV)” before
“has adequate prior education”;
(C) by striking out “December 31, 1981” in paragraph (2XA)
and insertinginiieu thereof “December 31, 1983
(1)) by stnking out “and (B) of paragraph (1)’ in paragraph
(2XA) and inserting in lieu thereof “and (EXiiXI) of paragraph
by inserting after “if’ inparagragh (2XA) the following: “(i)
the Secretanj of Health and Human Services determines, on a
case-by-case basis, that”;
(F) by striking out the period at the end ofparagraph (2XA) and
Plan to reduce
inserting in lieu thereofthe following
relin!ice on alien
“,and (ii) the program has a comprehensive plan to reduce reliance
physicianS.
on alien physicians, which plan the Secretary of Health and Human
Services finds, in accordance with criteria published by the Secretary,
to be satisfactory and to include the followmg:
“WA detailed discussion ofspecific problems that the program
anticipates without such waiver and of the alternative resources
and methods (including use of physician extenders and other
paraprofeasionals) that have been considered and have been and
will be applied to reduce such disruption in the delivery of health
services.
“(ID A detailed description of those changes of the program
(uicludmg improvement of educational and medical services
training) which have been considered and which have been or
will be applied which would make the program more attractive
to graduates of medical schools who are citizens of the United
States.
“(ifi) A detailed description of the recruiting efforts which
have been and will be undertaken to attract graduates of medical
schools who are citizens ofthe United States.
“(IV) A detailed description and analysis of how the program,
on a year-by-year basis, has phased down and will phase down its
dependence upon aliens who are graduates of foreign medical
schools so that the program will not be dependent upon the
admission to the program of any additional such aliens after
December 31, 1983.”; and
(G) by inserting at the end of paragraph (2XB) the following.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 25 of 55

95 STAT. 1614
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
Waivers.
“The Secretary ofHealth and Human Services, in coordination with
the Attorney General and the Director of the International Commu
nication Agency, shall (1) monitor the issuance of waivers under
subparagraph (A) and the needs of the communities (with respect to
which such waivers are issued) to assure that quality medical care is
provided, and (ii) review each program with such a waiver to assure
that the plan described in subparagraph (AXII) is being carried out
and that participants in such program are being provided appropri
ate supervision in their medical education and training.
Report to
“(C) The Secretary ofHealth and Human Services, in coordination
Conwresa.
with the Attorney General and the Director of the International
Communication Agency, shall report to the Congress at the begin
nin~ of fiscal years 1982 and 1983 on the distribution (by geography,
nationality, and medical specialty or field of practice) of foreign
medical graduates in the United States who have received a waiver
under subparagraph (A), including an analysis of the dependence of
the various communities on aliens who are in medical education or
training programs in the various medical specialties.”; and
Report to
(8) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:.
Congress
“(3) The Director of the International Communication Agency
annually shall transmit to the Congress a report on aliens who have
submitted affidavits described in paragraph (IXE), and shall include
in such report the name and address of each such alien, the medical
education or training program in which such alien is participating,
and the status ofsuch alien in thatprogram.”.
8 USC 1182 note.
(c) The amendments made by paragraphs (2), (5), and (6) of subsec
tion (1,) shall apply to aliens entering the United States as exchange
visitors (or otherwise acquiring exchange visitor status) on or after
January 10, 1978.
(dXl) Section l01(aX27) (8 U.S.C. I lOl(aX2T)) is amended by striking
out “or” at the end of subparagraph (F), by striking out the period at
the end of subparagraph (G) and inserting in lieu thereof”; or”, and
by adding after subparagraph (G) the following new subparagraph:
“(H) an immigrant, and his accompanying spouse and children,
who—
“(i) has graduated from a medical school or has qualified to
practice medicine in a foreign state,
“(ii) was fully and permanently licensed to practice medi
cine in a State on January 9, 1978, and was practicing
medicine in a State on that date,
“(iii) entered the United States as a nonimmigrant under
subsection (aXI5XH) or (aX1SXJ) before January 10, 1978, and
“(iv) hasbeen continuously present in the Umted States in
the practice or study of medicine since the date of such
entry.!’.
(2) Section 245(cX2) (8 U.S.C. 1255(c)(2)) is amended by inserting “or
a special immigrant described in section 101(aX2IXH)” after “an
immediate relative as defined in section 201(b)”.
Report to
(e) The Secretary ofHealth and Human Services, after consultation
with the Attorney General, the Secretary ofState, and the Director of
U
1~
no
the International Communication Agency, shall evaluate the effec
tiveness and value to foreign. nations and to the United States of
exchange programs for the graduate medical education or training of
aliens who are graduates of foreign medical schools, and shall report
to Congress, not later than January 16, 1983, on such evaluation and
include in such report such recommendations for changes in legisla
tion and regulations as may be appropriate.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 26 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1615
Sac. 6. Section 223(b) (8 U.S.C. 1203(b)) is amended by striking out
“one year from the date of issuance: Provided, That the Attorney
General may in his discretion extend the validity of the permit for a
period or periods not exceeding one year in the aggregate” and
inserting in lieu thereof “two years from the date of issuance and
shall not be renewable”.
Sac.?. (a) Subsection (a) ofsection 237(8 U.S.C. 1227) is amended to
Deportation.
read as follows:
“(aXI) Any alien (other than an alien crewman) arnving in the
United States who is excluded under this Act, shall be immediately
deported, in accommodations of the same clan in which he arrived,
unless the Attorney General, in an Individual case, in his discretion,
concludes that immediate deportation is not practicable or proper.
Deportation shall be to the country in which the alien boarded the
vessel or aircraft on which he arrived in the United States, unless the
alien boarded such vessel or aircraft in foreign territory contiguous to
the United States or in any island adjacent thereto or adjacent to the
United States and the alien is not a native, citizen, subject, or
national of, or does not have a residence in, such foreign contiguous
territory or adjacent island, m which case the deportation shall
instead be to the country in which is located the port at which the
alien embarked for such foreign contiguous territory or adjacent
island. The cost of the maintenance including detention expenses and
Detention
expenses incident to detention of any such alien while he is being
eXpeflSaS.
detained shall be borne by the owner or owners of the vessel or
aircraft on which he arrived, except that the cost of maintenance
(including detention expenses and expenses incident to detention
while the alien is being detained prior to the time he is offered for
deportation to the transportation line which brought him to the
United States) shall not be assessed against the owner or owners ~of
such vessel or aircraft if (A) the alien was in possession of a valid,
unexpired immigrant visa, or (B) the alien (other than an alien
crewman) was in possession of a valid, unexpired nonimmigrant visa
or other document authorizing such alien to apply for temporary
admission to the United States or an unexpired reentry permit issued
to him, and (i) such application was made within one hundred and
twenty days of the date of issuance of the visa or other document, or
in the case of an alien in possession of a reentry permit, within one
hundred and twenty days of the date on which the alien was last
examined and admitted by the Service, or (ii) in the event the
application was made later than one hundred and twenty days of the
date of issuance of the visa or other document or such examination
and admission, if the owner or owners of such vessel or aircraft
established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the
ground of exclusion could not have been ascertained by the exercise
of due diligence prior to the alien’s embarkation, or (C) the person
claimed United States nationality or citizenship and was in posses
sion of an unexpired United States passport issued to him by
competent authority.
“(2) If the government of the country designated in paragraph (I)
Nonacceptance
will not accept the alieh into its territory, the alien’s deportation
OP.dePOrted
shall be directed by the Attorney General, in his discretion and
ILI,ens.
without necessarily giving any priority or preference because of their
order as herein set forth, either to—
“(A) the country of which the alien is a subject, citizen, or
national;
“(B) the country in wlüch he was born;
“(C) the country in which he has a residence; or
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 27 of 55

95 STAT. 1616
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
“(D) any country which is willing to accept the alien into its
territory, if deportation to any of the foregoing countries is
impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible.”.
(b) Subsection (1>) ofsuch section is amended—
(1) by striking out “to the counti7 whence he caine” in clause
(3) and inserting in lieu thereof ‘to the country to which his
deportation has been directed”; and
(2) by striking out “collector of customs” each place it appears
and inserting in lieu thereof “district director of customs”.
Transportation
(c) Subsection Cc) of such section is amended to read as follows:
expense.
“(c) An alien shall be deported on a vessel or aircraft owned by ~the
same person who owns the vessel or aircraft on which the alien
arrived in the United States, unless at is impracticable to so deport
the alien within a reasonable time. The transportation expense ofthe
alien’s deportation shall be borne by the owner or owners of the
vessel or aircraft on which the alien arrived. If the deportation is
effected on a vessel or aircraft not owned by such owner br owners
the transportation expense of the then’s deportation may be paid
from the appropriation for the enforcement of this Act and recovered
by civil suit from any owner, agent, or consignee of the vessel or
aircraft on which the alien arrived.”,
Deportation.
SEc. 8. Section 2410) (8 U.S.C. 1251(0) is amended to read as follows:
“(Q(1XA) The provisions of this section relating to the deportation
of aliens within the United States on the ground that they were
excludable at the time of entry as aliens who have sought to procure
or have procured visas or other documentation, or entry into the
United States, by fraud or misrepresentation, whether willful or
innocent, may, in the discretion of the Attorney General, be waived
for any alien (other than an alien described in subsection (aXl9))
who—
“(i) is the spouse, parent, or child of a citizen of the United
States or of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for
permanent residence; and
“(ii) was in possession of an immigrant visa or equivalent
document and was otherwise admissible to the United States at
the time ofsuch entry except for those grounds of inadmissibility
8 USC 1182.
specified under paragraphs (14), (20), and (21) of section 212(a)
which were a direct result of that fraud or misrepresentation.
Waiver qf
“(B) A waiver of deportation for fraud or misrepresentation
deportation.
granted under subparagraph (A) shall also operate to waive de
portatioh based on the grounds of inadmissibility at entry described
under subparagraph (A)Øi) directly resulting from such fraud or
misrepresentation.
“(2) The provisions of subsection (aXil) as relate to a single offense
of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marthuana may, in the
discretion of the Attorney General, be waived for any alien (other
than an alien described in subsection (aX19)) who—
“(A) is the spouse or child ofa citizen ofthe United States or of
an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or
“(B) has a child who is a citizen ofthe United States or an alien
lawfullyndmitted for permanent residence,
if it is established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the
alien’s deportation would result in extreme hardship to the United
States citizen or lawfully resident spouse, parent, or child of such
alien and that such waiver would not be contrary to the national
welfare safety, or security of the United States.”.
Ssc. ~ Subsection (f) of section 244 (8 U.S.C. 1254) is amended to
read as follows:
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 28 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1617
“(f) The provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to an alien
who—
“(1) entered the United States as a crewman subsequent to
June 30, 1964;
“(2) was admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant
exchange alien as defined in section 10l(aX15XJ), or has acquired
B USC I 101.
the status of such a nonimmigrant exchange Mien after admis
sion, in order to receive graduate medical education or training,
regardless of whether or not the alien is subject to or has fulfilled
the two-year foreign residence requirement of section 212(e); or
8 USC 1182.
“(3M) was admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant
exchange alien as defined in section 101(aXISXJ) or has acquired
the status of such a nonimmigrant exchange alien after admis
sion other than to receive graduate medical education or train
ing, (B) is subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement
of section 212(e), and (C) has not fulfilled that requirement or
received a waiver thereof.”.
SEC. 10. Section 248 (8 U.s.c. 1258) is amended by striking out
Nonipirnigrant
“except” and all that follows through the end and inserting in lieu
classification.
thereofthe fouowinr “except in the case of—
“(1) an alien classified as a nonimmigrant under subparagraph
(C), (D),or (K) ofsection 1O1(aX 15)1
“(2) an alien classified as a nonunmigrant under subparagraph
(J) ofsection 10l(aXlS) who came to the United States or acquired
such classification in order to receive graduate medical educa
tion or training, and
“(3) an alien (other than an alien described in paragraph (2))
classified as a nonimmigrant under subparagraph (J) of section
1O1(aX15) who is subject to the two-year foreign residence
requirement of section 212(e) and has not received a waiver
thereof, unless such alien applies to have the alien’s classifica
tion changed from classification under subparagraph (J) of sec
tion 101(aXl5) to a classification under subparagraph (A) or (G) of
such section.”.
SEc. 11. Section 265 (8 U.S.C. 1305) is amended to read as follows:
Alien
“SEc. 265. (a) Each alien required to be registered under this title
registration arid
who is within, the United States shall notify the Attorney General in
address changes.
writing of each change of address and new address within ten days
from the date of such change and furnish with such notice such
additional information as the Attorney General may require by
i~ulation.
‘(b) The Attorney General may in his discretion, upon ten days
notice, require the natives of any one or more foreign states, or any
class or group thereof, who are within the United States and who are
required to be registered under this title, to notify the Attorney
General of their current addresses and furnish such additional
information as the Attorney General may require.
“(C) In the case of an alien for whom a parent or legal guardian is
required to apply for registration, the notice required by this section
shall be given to such parent or legal guardian.”.
Sw. 12. Subsection (b) of section 2’74 (8 U.S.C. 1324) is amended to
Conveyancc~
read as follows:
used in customs
“~bXl) Any conveyance, including any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft,
laws violation.
which is used in the commission of a violation of subsection (a) shall
be subject to seizure and forfeiture, except that—
“(A) no conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in
the transaction ofbusiness as a common carrier shall be forfeited
under the provisions ofthis section unless it shall appear that the
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 29 of 55

95 STAT. 1618
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
owner or other person in charge of such conveyance was a
consenting party or privy to the illegal act; and
“(B) no conveyance shall be forfeited under the provisions of
this section by reason of any act or omission established by the
owner thereof to have been committed or omitted by any person
other than such owner while such conveyance was unlawfully in
the possession of a person other than the owner in violation of
the criminal laws of the United States or of any State.
“(2) Any conveyance subject to seizure under this section may be
seized without warrant if there is probable cause to believe the
conveyance has been used in a violation of subsection (a) and
circumstances exist where a warrant is not constitutionally required.
“(8) All provisions of law relating to the seizure, summary and
judicial forfeiture, and condemnation of property for the violation of
the customs laws; the disposition of such property or the proceeds
from the sale thereof; the remission or mitigation of such forfeitures;
and the compromise of claims and the award of compensation to
informers in respect of such forfeitures shall apply to seizures and
forfeitures incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, under the
provisions of this section, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent
with the provisions hereof, except that duties imposed on customs
officers or other persons regarding the seizure and forfeiture of
conveyances under the customs laws shall be performed with respect
to seizures and forfeitures carried out under the provisions of this
section by such officers or persona authorized for that purpose by the
Attornçy General.
“(4) Whenever a conveyance is forfeited under this section the
Attorney General may—
“(A) retain the conveyance for official use;
“(B) sell the conveyance, in which case the proceeds from any
such sale shall be used to pay all proper expenses of the
proceedings for forfeiture and sale including expenses of seizure,
maintenance ofcustody, advertising, and court costs; or
“(C) require that the General Services Administration take
custody of the conveyance and remove it for disposition in
accordance with law.
“(5) In aU suits or actions brought for the forfeiture of any
conveyance seized under this section, where the conveyance is
claimed by any person, the burden of proof shall lie upon such
claimant: .Provtdec4 That probable cause shall be first shown for the
institution of such suit or action. In determining whether probable
cause exists, any of the following shall be pnma facie evidence that
an alien involved in the alleged violation was not lawfully entitled to
enter, or reside within, the United States:
“(A) Records of any judicial or administrative proceeding in
which that alien’s status was an issue and in which it was
determined that the alien was not lawfully entitled to enter, or
reside within, the United States.
“(B) Official records of the Service showing that the alien was
not lawfully entitled to enter, or.reside within, the United States.
“(C) Testimony, by an immigration officer having personal
knowledge of the facts concerning that alien’s status, that the
alien was not entitled to enter, or reside within, the United
States.”.
SEC. 13. Section 286(8 U.S.C. 1356) is amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c) and by
inserting “and subsection (b)” in that subsection after “Except as
otherwise provided in subsection (a)”, and
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 30 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97—116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1619
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new subsec
tion:
“(b) Moneys expended from appropriations for the Service for the
purchase ofevidence and subsequently recovered shall be reimbursed
to the current appropriation for the Service.”.
Sic. 14. Section 316(b) (8 U.S.C. 1427(b)) is amended by adding at the
end the following; “The spouse and dependent unmarried sons and
daughters who are members of the household of a person who
qualifies for the benefits of this subsection shall also be entitled to
such benefits during the period for which they were residing abroad
as dependentmembers ofthe household ofthe person.”.
Sic. 15. (a) Section 829(b) (8 U.S.C. 1440(b)) is amended by inserting
“and” at the end ofparagraph (8), by striking out “; and” at the end of
paragraph (4) and Inserting in lieu thereof a period, and by striking
out paragraph(5).
(b) Section 334(a) (8 u.ac. 1445(a)) is amended by striking out “and
duly verified by two witnesses “.
(c) Section 335(8 U.S.C. 144d) is amended—
(1) by striking out “and the oaths of petitioner’s witnesses to
the petition for naturalization” in the second sentence ofsubsec
tion (b);
(2) by striking out subsections W,(g), and (h) and
(3) by redesigpatingsubsection (i) as subsection (I).
(d) Section 336(3 U.S.C. 1447) is amended—
(1) by striking out “and the witnesses” each place it appears in
subsections (a) and (b);
(2) by striking out subsection (c);
(3) by redesignatingsubsection (d) as subsection (c);
(4) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection 01) and striking
out the last sentence thereof~ and
(5) by redesignatinjsubeection U) as subsection (e).
(e) Section 328(bX2) (8 U.S.C. 1439(bX2)) is amended by striking out
“and section 336(c)” and “and the witnesses”.
Sic. 16. Section 344(c) (8 U.S.C. 1455(c)) is amended by striking out
‘16180~,,each place it appears and Inserting in lieu thereof
Sr& 17. Section 13(b) ofthe Mt ofSeptember 11, 1957 (71 Stat. 642
8 U.S.C. 1255b(b)), is amended by insertin~ after “Attorney General’
the first place it appears the following; ‘that the alien has shown
compelling reasons demonstrating both that the alien is unable to
return to the country represented by the government which accred
ited the alien or the member ofthe alien’s immediate family and that
adjustment ofthe alien’s status to that of an alien lawfuli1y admitted
forj*rmanent residence would be in the national Interest,.
bra. 18. (a) Section 101(8 U.S.C. 1101) is amended—
(1) by striking out “Office ofEducation ofthe United States” In
subsection (aX15XF) and inserting in lieu thereof “Secretary of
Education;
(2) by striking out the period at the end of each of subpara
graphs (H), (fl, and (K) of subsection (axiS) and inserting in lieu
thereofa semicolon;
(8) by striking out the period at the end ofsubparagraph (L) of
subsection (axiS) and inserting in lieu thereof “; or”;
(4) by strikingout the second sentence ofsubsection (aX33); and
(5XA) by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraphs (A) and
(B) ofsubsection (bXl),
(B) by striking out the period at the end ofsubparagraph (C) of
such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon, and
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 31 of 55

95 STAT. 1620
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. 29, 1981
(C) by striking out the period at the end of aub?aragraph (B) of
such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof”, or’.
(b) Section 106(a)(1) (8 U.S.C. llO5a(aXl)) is amended by striking out
the period at the end and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon.
Cc) Section 202(b) (8 U.S.C. 1152(b)) is amended by inserting “and”
before “(4)”.
(d) Section 204(a) (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)) is amended by striking out “of
the relationships described in paragraphs” and inserting in lieu
thereof“ofa relationship described in paragraph”.
(e) Section 212(8 U.S.C. 1182) is amended—
(1) by inserting “y’ in subsection (aX32) after “is in the United
States ‘,and
Alien
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
admittance.
“1k) Any alien, excludable from the United States under paragraph
(14), (20), or (21) ofsubsection (a), who is in possession of an immigrant
visa may, ifotherwise admissible, be admitted in the discretion of the
Attorney General if the Attorney General is satisfied that exclusion
was not known to, and could not have been ascertained by the
exercise of reasonable diligence by, the immigrant before the time of
departure of the vessel or aircraft from the last port outside the
United States and outside foreign contiguous territory or, in the case
of an immigrant coming from foreign contiguous territory, before the
time ofthe immigrant’s application for admission.”.
(0 Section 221(a) (8 U.S.C. 1201(a)) is amended by striking out the
period after “is charged” and inserting in lieu thereof a comma.
(g) Section 231(d) (8 U.S.C. 1221(d)) is amended by striking out
“subsections” and inserting in lieu thereof “subsection’.
(h)(1XA) The eleventh sentence of subsection (1,) of section 242 (8
U.S.C. 1252) is amended by striking out “or (18)” and inserting in lieu
thereof “(18), or (19)”.
(B) Subsection (e) of such section is amended by striking out “or
(18)” and inserting in lieu thereof “(18), or (19)”.
(2) Subsection (a) of section 244 (8 U.S.C. 1254) is amended by
inserting “(other than an alien described in section 241(aXl9))” after
“in the case of an alien” in the matter before paragraph (1).
(i) The fourth sentence of section 243(a) (8 U.S.C. 1253(a)) is
amended by inserting a comma after “subject”.
Ii) Section 244(d) (8 U.S.C. 1254(d)) is amended—
(1) by striking out “nonpreference”, and
(2) by striking out “208(aX7)” and inserting in lieu thereof
“201(a) or 202(a)”,
(kXl) Section 291 (8 U.S.C. 1361) is amended by striking out “quota
immigrant, or nonquota immigrant” and inserting in lieu thereof
“immigrant, special immigrant, immediate relative, or refugee”
(2) Section 349(a)(1) (8 U~S.C. l481(a)(l)) is amended by striking
out “nonquota immigrant” and inserting in lieu thereof “special
immigrant”.
(I) Section 809(8 U.S.C. 1409)18 amended—
(1) by striking out “(3), (4), (5), and (7) of section 301(a)” in
subsection (a) and inserting in lieu thereof “(c), (d), (e), and (g) of
section 301”, and
(2) by striking out “301(aX7)” in subsection Ib) and inserting in
lieu thereof “301@)”.
(m) Sections 320(b), 3210), and 322(b) (8 U.S C. 1431(b), 1432(b),
1433(b)) are each amended by striking out “a child adopted while
under the age of sixteen years who” and inserting in lieu thereof “an
adopted child only ifthe child”.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 32 of 55

PUBLIC LAW 97—116—DEC. 29, 1981
95 STAT. 1621
(n) Section. 322 (8 U.SAI 1438) is further amended by adding after
subsection (b) the following new subsection
“(c) In the case of an adopted child (1) who is in the United States at
the time of naturalization, and (2) one of whose adoptive parents (A)
petitions ‘for naturalization of the child under this section, (B) meets
the criteria of clauses (A) (B), and (C) of section 319(bXl), and (C)
8 USC 1430
declares before the naturaLzabon court in good faith an intention to
take up residence within the United States unmediately upon the
termination of the employment described in section 319(bXlXB), no
specified period ofresidence within the jurisdiction of the naturaliza
tion court or proofthereofshall be required”
(a) The fourth sentence of section 337(a) (8 U S C
1448(a)) is
amendedbystrikingout”or323”.
(p) Section 841 (8 USC, 1452) is amended by strikin~ out “(3), (4),
(5), or (7) .of section 301(a)” audinserting.in lieu:thereof ‘(o),jd), ~ or
(g)’of.section 301”..
(q) Section 349 (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended by section 4 of. Public
Law 95-432k is amendedby striking out the setond “(a)” after °g49”
(r) Section 851(8 U SC 1483) is amended—
(1) by striking out “paragraphs (7), (8), sod (9) ofsection 349” jy~
subsection (a) and inserting in lieu thereof “paragraphs (6) and
(7) ofsection 349(a)”, and
(2) by strikiw out “(5), and (6)” in subsection (b) and inserting
in’lieu thereof.’ and (5)fl
.
.
(s) Section 404(8 U SC 1101 note) is amended by inserting “(other
than chapter 2 oftitle IVY’ after “this Act”,
(t) The table of contents is
. amended by striking out the items
relating to sections 345,350, 352,853,854, and 355.
(nfl) Section 1429 of title. 18, United States Code, is amended by
striking out “subsection (e)” and inserting in lieu thereof “subsection
(a)”.
(2) The Act of March 16, 1956 ($ U.S.C. 1401a) is amended by
striking out “301(aX7)” and inserting in lieu thereof”301(,g)”.
SEC. 19. The numerical limitations contained in seàtions 201 and
813501151 note,
202 of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall not apply to any
8 USC 1151,
alien who, is present in the United States and who, on or before
1.152.
June 1, 1978—
(1) qualifIed as a nonpreference immigrant under section
203(aXS) ofsuch Act(as in effect on June 1, 1~78);
8 USC 1153.
(2) was determined to be exempt from the labor certification
requirement of section 212(aX14) of such Act because the alien
8 USC 1182
had actually invested, before such date, capital in an enterprise
in the United States of which the alien became a principal
manager and which employed a person or persons (other than
the spouse or children of the alien) who are citizens of the United
States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence; and
(8) applied for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully
admitted for permanent residence.
SEe, 20. Section 201(a) (8 U.S.C. 1151(a)) is amended .by inserting
after “two hundred seventy thousand” the following: “: .&ovidâ~
That to the. extent that in a particular fiscal year the number of
aliens who are issued immigrant visas or who may otherwise acquire
the status of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, and
who are subject to the nwnencai limitations of this section, together
with the aliens who adjust their status to aliens lawfully admitted for
permanent residence pursuant to subparagraph (H) of section
101(aX2’7) or section 19 of the Immigration and Nationality Amend
S USC 1101
ments Act of 1981, exceed the annual numerical limitation in effect
Supnz.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 33 of 55

95 STAT. 1622
PUBLIC LAW 97-116—DEC. .29, 1981
pursuant to this section for such year, theSecretary of State shall
reduce to such extent the annual numerical limitation in effect
pursuaiit to this section for the following fiscal year”,
(b) Section 202(a) (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)) is amended by inserting after
“year” the following: “:Andprovided further, That to theextent that
in a particular fiscal year the number of such natives who are issued
immigrant visas or who may otherwise acquire the status of aliens
lawfiully admitted for permanent residence and who are subject to the
numerical limitation ofthis section, together with thealiens from the
same foreign state who adjust their status to aliens lawfully admitted
for permanent residence pursuant to subparagraph (H) of section
8 USC 1101.
101(aX27) orsection 19 of theImmigration and Nationality Amend-
Ante, p. 1621.
ments Act of 1981, exceed the numerical limitation in effect for such
year pursuant to this section, the Secretary of State shall reduce to
such extent the, numerical limitation in effect. for. the natives of the
same foreign state pursuant to this section for the following fiscal
year”.
.
.
~.
Effective data
SEc. 21(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) andm section 5(c),
8 USC 1101 note,
the amendments made by this.Act shall take effect.on the date of the
enactment ofthis Act.
(bXl) The amendments made by section 2(a) shall apply on and
after the first day of the sixth month beginning after the date of the
enaclEentofthis Act.
‘~
(2) The amendment made by section 16 shall apply to fiscal years
beginning on orafter October 1,1981.
Approved December 29, 1981..
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—KR. 4327~
HOUSE REPORT Nd, 97-264 (Cosinton the ‘Judkiary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 127 (1981):
Oct. 13, con.idered.and pas8ed House.
Dec. 16, considered and pa~cd Senate, amended; House concurred in Senate
amendments
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 34 of 55

EXHIBIT 4
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 35 of 55

Maternal
Affidavit of Fact
C
Septuagint: Psalms 2, Psalms 47, Psalms 54, Psalms 67, Psalms 68, Psalms 113,
RE:
STATE OP ARKANSAS STATE FILE NUMBER: 6512262
Alphident:
MAURICE JOHNSON PAYNE
FAYNE,
MAURICE JOHNSON
Numident:
429539389
429-53-9389
C622530020
To whom It may concern,
I am, the private hwnan, in full life, to animate the flesh, blood, and bone body, known commonly as
“faync. vanessa ann “, being of sound mind, body, and soul, by restricted special appearance, hereby
states forevermore for the record as a living memorial that: I am personally familiar with the facts
stated herein. Having been begotten by my natural mother, “ tulibs, velma “: Long Count Date
12.17.13.17.10 [August 10th, 1967], at the land known commonly as: the north gate/al maghrib al
aqsa / parkin, arkansas / States of the Union, as the living soul, and occupant, of this 52 year old body
that the lord god has provided me, at the time of this writing, I affirm that I have attained the age of
majority. I affirm & certify, under penalty of perjury, on the blood of my ancestors, love of god, and
universal law, that the statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my volition, honor,
knowlcdgc, customs, and bclicfs.
Maternal Affidavit of Fact
Page I of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 36 of 55

Ma result of the holy covenant with my husband, Johnson, bilk lzicks(
, on Long count Date
12.18.9.14.14 [March 23rd, 1983 ], at 06:36 pm, at Latitude 35.223549° N? -90.787ll7°W, on the
land known commonly as: the north gate I at maghrib al aqsa I wynne, arkansas? States of the Union,
our begotten son was born into flesh. lie came to be known in full life, by restricted special appearance
as, “ninurice johnson ayne-e t’, nom deguerre: fayne, maurice jolinsonC”.
Shortly alter having just given birth to my begotten son
“ maurice Johnson fa~ne-eiC
, nom
dcgucrrc; faync, Inauricc Johnson® “, and while enduring the painful process of child birth, contracts
like the Birth Certificate and Social Security number were presented to our tribe, and issued, while I
was under legal disability, was legally incapacitated, and under temporary disability. There was no full
disclosure, no consideration, nor any meeting of the minds, to cause said contracts to be issued in the
name MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNEC,
FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON®, etc., as they were
issued in bad faith.
As any loving mother should, I am fully supportive of my son’s high pursuit of happiness In full
life, and hereby gives lawful notice of my rescission of any and all signatures ever signed by
myself in relation to “ maurice Johnson faync-el® , nom deguerre: fayne, maurice johnson® “,
that caused STATE OF ARKANSAS STATE FILE NUMBER: 6512262, MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYtWEC,
FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON® Social Security Administration Account Numbers
429539389, 429-53—9389, C622S30020, etc., to ever have been created, Nunc pro tunc.
I hereby relinquish any alleged authority, or rights, title, and Interest in the property, STATE OF
ARKANSAS STATE FILE NUMBER:
6512262, MAURICE JOHNSQN FAYNEC,
FAYNE,
MAURICE JOHNSON®
Social
Security Administration
Acconnt Numbers
429539389,
429-53-9389, G622830020, etc., to cause to be divested ‘m, and inalienably retained, by the nnked
& beneficial owner, absolute in possession by freehold tenure, my noble son, “maurice johnson
fa’, ne—el®, nom deguerre: fayne, maurice johnson®”.
Public Notices
Although done as an act of my sons own free will, I am fully supportive of the information, my
noble son,” maurice johnson fayne-el®, nom deguerre: byne. maunce Johnson® “, expressed in
the Newspaper Public Notices of
LLZmnfl€.
~c~(cA4
on
__________
2020, ~ ~9M
, 2026,
3...I.~ ~
, 2020, and
us~ ~
2020.
C)
C
In God We Trust
Declaration of Nationality
Notice of Special Appearance :1 am that 1 am:
Maurice Johnson Faync® “, in full life, in propria
persona, sui juris, in solo proprio, by natural issue, the beneficiary and heir of: “ Fayne, Maurice
Johnson® “, corp.sole Dba.: “Maurice Johnson Fayne® “, “ FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON®
corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOT-INSON FAYNE® “, having reached the age of majority, being
aboriginal to the northwestern and southwestern shores of Africa, the Atlantic Islands, the
continental Americas, being duly certified, hereby affirms to declare my tribal intention to be as
my pedigree subscribes, as an: aniyunwiya Moorish American National, but not a citizen of the
United States. I declare permanent, and unalienable, allegiance to the Moorish Empire,
Societas Republicae Ea Al Maurikanuus Estados, The Constitution for the united States of
America, Article III Section 2, International Law, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
indigenous Peoples, and all natural laws governing moors, and hereby declare and proclaim
my nationality as an: aniyunwiya moorish american moslem. I am that I am: “Maurice Johnson
Fayne© “, from this day forward, in harmony with my Nationality
Status I Jurisdiction, shall be
known as: “maurice johnson faync-el® “. Notice of Merging of Legal Title with Equitable Title:
This order is to preserve legal and equitable title
, and to reserve all rights, title, and interest, in
Maternal Affidavit of Fact
Page 2 of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 37 of 55

the property, Re: “Payne, Maurice Johnson© “, corp.sole Dba.: “Maurice Johnson Fayne©”,”
PAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON© “, corp.sole Dba.: “ MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNEC’ “, to the
depositor: “ maurice Johnson fayne-el© “. All property ,of the same issue and amount, in like
kind and specie, is to be returned fully intact, as a Special Deposit order of the Depositor!
Beneficiary I Bailor I Donor
Principal
Creditor: “ maurice Johnson faync-el© “, as a special
deposit order in lawful money. This special deposit is to be used exclusively for the benefit of:
Payne-el, Maurice Johnson TrustO “, an Unincorporated Divine Grantor Trust. This deposit is
not to be commingled with general assets of any bank . nor depositary! trustee / agent! bailee
/ donee / debtot This deposit is not limited to, but including: discharge and set off, of any and
all outstanding liabilities as accord and satisfaction. Any and All Attorneys with a License from
the BAR Association are explicitly prohibited from administrating “ Payne-el, Maurice Johnson
Trust© “, property without handwritten consent from each and every trustee, after said
Attorneys have fUrnished their nationality, and Principal for whom’s interest they are working,
[pursuant to Public Law 75-583] to trustees in plain writing. All Rights Reserved.
Signed in the presence of:
County
State
Signed and affirmed to before me, a Notary on [
2020], that fayne. vanessa
personally appeared and known to me to be the woman whose name subscribed to the instrument
and acknowledged to be the same.
JAY B. FICKESS
Notar~~r
STATE 0 P::c
My Commission Expires
~j~gi
-
In testimony whereof, I, fayne, vahlessu ann certify under penalty of pajury, that the statements made
herein are true and correct to the best of my volition, honor, knowledge, customs, and beliefl. I have
hereunto caused my appellation to be subscribed this [
‘-1.
day of
~5L~
, 2020 J.
Iamthatlam: _________________________
All Rights Reserved
Without Prejudice
Deo Volente
Jus Cogens
Maternal Affidavit of Fact
Page 3 of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 38 of 55

EXHIBIT 5
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 39 of 55

FILED - Oklahoma Secretary of State #3612856042 0711612020
OKLAHOMA Secretary of State Electronic Filing
FOREIGN TRADE NAME ENTITY
Document Number 45537900004
Submit Date 7(16/2020
TRADE NAME
The trade name under which the business is carried on in Oklahoma is.
PAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON
Legal Name:
FAYNE El. MAURICE JOHNSON TRUST
The type of “business entity” filing the trade name report is:
Unincorporated Business
ADDRESS(ES)
6608 N WESTERN AVE #1307
Email - mauricejohnsonfayne
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73116 USA
eftrust@protonmail.com
PURPOSE
Uplifting fallen humanity.
FUTURE EFFECTIVE DATE
Effective Date:
Same as fifing date.
FOREIGN ENTITY
The business entity was formed in the state of:
MOROCCO
SIGNATURE
Title
Signature Name
MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE EL
H
TRUSTEE
[End Of Ixnage~
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 40 of 55

FILW - Oklahoma Secretary of State #3612856585 0711712020
OKLAHOMA Secretary of State Electronic Filing
FOREIGN tRADE NAME ENTITY
Document Number 45554780002
Submit Date 7/17/2020
TRADE NAME
The trade name under which the business is carried on in Oklahoma is:
MAURICE FAYNE
Legal Name:
PAYNE EL MAURICE JOHNSON TRUST
The type of “business entity” filing the trade name report is:
Unincorporated eusiness
-
ADDRESS(ES)
6608 N WESTERN AVE #1307
Email -mauricejohnsonfayne-
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73116 USA
eltrust@protonmail.com
PURPOSE
Uplifting fallen humanity.
FUTURE EFFECTIVE DATE
Effective Date:
Same as filing date.
FOREIGN ENTITY
The business entity was formed in the state of:
MOROCCO
SIGNATURE
Signature Name
Title
MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE EL
TRUSTEE
[End Of Imagej
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 41 of 55

EXHIBIT 6
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 42 of 55

MONEY ORDER
Number: 369
July 20th, 2020
Pay on demand to the order of:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
1500 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220
Credit the memory of account number:
429539389
Pay:
ONE MILLION DOLLARS. SI .000.000.00
Charge the sum said to:
DISTRICT COURT EXECUTIVEICLERK OF COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
2211 United States Courthouse
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303-3309
By:
(~ft
\{~L V%’~J\ ~
-€9.
LU.5.C_.
‘pchtt c43çxc~&I Jtet2~~ maurice johnson fayne-el C
Authorized Signature
without recourse
Donor, Settlor, Beneficiary, on behalf of
MAURICE JOHNSON FAYNE
429-53-9389
Void where prohibited by law
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 43 of 55

JU’I IALN•
C
IFj U
I
L
44
79 H
0
SSj
HAP E
32’
I SESSIINI
.7
Notice of Restricted Special Appearance
: maurice johnson faiyne’-cl©, I Icir, Real Party in
Interest, and Beneficiary of:
“Fayne, Maurice, JohnsonC “, corp.sole Dba.: “ Maurice Johnson FayneC”,”
FAYNE, MAURICE JOHNSON© “, corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNE© “.
THIS ISA I’RI VtLTF COMMUNICATION
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPLE. NOTICE TO PRINCIPLE IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Biblios Heliotech: Psalm 99, Psalm 3 , Psalm 59, Psalm 7 , Psalm 23 , Psalm 70, Psalm 109
Re: Any and all alleged cases including I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA, CASE NO. I :20-CR-228, & CASE NOs. I :20-MJ-370,
364,361,360,355 and 1:20-MC-833
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF [PUBLIC LAW 404
79TH CONGRESS]
PAGE
1 of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 44 of 55

From:
Ex pane: maurice johnson fayne-elilD,
Entitlement holder, Master, Executor, Heir, and Beneficiary of the vessel(s):
“Fayne, Maurice, Johnson© “, corp.sole Dba.: “Maurice Johnson FayneC”,”
FAYNE, MAURTCE JOHNSON© “, corp.sole Dha.: “MAITRTCF JOHNSON
FAYNEC”
Affiant.
Walker, Linda I., D.b.a.: HON. LINDAT. WALKER, D.b.a.: UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
JUDGE, D.b.a.: [UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
GEORGIA, CASE NO. 1:20-CR-228, & CASE NOs. 1:20-MJ-370, 364, 361,360,355 and 1:20-
MC-833 j, ALL ‘TRADED AS’ PRIVATE & PUBLIC CORPORATIONS, ALL ENTITIES IN THE
PAST, CURRENT AND FUTURE.
As the Entitlement Holder, the office of my appointment delegates as Beneficial Owner (in said
properties), pursuant to my unalienable power of appointment, I,”
maurice johnson fayne-el (
“,
nom deguerre: “ Maurice .Johnson Fnync© “, hereby nominate: Walker, Linda ‘L, D.b.a.: NON.
LTNDA T. WALKER, D.b.a.: UNITED SlAmS MAGIS I HAlE JULXJt, D.b.a.: [UNITED STATES
DISTRJCT COURT NORTHERN DJSTRICT OF GEORGIA, CASE NO. 1:20-CR-228, &
CASE NOs. 1:20-MJ-370, 364,361,360,355 and 1:20-MC-833
as trustee to receive this NOTICE
as trustee of this matter, in good faith, to make known my intent as it relates to the representation of
“Fayne, Maurice, Johnson© “, corp.sole Dba.: “Maurice Johnson Fayne©”,”
FAYNE, MAURICE JOT-INSONO “, corp.sole Dba.: “MAURICE JOHNSON
FAYNEC”
Pursuant to: IPUBLIC LAW 404—79TH CONGRESSI [CHAPTER 324—2D SES5IONI [S. 71
ANCILLARY MATFERS
SEC. 6. Except as otherwise provided in this Act—
(a) APPEARANCE—Any person compelled to appear in person before any agency or representative
thereof shall be accorded the
right to be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel or, if permitted by the agency, by other
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF [PUBLIC LAW 404—79T11 CONGRESS]
PAGE 2 of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 45 of 55

qualified representative. Every party shall be accorded the right to appear in person or by or with
counsel or other duly qualified representative in any agency proceed ing. So far as the orderly conduct
of public business permits, any interested person may appear before any agency or its responsible
officers or employees for the presentation, adjustment, or determination of any issue, request, or
controversy in any proceeding (interlocutory, summary, or otherwise) or in connection with any agency
function. Every agency shall proceed with reasonable dispatch to conclude any matter presented to it
except that due regard shall be had for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their repre
sentatives. Nothing herein shall be construed either to grant or to deny to any person who is not a
lawyer the right to appear for or represent others before any agency or in any agency proceeding.
As a matter of record, it is my intention to present the facts regarding this matter in propria persona, sui
juris.
Signed in the presence of:
County
t
State
Signed and affirm-:
before me, a Notary on this [
k
0].
Notary
ublic
My Commission Expires
1~
In testimony whereof, I, Lx parte: mauricejohnson fayne-e1
,certify under penalty of perjury, that
the statements made herein are true and correct to the best of my honor, knowledge, customs, and
beliefs. I have hereunto caused my appellation to be subscribed this [ 20th day of July, 2020].
lam that lam: (fh~nU~
C~L~Lf\
~e.
aniyunwiya moorish american
All Rights Reserved
Without Prejudice
Deo Volente
Jus Cogens
JUDiCIAL NO’IICE OF WUBL1C LAW 404—79TH CONGRESS]
PAGE 3 of 3
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 46 of 55

• ADMINISTRATiVE PROCEDURE ACT
[PUBUO LAW 404—79TH CONGRESS]
[Crnrnm 324,—2D SESSIoN)
(LU
AN ACT To improve the administration of justice by prescribing fair
administrative procedure
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United Statel of America in Congress assembled,
•
TITLE
SEctioN 1. This Act maybe cited as the “Administrative Procedure
Act”.
Dn’nwrzows
Ssc.2. AsusedinthisAct—
(a) AGENCt—”Agency” means each authority (whether or not
•within or subject to review by another agency) of the Government of
the United States other than Congress, the courts or the governments
of the possessions, Territories, or the District of ôolumbia.
Nothing
in this Act shall be construed to repeal delegations of authority as
provided by law.
Except as to the requirements of section 8, there
shall be excluded from the operation of this Act (1) agencies com
posed of representatives of the parties or of representatives of organ
izations of the parties to the disputes determined by them (2) courts
martial and military commissions, (8) military or naval authorit
exercised in the field in time of war or in occupied territory, or (4
functions which by law expire on the termination of present hos
tilities, within any fixed penod thereafter, or before July 1, 1947, and
thefunctions conferred by the following statutes: Selective Training
and Service Act of 1940; Contract Settlement Act of 1944; Surplus
Propefly Act of 1944.
(b) Pznsow nm nxn.—”Person” includes individuals, Raftner
ships, corporations, associationsj or public or ,private orgAnizations
of. any character other than agencies.
“Party
includes any person
or agency named or Admitted as a party, or prpperIy. seeking and
entitle& asOf tight to be admitted as a party in any agency proceed
ing; but hothing herein shall be construe~l to prevent an agency
from admitting any’ peràon or agenoy as. a pArty for limited purposes.
7 (c) Run AND. RuIa:nKuaL—”Rule” means the whole Or any
pArt of ally agency statement Of general or particular ipplicability
1.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 47 of 55

2
ADMINISTRATIVZ PROCEDUER
and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or
policy or to describe the organization, procedure, or practice require
ments of any agency and includes the approval or prescription for the
future of rates, wages; corporate or financial structures or reorganiza
tions thereof prices, facilities, appliances, services or allowances there-
for or of vaiqatigne, costs, or accounting, or practices bearing upon
any of the foregoing. ‘.!‘Rule making” rneiuis agency process tor the
formulation, amendment, or repeal ot a rule.
(d) Onun AND ADJ DxcAnoN;—”Order” means the whole2 or any
part of the final disposition (whethenffirmative, negative, injunctive,
or declaratory in•• font) of any agency in any matter other than
rule making but including liceiising.. “Adjudication” means agency
process for the formulAtion of an order.
(e) LxcnIsE AND LICENSU’IG.—”LiCense” includes the whole or part
of any agency permit, certificate, approval, registration, charter, mem
bership, statutory exemption or other form of: permission.
~“Licens
ing” includes agency process respecting the grant, renewal, denial,
revocation, suspension, annulment, withdrawal, limitation amendment,
modification, or conditioning ofa license..
(f) SANctioN AND nuEr.—”Sanction” includes the whole or part
of any agency (1) prohibition, requirement, limitation, or other con
dition affecting the freedom of any person; (2) withholding of relief;
(3) imposition of any form of penalty or fine; (4) destruction,
taking, seizure, or withholding of property; (5) assessment of dam
ages, reimbursement, restitution, compensation, costs, charges, or fees;
(6) requirement, revocation, or suspension of a license; or (7) taking
of other compulsory oi’restrictive Action;
“Relief” includes the whole
or part of any agency (1) grant of money, assistance, license7 authority,
exemption, exception,
. privilege, or remedy; (2)~ recognition of an
claim, right, immunity, privilege, exemption, or exception; or (3
taking of aUy other action upon the application or petition of, and
bneficial tO, any person..
..
.
(g)
AGENCX noczznrno AND ACfl0N.—”Agency proceeding” means
any agency process as defined in subsections (e)., (d), and (e) of this
section.
“4ency action” includes the whole or part of every ageiley
rule, order, license, sanction, relief, or the equivalent or denial thereof,
or failure to act.
.
Ptrauv INFORMATION
Sto. 3. Except to the extent that there is involved (1) any function
of the United States requiring secrecy in the public interest or (2) any.
matter relating solely to the internal management of any agency—
(a) Ruin—Every agency shall separately state and currently.
publish in the Federal Register (1) descriptions of its central and
Said organization including delegations by the agency of final author
ity and the established places at which, and methods whereby, the
public may secure information or make submittals or requests; (2):
statements of the general course and method by which its functions
are channeled and determined, including the nature and requirements
of all formal or mformal procedures available as well as forms and
instructions as to. the scope and contents of all papers, reports, or
eziuninations; and (3) substantive rules adopted as authorized by
~aw and statements of general policy or interpretations formulated
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 48 of 55

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
3
and adopted by the agency for the guidance of the public, but not
rules a dressed to And served upon named persons in accordance
with law.
No person shall in any manner b~e required to resort to
organization or procedure not so published.
(b)
OPINIONS
AND oIwEns.—Every agency shall publish or, in
aàcordanee with published rule, make available to public inspection
all final opinions or orders in the adjudication of cases (except those
required for good cAuse to be held
. cnifidential and not. cited~ as
precedents) and all rules..
.
.
.
.
.
-
(c)
PunLrc nzcOiins.—Ssve as otherwise required by statute, mat
ters of official re~ord shall in accordance with published rule be made
available to persons properly and directly concerned except informa
tion held confidential for good cause found.
Ruxz M*zzwo
Szc. 4. Except to the extent that there is involved (1) any military,
naval, or foreign affairs funetion of the United States or (2) any
matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public
property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts—
(a) No’ncz.—Oeneral notice of proposed rule making shall be pub
lished in the Federal Register (unless all persons subject thereto are
named and either personally served or otherwise haveS actual notice
thereof in accordance with law) and shall.includc (1) a statement of
the time, place, and nature of public rule making, proceedings- (2)
reference to the authOrity under. which the rule is proposed; antI (8)
either the terms or substance of theyroposed rule or a description of
the subjects and issues involved.
Except where notice or hearing is
required oy statute, this subsection shall not apply” to interpretative
rules, general statements of policy, rules of agency organization, pro
cedure, or practice, or in any situation in which the agency for good
cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of
the reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and’ public pro
cedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.
(b)
PRoCUnYRES.—After notice required by this section2 the agency
shall afford interested persona an opportunity to participate in the
rule making through submissiOn of written data, views, or arguments
with or without opportunity to present the same orally in any man
ner; and, after consideration of all relevant matter presented, the
agency shall incorporate in any rules adopted a concise general state-
meld of their basis and purpose.
Where rules are required by statute
to be made on.the record after opportunity for an agency hearinç~, the
requirements~of sections.? and 8 shall apply in place of the provisions
of this subsection.
(c) Enwnvr •DAns.—The required publication or service of any
substantive rule (other than one ranting or recngnizing exemption
or relieving restriction or interpretative rules and :gtatemefltg at pol
icy) shall be made not less than thirty days prior to the effective date
thereof except asotherwise provided by the agency upon good cause
found and published with the rule.
..
v
.(d) Prrnzozcs.—Every agency shall accord any interested person.
the nght to petition torthe issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule,
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 49 of 55

4
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
ADJUDICATION
SEC. 5. In every case of adjudication required by statute to be deter
mined on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing, except
to the extent that there is involved (1) any matter subject to a subse
quent trial of the law and the facts de novo in any court; (2) the
selection or tenure of an officer or employee of the United States other
than examiners appointed pursuant t9 section 11; (3) proceedings in
which decisions rest solely on inspections, tests, or elections; (4) the
conduct of military, naval, or foreign affairs functions; (5) cases in
which an agency is acting as an agent for a court; and (6) the certifi
cation of employee representatives—
(a) No’ricE.—Persons entitled to notice of an agency.hearing shall
i’e timely informed of (1) the time, place, and nature thereof; (2) the
legal authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is tobe held;
and (3) the matters of fact and law asserted.
In instances in which
private persons are the moving parties, other parties to the proceeding
shall give prompt notice of issues controverted in fact or law; and in
other instances agencies may by rule require responsive pleading.
In
fixing the times and places for hearings, due regard shall be had for
the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives.
(b) PRocEnuna—The agency shall afford all interested parties
opportunity for (1) the submission and consideration of facts, argu
inents, offers of settlement, or proposals of adjustment where time,
the nature of the proceeding, and the public interest permit, n.nd (2)
to the extent that the parties are unable so to detennine any contro
versy by consent, hearing, and decision upon notice and in conformity
with sections 7 and 8.
(c)
SEPARATION or FuNC~rIoNs.—The same officers who preside at
the reception of evidence pursuant to section 7 shall make the recoin-
mended decision or initial decision required by section 8 except
where such officers become unavailable to the agency.
Save to the
extent required for the disposition of ex parte matters as authorized
by law, no such officer shall consult any person or party on any fact
in issue un)ess upon notice and opportunity for all parties to partici
pate; nor shall such officer be responsible to or subject to the super
vision or direction of any officer, employee, or agent engaged in the
performance of investigative or prosecuting functions for any agency.
No officer, employee, or agent engaged in the performance of investi
gative or prosecuting functions for any agency in any case shall, in
that or a factually related case, participate or advise in the decision,
recommended decision, or agency review pursuant to section 8 except
as witness or counsel in public proceedings.
This subsection shall
not apply in determining applications for initial licenses or to pro.
ceedings involving the validity or application of rates, facilities, or
practices of pubhc utilities or carriers; nor shall it be applicable in
any maniier to the agency or any member or members of the body
comprising the agency.
(d)
DECLARATORY oRnzns.—The agency is authorized in its sound
discretion, with like effect as in the case of other orders, to issue
a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 50 of 55

ADMXNXSThATIVE PROCEDURE
5
ANGuLar Msnr4as
Szc. 6. Except as otherwise provided in this Act—
(a) An’taaNcE.—Any person
compelled to appear in
person
before any agency or representative thereof shall be accorded the
right to be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel or, if
permitted by the agency, by other qualified representative.
Every
party shall be accorded the right to appear in person or by or with
counsel or other duly qualified representative in any agency proceed
ing.
So far as the orderly conduct of public business permits, any
interested person may appear before any agency or its responsible
officers or employees for the presentation, adjustment, or determina
tion of any issue, request, or controversy in any proceeding (inter
locutory, summary, or otherwise) or in connection with any agency
function.
Every agency shall proceed with reasonable dispatch to
conclude any matter presented to it except that due regard shall be
had for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their repre
sentatives.
Nothing herein shall be construed either to grant or to
deny to any person who is not a lawyer the right to appear for or
represent others before any agency or in any agency proceeding.
(b)
INVEST1GAT1ONS.—1~O process, requirement of a report., inspec
tion, or other investigative act or demand shall be issued
made, or
enforced in any manner or for any purpose except as autiiorizecl by
law.
Every person compelled to submit data or evidence shall be
entitled to retain or, on payment of lawfully prescribed costs, procure
a copy or transcript thereof, except that in a nonpublic investigatory
proceeding the witness may for good cause be limited to inspection of
the official transcript of his testimony.
(c) SuBrENAs.—Agency subpenas authorized by law shall be issued
to any party upon request and, as may be required by rules of pro
cedure, upon a statement or showing oP general relevance and reason
able scope of the evidence sought.
Upon contest the court shall sustain
any such subpena or similar process or demand to the extent that it is
found to be in accordance with law and, in any proceeding for enforce
ment, shall issue an order requiring the appearance of the witness or
the production of the evidence or data within a reasonable time under
penalty of punishment for contempt in case of contumacious failure
to comply.
(d) DENTAL5.—Prompt notice shall be given of the denial in whole
or in part of any written application, petItion, or other request of any
inter~ted person made in connection with any agency proceeding.
Except in affirming a prior denial or where the denial is self-explana
tory, such notice shall be accompanied by a simple statement of
procedural or other grounds.
HEARINGS
Ste. 7. In hearings which section 4 or 5 requires to be conducted
pursuant to this section—
(a)
PRESTDTNG ovncnis.—There shall preside at the taking of cvi
dence (1) the agency, (2) one or more members of the body which
comprises the agency, or (8) one or more examiners appointed as
provided in this Act; but nothing in this Act shall be deemed to
supersede the conduct of specified classes of proceedings in whole or
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 51 of 55

6
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURm
part by or before boards or other officers specially provided for by or
designated pursuant to statute.
The functions of ~11 presiding officers
and of officers participating in decisions in conformity with section
8 shall be conducted in an impartial manner.
Any such officer may at
any time withdraw if he deems himself disqualified; and, upon the
filing in good faith of a timely and sufficient affidavit of personal bias
or disqualification of any such officer, the agency shall determine the
matter as a part of the record and decision in the case.
(b) HEARING rowzus.—Officers presiding at hearings shall have
authority, subject to the published rules of the agency and within its
powers, to (1) administer oaths and affirmations, (2) issue sqbpenas
authorized by law, (3) rule upon offers of proof and receive relevant
evidence, (4) take or cause depositions to be taken whenever the ends
of justice would be served thereby, (5) regulate the course of the hear
ing, (6) hold conferences for the settlement or simplification of the
issues by consent of the parties, (7) dispose of procedural requests
or similar matters, (8)
make decisions or reeommend decisions in
conformity with section 8, and (9) take any other action authorized
by agency rule consistent with this Act.
(c) EvIDENCE.—Except as statutes otherwise provide, the pro~o
nent of a rule or order shall have the burden of proof.
Any oral or
documentary evidence may be received~ but every agency shall as a
matter of policy provide for the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial,
or unduly repetitions evidence and no sanction shall be imposed or
rule or order be issued except upon consideration of the whole record
or such portions thereof as may be cited by any party and as su
-
ported by and in accordance with the reliable, probative, and su
stantial evidence.
Every party shall have the right to present his
case or defense by oral or documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal
evidence, and to conduct such cross-examination as may be required
for a full and true disclosure of the facts.
In rule making or deter
mining claims for money or benefits or applications for initial licenses
any agency may, where the interest of any party will not be pre
judiced thereby, adopt procedures for the submission of all or part
of the evidence in written form.
(d) REconn.—The transcript of testimony and exhibits, together
with all papers and reqilests filed in the proceeding, shall constitute
the exclusive record for decision in accordance with section 8 and,
upon payment of lawfully prescribed costs, shall be made available to
the parties.
Where any agency decision rests on official notice of a
material fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, any party
shall on timely request be afforded an opportunity to show the con
trary.
DECISIONS
SEC. 8. In cases in which a hearing is required to be conducted in
conformity with section 7—
(a) AcrnoN ur sunonrnwAns.—In cases in which the agency. has
not presided at the reception of the evidence, the officer who presided
(or, in cases not subject to subsection Cc) of section 5, any other officer
or officers qualified to preside at hearings pursuant to section 7) shall
initially decide the case or the agency shall require (in specific cases
or by general rule) the entire record to be certified to it for initial
decision.
Whenever such officers make the initial decision and in
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 52 of 55

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
7
the absence of either an appeal to the agency or review upon motion
of the agency within time provided by rule, such decision shall without
further proceedings then become the decision of the agency.
On
appeal from or review of the initial decisions of such officers the agency
shall, except as it may limit the issues upon notice or by rule, have
all the powers which it would have in making the initial decision.
Whenever the agency makes the initial decision without having pre
sided at the reception of the evidence, such officers shall first recom
mend a decision except that in rule making or determining applications
for initial licenses (1) in lieu thereof the agency may issue a tentative
decision or any of its responsible officers may recommend a decision
or (2) any such procedure may be omitted in any case in which the
agency finds upon the record that due and timely execution qf its
functions imperatively and unavoidably so requires.
(b) SnrnnAI~
AND
DECISI0NS.—Prior
to
each
recommended,
initial, or tentative decision, or decisioti upon agency review of the
decision of subordinate officers the parties shall be afforded a reason
able opportunity to submit for the consideration of the officers partici
pating in such decisions (1) proposed findings and conclusions, or
(2) exceptions to the decisions or recommended decisions of .subordi
nate officers or to tentative agency decisions, and (3) supporting
reasons for such exceptions or proposed findings or conclusions.
‘The
record shall show the ruling upon each such finding, conclusion, or
exception presented.
All decisions (including initial, reconnuended,
or tentative decisions) shall become a part of the record and include
a statement of (1) findings and conclusions, as well as the reasons
or basis therefor, upon all the material issues of fact, law, or discre
tion presented on the record; and (2) the appropriate rule, order,
sanction, relief, or denial thereof.
SANCTIONS fl40 POWERS
SEc. 9. In the exercise of any power or authority—
(a) IN OENERAL.—No sanction shall be imposed or substantive rule
or order be issued except within jurisdiction delegated to the agency
and as authorized by law,
(b) LIcENSP4.—ln any case in which application is made for a
license required by law the agency, with due regard to tl~~ rights or
privileges of all the interested parties or adversely affected persons
and with reasonable dispatch, shall set and complete any proceedings
required to be conducted pursuant to sections 7 and 8 of this Act. or
other proceedings required by law and shall make its decision,
Ex
cept in cases of willfulness or those in which public health, interest or
safety requires otherwise, no withdrawal, suspension, revocation, or
annulment of any license shall be lawful unless, prior to the institution
qf agency proceedings therefor, facts or conduct which may warrant
such action shall have been called to the attention of the licensee by the
agency in writing and the licensee shall have been accorded oppor
tunity to demonstrate or achieve compliance with all lawful require
ments.
In any case in which the licensee has, in accordance with
agency rules, made timely and sufficient application for a renewal or a
new license, no license with reference to any activity of a continuing
nature shall expire until such application shall have been finally de
termined by the agency.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 53 of 55

8
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
JUNCIAL Rizvrzw
SEc. 10. Except so far as (1) statutes preclude judicial review or
(2) agency action is by law committed to agency discretion—
(a)
RIGHT OF nvn1w.—Any person suffering legal wrong because
of any agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by such
action within the meaning of any relevant statute, shall be entitled to
judicial revis’êv thereof.
(b) FORM%ND VENUE OF ACfloN.—The form of proceeding for judi
cial review shall be any special statutory review proceeding relevant
to the subject matter in any court specified by statute or, in the
absence of inadequacy thereof, any applicable form of legal action
(including actions for declaratory judgments or writs of prohibitory
or mandatory injunction or habeas corpus) in any court of competent
jurisdiction.
Agency action shall be subject to judicial review in
civil or criminal proceedings for judicial enforcement except to the
extent that prior, adequate, and exclusive opportunity for such review
is provided by law.
(c)
REnEWABLE Aura—Every agency action made reviewable by
statute and every final agency action for which there is no other
adequate remedy in any court shall be subject to judicial review.
Any preliminary, procedural, or intermediate agency action or ruling
not directly reviewable shall be subject to review upon the review of
the final agency action.
Except a~ otherwise expressly required by
statute, agency action otherwise final shall be final for the purposes
of this subsection whether or not there has been presented or deter
mined any application for a declaratory order, for any form qf recon
sideration, or (unless the agency otherwise requires by rule and pro
vides that the action meanwhile shall be inoperative) for an appeal
to superior agency authority.
(d) INTERIM RELIEF.—Pendin~ judicial
review
any
agency
is
authorized, where it finds that justice so requires, to postpone the
effective date of any action taken by it.
Upon such conditions as
may be required and to the extent necessary to prevent irreparable
injury, every reviewing court (including every court to which a case
may be taken on appeal from or upon application for certiorari or
other writ to a reviewing court) is authorized to issue all necessary
and appropriate process to postpone the effective date o.f any agency
action or to preserve status or rights pending conclusion of the review
proceedings.
(e)
SCOPE OF REvIEW.—So far as necessary to decision and where
presented the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of
law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine
the meaning or applicability of the terms of any agency action.
It
shall (A) comp~l agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably
delayed; and (13) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings,
and conclusions found to be (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of
discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to
constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; (3) in excess of
statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory
right; (4) without observance of procedure required by law; (5)
unsupported by substantial evidence in any case subject to the require
ments of sections 7 and 8 or otherwise reviewed on the record of an
agency hearing provided by statute; or (6) unwarranted by the facts
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 54 of 55

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
9
to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing
court.
In making the foregoing determinations the court shall review
the whole record or such portions thereof as may be cited by any party,
and due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.
ExAMwms
SEc. 11. Subject to the civil-service and other laws to the extent
not inconsistent with this Act., there shall be appointed by and for
each agency as many qualified and competent examiners as may be
necessary for proceedings pursuant to sections 7 and 8, who shall be
assigned to cases in rotation so far as practicable and shall perform
no duties inconsistent with their duties and responsibilities as examin
ers.
Examiners shall be removable by the agency in which they are
employed only for good cause established and determined by the
Civil Service Commission (hereinafter called the Commission) after
opportunity for hearing and upon the record thereof.
Examiners
shall receive compensation prescribed by the Commission independ
ently of agency recommendations or ratings and in accordance with
the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, except that the piovisions
of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b) of section 7 of said
Act, as amended, and the provisions of section 9 of said Act, as
amended, shall not be applicable.
Agencies occasionally or tempo
‘rarily insufficiently staffed may utilize exanuners selected by the
Commission from and with the consent of other a°encies.
For the
purposes of this section, the Commission
is authorized to make
investigations, require reports by agencies, issue reports, includingan
annual
report to
the
Congress,
promulgate rules, appoint
such
advisory committees as may be (teemed necessary, recommend legisla
tion, subpena ;vi tnesses or records, and pay witness fees as established
for the United States courts.
CoNsmucnow AND EnEc’r
Szc. 12. Nothing in this Act shall be held to diminish the con
stitutional rights of any person or to limit or repeal additional
requirements imposed by statute or otherwise recognized by law.
Except as otherwise required by law, all requirements or privileges
relating to evidence or procedure shall apply equally to agencies and
persons.
If any provision of this Act or the application thereof is
held invalid, the remainder of this Act or other applications of such
provision shall not be affected.
Every agency is granted all author
ity necessary to comply with the requirements of tins Act through
the issuance of rules or otherwise.
No subsequent legislation shall
be held to supersede or modify the provisions of this Act except to
the extent that such legislation shall do so expressly.
This Act shall
take effect three months after its approval except that sections 7
and 8 shall take effect six months after such approval, the require
ment of the selection of examiners pursuant to section 11 shall not
become effective until one year after such approval, and no pro
cedural requirement shall be mandatory as to any agency proceeding
initiated prior to the effective date of such requirement.
Approved June 11, 1946.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL     Document 33     Filed 07/20/20     Page 55 of 55

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gand.278523.33.0.pdf

Size

6,435,888 bytes

SHA-256

64db49423d2ab3151a4550392eb783a257446b243c72c974487f1d5c6cddf08d

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gand.278523.33.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)