NationStates Jolt Archive

Anyone familiar with these gems of asinine convolution?

"Taxes voluntary" / "illegal"
"Ohio not a state"
Pretending to be "sovereign"
Block-letter name not legitimate

Insisting on having name typed with strange punctuation
Arguments based on fringe on courtroom flag
Similarly, on eagle on flagpole
Similarly, on so-called "American Flag of Peace"

There is a really nice casebook put together on this sort of stuff and available free online, here:
http://www.adl.org/mwd/suss1.asp


"Jurisdiction is a matter of law, statute, and constitution, not a child’s game wherein one’s power is magnified or diminished by the display of some magic talisman."

"They fired me because I'm a woman"

Arguments based on fringe on courtroom flag

That's the only one I know of; there was a Law and Order episode in which such a matter was brought up, confounding and angering the judge.

"Petitioners argue that filing federal income tax returns violates their right to free speech under the First Amendment. Noncompliance with the tax laws is not protected by the First Amendment. ..."

Now there's a brilliant argument:p

"...The requirement that petitioners shall prepare and file their tax returns does not violation the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination."

:D

Anyone seem to remember the case in which the argument was "McDonalds made me fat". Hm? Hm?

"Taxes voluntary" / "illegal"
"Ohio not a state"
Actually, on a purely legal and technical level, these arguments are right. Of course, they're based on the idea that the income tax laws were passed before Ohio was a state, and were signed by a President born from that state (who was ergo not a legal candidate for presidency), and if accepted would necessitate the invalidation of all acts committed by Presidents from said state. So, while the tax evaders are technically right, the judiciary has agreed to overrule them for the sake of convenience and practicality.

Source: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_127.html

American flag of peace?

I've heard of the rest, but this concept confounds me.

People have actually won the right not to pay income tax, but they are usually lawyers themselves who have spent their lives building up a case for it. I wouldnt recommend anyone with a middle-class income try it.

American flag of peace?

I've heard of the rest, but this concept confounds me.

The thingie on the end of those indoor flagpoles. You know, the little brass thingie that's normally either a pointie thing or an eagle? I think they're referring to something like that.

The thingie on the end of those indoor flagpoles. You know, the little brass thingie that's normally either a pointie thing or an eagle? I think they're referring to something like that.

No, that's listed separately.

Actually, on a purely legal and technical level, these arguments are right. Of course, they're based on the idea that the income tax laws were passed before Ohio was a state, and were signed by a President born from that state (who was ergo not a legal candidate for presidency), and if accepted would necessitate the invalidation of all acts committed by Presidents from said state. So, while the tax evaders are technically right, the judiciary has agreed to overrule them for the sake of convenience and practicality.

Source: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_127.html

From your site:

1. The ban on ex post facto laws refers only to criminal matters. Case law, 1798. Ohio's retroactive admission to the union was OK.
2. Persons born in U.S. territories--not just in states--are U.S. citizens. (For example, Puerto Rico.) So Taft was a natural-born citizen and could legally serve as president.
3. Even if he wasn't, so what? Presidents don't introduce constitutional amendments; members of Congress do.
4. Ohio was a state even without the 1953 resolution. The statehood admission process was somewhat casual in 1803; it required no formal resolution of admission.

Therefore, the tax evaders not technically right.

No, that's listed separately.


I think they mean a flag like this:
http://www.embassyflag.com/flag/desksetenvoy.jpg


Something about the tassles is supposed to magically rob the court of its jurisdiction.

"Appellant claims the trial court was without jurisdiction ... because the courtroom displayed a military style US flag with gold fringe. We disagree."); (claimed the fringe on the American flag "the court was thus a foreign power, and the trial judge was the supreme ruler of a foreign power, devoid of any jurisdiction over him") "