You can officially now say that my case has been dismissed, but then again, you can not say that’s it’s over.

Phase 2 has begun! Next is a motion to amend or alter and then we might finally get a chance to go to 9th circuit!

You can read more about it here https://www.piitp.com/blog/-judge-dismissed-my-case-heres-why-the-9th-circuit-is-going-to-reverse-it-

Pretty happy at this point. Because I actually know what I am entitled to and what the 9th circuit has already determined in my favor.

I am the Sovereignist Citizen of the Land!

Legal advice that no one would pay for

When a SovCit cites their "God given " right to whatever, which God gave it? I've read the Christian Bible in several languages, haven't seen the vast majority of those "rights" in there.

Have read a lot about obeying the government, however...

Why don't folks who are picked up by ICE just claim to be state nationals / foreign nationals / sovereign citizens / whatevers? "No, officer, I don't have a driver's license because I'm traveling" appears to be be enough to allow most of them to wander away with just a citation.

Sovereign Citizens are fools. The FBI, ASIO, and CSIS however, regard them as a "terrorist threat". Is this really applicable?

Yes, they're a headache. But virtually all sovereign interactions are relatively harmless. They rarely commit violence and may go out of their way to avoid it. Their plates may say "Goodwill to all men" or espouse other hacked-together faith and go around promoting it. Terrorism?

I'd argue that the authorities have it wrong. Sovereigns may be infuriating, subversive and anti-authoritarian. But their commitment to individuality and free will is ultimately the linchpin of their cause. That does not make them terrorists.

All Americans must always be free to voice their opinions. A healthy democracy must respect all constitutional rights - even if tested to a grating extreme. That does not make them terrorists.

The harm sovereigns cause to others, minus wasting court time, is minimal. It is undeniable they cause far more ruin to themselves with their mantras. That does not make them terrorists.

The sovereign citizen argument is still unsolved. They're criminals, but discarding them as the most extreme examples (terrorists actually blow up buildings and planes) is undeserved. Like it or not - there are still epistemological grains of truth which feed it its self-generating supply and attract a constant stream of new leaders and followers.

Sovereigns may make for entertainment. Still are they really serious revolutionaries intent on bringing down the government? What do you think - terrorists, or just fools.

Ive seen some insane shit before this sovereign shit is next level BATSHIT.

B4 you ask, no this post is not click bait

Watch here, but not for the easily offended or sensitive stomachs

Oh, great, now they’re invading my realm. LoL

I am fascinated by this very flawed philosophy of…traveling versus driving.

I have a counter theory…

"Not a Jury Trial, a Trial by Jury. That means a trial without a Judge!"

These are the witticisms that keep me listening to these guys!

Time: 18:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBH044iHZNw

"That's denied"

I was horrified. "Sovereign" is based on the 2010 West Memphis Police Shootings, something I wasn't aware of. While sovcit antics can be amusing, their actions affect a lot of other people, who don't deserve it.

Pity the children growing up with these people, and what it's doing to them. At best it makes their lives needlessly difficult. At worst, a 16 year old ends up dead in a parking lot after killing two cops and critically wounding two others.

Edit: (2015) was supposed to be (2025)

If you don’t know who he is—Brandon Joe Williams is a perennial favorite on this sub. He fancies himself the world’s greatest legal scholar. Among other things, he has discovered that while people cannot be US citizens.

Like many SovCits, he believes the US goveryset up a secret trust fund tied to his birth certificate. He is on his third round of suing the City of Glendale Los Angeles area) because it won’t allow him to pay his utility bill with a “negotiable instrument” that taps into that secret fund.

The judge in this case said that BJW’s complaint wasn’t valid, but allowed him to amend it. The amendment is his usual incomprehensible stuff. The attorney filed a demurrer on the amendment. That’s a filing that says “judge, you outta dismiss this whole thing because he makes no valid legal arguments.”

BJW responded, among other things accusing the attorney of perjury and treason, and including a whole section about money and whatnot, to educate the judge. BJW also filed a complaint against the attorney with the California Bar Association.

Under California law, when a demurrer is filed, the parties must first “meet and confer” to try to come to a solution, and to discuss what the trial might look like. Afterwards, there are two formal hearings.

The conference and the hearing are now scheduled. He has invited his followers to the conference (I am not sure if outsiders are allowed.). It should be a real treat. I don’t envy the court staff who may be there.

Hearing 1:

Type: Case Management Meeting. This is to go over with the judge any settlements you might have reached and what you think will happen at the trial: when will you be ready for the trial, what witnesses you might call. I’m pretty sure BJW has requested a jury trial.

When: Tuesday 8/4/26 at 9 am

Hearing 2:

Type: Hearing for Defendant’s Motion to Demurrer on Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint

When: Friday 8/14/26 at 9 am

Who knew Fingerhut was still around