Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.

Language:

Download

Go BackAdd Note

Link

Embed

Save for later

United States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaPetition for writ of habeas corpus for American national andHawaiian citizenBefore Judges Ware and Patel on habeas and mandamus tocompel

Mark Church

Chief Elections Officer & Assessor-County Clerk-RecorderSan Mateo County555 County CenterRedwood City, CA 94063-1665Phone: (650) 363.4988E-mail:

mchurch@smcare.org

to issue a birth certificate certifying US air occupational jurisdictionbirth to baby Kevin within the occupied Kingdom of Hawaii.Seeking declaratory relief that the US occupies the Kingdom of Hawaii airspace, in fact and law, from the USAF bases on theislands, and under the Treaty of Friendship with Kiribati purportedlyrelinquishing the US District Court for Hawaii’s jurisdiction under 28USC 91 and 48 USC 644a over Canton and Enderbury whilemaintaining complete US control in sovereign exclusion of any otherair forces. Thus, baby Kevin was born within the jurisdiction of theUnited States by air occupation. Moreover, the act of delivery by apregnant mother constitutes lawful air piracy under the law of nations, permitting her effective commandeering of the place toland immediately, anywhere, without prior authority or notice, formother and child care needs.

1 USC 8 and the Siljander Amendment, provide: § 8.“Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” asincluding born-alive infant(a)

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of anyruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative

bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”,“human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infantmember of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stageof development.

(b)

As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to amember of the species homo sapiens, means the completeexpulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, atany stage of development, who after such expulsion or extractionbreathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, ordefinite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether theumbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether theexpulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or inducedlabor…In re Baby Kevin K. R. F. D., habeas for declaratory nationality relief under 8 USC 1503 and the Supremacy Clause and 14

amendment,

06/20/2011Civil Action No. 1998-1192SUNUNU, et al v. PHILIPPINE AIRLINESDoc No. 64 (memorandum opinion) by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?1998cv1192-64Since Sai v Obama could mean the US had a claim of right in theplane as property of the US under the law of nations, or asconcurrent property under the

1944 Convention on International CivilAviation, articles 17–21,

we pray the Court reconsider her decision anddeclare baby Kevin to be a US citizen at birth within the jurisdictionof the Court pending final resolution of the Sununu claims againstPhilippine Airlines. Even putative pending status of the motion forreconsideration could be sufficient to color cognizable claims (8 USC1503) for the birth of the child en route to US soil with Americannationality and Hawaiian citizenship.

Aida Alamillo, 41, went into labour while onPhilippineAirlinesFlight104 from Manila enroute to San Francisco.

At Mills-Peninsula Medical Center in Burlingame, where she and hernewborn were transported upon landing in San Francisco.At 3:25 p.m. Monday, just a few hours before the plane was set toland,

Alamillo

gave birth to a healthy baby boy.

amendmentguarantee of equality ,

http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1898&entity=FRUS.FRUS1898.p1057&q1=alaska&q2=treaty&q3=native Hr. Hay to Hr. Day.[Telegram.]WASHINGTON,. November 29, 1898.The President wishes to know the opinion of the Commission as to insertingin treaty provisions on the

subject of citizenship of inhabitants of Philippineswhich will prevent extension of that right to Mongolians and others not actuallysubjects of Spain; also whether you consider it advisable to provide, if