PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ARTICLE III SECTION 1 AND THE UNITED

STATES CONSTITUTION ARTICLE I SECTION 10 From: Douglas-Mac: Duff, sui juris c/o 3733 Highway 43 South Harrison, Arkansas Republic [72601] Petition To: Commandant (G-OPL) U.S. Coast Guard 2100 2nd St. SW Washington, DC 20593-0001 SUBJECT MATTER: CIVIL LIBERTIES, LOCAL COURTS IN THE TERRITORIES & POSSESSIONS, JUDICIAL PROCEDINGS, CIVIL, CRIMINAL, & GENERALLY, INTERSTATE COMPACTS & OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS SPECIFICALLY. VIOLATION OF RULES OF LAW VIOLATION OF THE INTERSTATE COMPACT DISREGARD FOR JUDICIAL PROCEDINGS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BY LOCAL COURTS CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION UNDER OBLIGATION OF CONTRACT LACK OF JURISDICTION OVER NON-U.S. CITIZEN – FEDERAL QUESTION [Claimant made it explicitly known that he is NOT a U.S. citizen or a 14th Amendment citizen claiming “privileges” and that Claimant IS a Category 4 Treaty Native American with full ability to contract. This “benefit of the contract” is what was taken from Claimant under vi et armis.] TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 1. > Sec. 4. Sec. 4. - Misprision of felony Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 33CFR1Subpart 1.07--Enforcement; Civil and Criminal Penalty Proceedings. CHAPTER I--COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The above named Petitioner has cause to notify the Office of the United States Coast Guard for a

claim of injury and pattern of un-Lawful activity. This injury was committed within a “Political subdivision “of the “State” by “THE STATE OF ARKANSAS” under provisions of the War Powers Act and Title 50 section 1621”Declaration of national emergency”. These administrative courts have failed to meet “Full Faith and Credit” obligations of contract that have a nation wide implication within the NDR Act of 1982. As the injured party, I claim a Right of Review actionable within the United States Code TITLE 5 > PART I > CHAPTER 7 >,§ 702. Right of review. This Practice of Law TITLE 28 > PART I > CHAPTER 21 > § 454 and TITLE 28 > PART III > CHAPTER 41 > § 607, violates Article I section 10 “Obligation of Contract” and is by definition a “Bill of Attainder”. Issues to be resolved that would bring the “Political Subdivisions” of the State of Arkansas into “Full Faith and Credit” compliance with the other compact States is the requirement that all civil service elected or appointed (Arkansas Revised Statutes), have Lawful Oath of Office as affidavit on file that defines venue and jurisdiction within the “Political subdivision.” To the best of Claimant’s inquiry, neither the Political subdivision nor the Secretary of State for the state of Arkansas have affidavit on file as required to validate offices under contract for local police, assistant prosecutors, or magistrates. When the State of Arkansas rescinded from original jurisdiction to ratification of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, all civil service employment was/is considered as “at will employment”. The Citizens of the “Political subdivision” of the “State” are paying for service to members of a collective bargaining unit who lack the contractual obligation of Oath of Office and Constitutional standing of 14th Amendment “immunity and privilege”. Claimant has determined by inquiry with the State of Arkansas Insurance Commissioner and finally with the Arkansas State Bar Association that neither the Judges nor the offending attorney (prosecuting) have bonds on file. This constitutes them, each and severally, as having entered commerce without “insurance.” As a concerned American Citizen I made every effort to stop this extortion to the best of my ability; however, they issue the orders to those with a “third grade bully mentality carrying badges and guns,” which equates to Piracy on the Inland Waterways (roads), or at the least, the act of “Privateering.” I, therefore, request that you expediently utilize your authority on behalf of one of “We The People” and investigate this situation, post haste. The result of this fraud has allowed the administrative courts to unlawfully expand the 6th Amendment venue and jurisdiction defined by the Oath of Offices of the courts, police and assistant prosecutors of the “Political subdivision”, to now include the “STATE OF ARKANSAS as Plaintiff” as a matter of statutory State Policy. Where the original Nature and Cause jurisdiction of the administrative courts lay with city ordinances and moving violation, the STATE OF ARKANSAS as Plaintiff now makes claims on property and federal benefits for alleged violations of national security, 20CFR404.465 Conviction for subversive activities. These fraudulent claims made in the name of THE STATE OF not only subvert the Right to private property it also is a means to deny the ’Right” of appeal that would expose this unlawful activity. Only recently have ‘enemy combatants’ been recognized as having “Rights.” However, Claimant is NOT an “enemy combatant” nor an “enemy of the State,” according to documents delivered to Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice’s Office, Chief of Protocol, approximately two years ago establishing that Claimant is NOT an Enemy of the State, contrary to all U.S. citizens under Title

50. Without standing of immunity or privilege and without Obligation of contract to those Citizens of the Political subdivision who possess Original Jurisdiction, We the People have Unalienable Rights to make Lawful claim of injury and remedy for claim of ‘Rebellion and Insurrection” against the unlawful abuse of our Home Rule local Government, the Political subdivision, by de facto state officers. These are war crimes and crimes against humanity in the name of a fictitious Plaintiff, THE STATE OF ARKANSAS and/or the COUNTY OF BOONE , by de facto State agencies and “local” courts. To Claimant’s investigation, neither the police, the assistant prosecutors, the magistrates of the Instant Issue, or the offending Attorney at Law, have a Bond on record as an insurance for/upon entering the Realm of Commerce as a “for profit” enterprise and Claimant has not been able to establish, as fact, that either, or both, have an Oath of Office. This unlawful use of a statutory administrative court of limited jurisdiction, has caused damage on a nation wide scale and failed to validate the Nature and Cause of actions created by de facto officers of that court, with Injury and Damages in particular to this Claimant. Re: 1. 23 CFR 1327. 3 US Coast Guard Law Enforcement (US Department of Transportation). 2. Highway Safety Act of 1966 3. The NDR Act of 1982 4. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. 5. POLITICAL SUBDIVISION PARTICIPATION IN STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS. PART 1206 -- RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR INVOKING SANCTIONS UNDER THE HIGHWAY SAFETY ACT OF 1966 1206.1 Scope This part establishes procedures governing determinations to invoke the sanctions applicable to any State that does not comply with the highway safety program requirements in the Highway Safety Act of 1966, as amended (23 U.S.C. 402). TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 47 > SUBCHAPTER X > Sec. 877. Sec. 877. - Art. 77. Principals TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 2 § 2. Principals 1. THE STATE OF ARKANSAS as Plaintiff 2. The State of Arkansas (or, their “minions”) as “State” defined collecting Federal assistance, Highway funds, “Political subdivision” grants, TITLE 18 Sec. 10. Interstate commerce TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 47 > SUBCHAPTER X >Sec. 878. Sec. 878. Art. 78 Accessory TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 3 § 3. Accessory after the fact 1. The collective bargaining unit known as STATE OF ARKANSAS has exhibited failure of all offices, elected, appointed or de facto to have a lawful Oath of office and insurance for a

commercial enterprise in the form of “Bonds.” a. Violations of “Obligations of contracts” and THE HOBBS ACT -- 18 U.S.C. § 1951. U.S. Constitution Article I Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. b. Failure to qualify all elected or appointed positions with affidavit validating Lawful Oath of Office as required by Constitutional Home Rule local Government, POLITICAL SUBDIVISION PARTICIPATION IN STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS TITLE 23 Sec. 1250.3 Policy, within Federal Highway standards: A. 5 USC 3331 B. 5 USC 3332 C. 5 USC 3333 D. 5 USC 5507 H.R.3396, Citizens Protection Act of 1998 Sec. 530B. Ethical standards for attorneys for the Government 2. Neither the American Bar Association nor the Arkansas Bar Association are registered with the Secretary of State of the “State” of Arkansas. There are no positions within the “State” of Arkansas where the practice of “Law” within the “Political subdivision” TITLE 23 Sec. 1250.3 Policy is accomplished with the required license to practice or required Oath of Office or Bond. Department of Justice > USAM > Title 9 Criminal Resource Manual 9-131.000 THE HOBBS ACT -- 18 U.S.C. § 1951 9-131.010 Introduction 9-131.020 Investigative and Supervisory Jurisdiction 9-131.030 Consultation Prior to Prosecution 9-131.040 Policy 9-131.010 Introduction This chapter focuses on the Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C. § 1951) which prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce. Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. Although the Hobbs Act was enacted as a statute to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, and corruption directed at members of labor unions. 9-131.020 Investigative and Supervisory Jurisdiction Primary investigative jurisdiction of offenses in 18 U.S.C. § 1951 lies with the Federal

Bureau of Investigation. The Inspector General's Office of Investigations, Division of Labor Racketeering (formerly the Office of Labor Racketeering), United States Department of Labor, is also authorized to investigate violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 in labor-management disputes involving the extortion of property from employers by reason of authority conferred on investigators as Special Deputy United States Marshals. [NOTE: It is evident that the “Lawyers Guild” and the American Bar Association and the Arkansas Bar Association are nothing more than “Labor Unions” banded together to prevent injury to its members. Since Judges are ex-lawyers and often retire into another “practice” of law, both judges and attorneys are active participants in the coercion, extortion and intimidation actions propagated across the land of America. This is Claimants’ open and direct protest to such an unlawful “compound” of participants against the lawful man upon the soil under Treaty Rights.] SUMMARY OF FACTS We the People have original jurisdiction on subject matter within the “Political subdivision” and standing within the Master/servant relationship to define contracts, TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > Sec. 1981. - Equal rights under the law. We the People have never given our permission or consent, Federal Rule Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(1), Rule 12(b)(6) nor have we given up Protected Rights under a statutory “State policy” within a “Political subdivision” that has nationwide implications, United States v. Morrison, 169 F.3d 820 (1999) and United States v. Lopez, 115 S.Ct. 1624 (1995), PETTY v. TENNESSE-ARKANSAS COMM’N., 359 U.S. 275 (1959), 359 U.S. 275. The State of Arkansas cannot expand the venue and jurisdiction of a “Political subdivision” to a national level while allowing State agency’s to hold offices that are in violation of contract to the Citizens. Erie Railroad v. Tompkins 304 U.S. 64 (1938). While administrative agency’s may set a nation wide policy under a State compact, the determination of that policy is a matter of Law and Equity determined by an Admiralty Court of contracts. The United States Coast Guard has original jurisdiction to determine violations within those courts: 33CFR1Subpart 1.07--Enforcement; Civil and Criminal Penalty Proceedings. CHAPTER I--COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Claimant requests an oral hearing within a proper court of review, TITLE 5 > PART I > CHAPTER 7 >,§ 702. Right of review, at which time a determine that the Art. 77. Principals and Art. 78 Accessory are in violation and lack 11th Amendment standing. This Right of review will also validate a Right of Claim for violations as a matter of “Public Law 105-6” , TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 73 > § 1513 Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant and H.R.3396, Citizens Protection Act of 1998 by all assistant prosecutors who are lacking a license to practice Law, an Oath of Office as affidavit for consideration of pay 5 USC 5507, and a Surety Bond. We the People have a Right to Recourse and Remedy with full consideration of Rights violations under a pretext of 42 U.S.C. § 402 ,20 CFR § 404.465, § 404.466, § 404.468 Nonpayment of benefits to prisoners. The administrative municipal courts within the “Political subdivision” were never given the venue and jurisdiction over subject matter to apply statutory code that had

ramification to the Citizens in the manner or consideration of a State compact. Any and all application of a State compact is limited to those persons defined as members named within the collective bargaining unit, who have a contract within that State. The Citizens have been denied the Right to local self Government of a Charter. Until the Citizens within the Political subdivision are given a free choice in choosing the Constitutional local Government, all application of a compact violation falls up on the State agency’s themselves for violation of Article I section 10, “Laws impairing the Obligation of a Contract”. Citizens have a Right to file a due process claim for violations of Protected Rights and Civil Liberties by impersonators. This is not a local issue as it is part of a record complied through the NDR Act of 1982 on a nation wide level. This is a federal violation by a fictitious plaintiff, THE STATE OF ARKANSAS, embezzling federal funds and grants allotted to the “Political subdivision” (Home Rule local Government) of the “State.” The name/title, THE STATE OF ARKANSAS is not registered with the Secretary of State of the STATE OF ARKANSAS as a corporation, association or political subdivision. The Citizens of the Republic within the Constitutional subdivision have been denied the Right to form a charter and without a charter defined by the Citizens, the municipality cannot apply for federal assistance or appear at a nation wide level as a compact State. FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT OF 1976 (as amended in 1988) § 1602. Findings and declaration of purpose The Congress finds that the determination by United States courts of the claims of foreign states to immunity from the jurisdiction of such courts would serve the interests of justice and would protect the rights of both foreign states and litigants in United States courts. Under international law, states are not immune from the jurisdiction of foreign courts insofar as their commercial activities are concerned, and their commercial property may be levied upon for the satisfaction of judgments rendered against them in connection with their commercial activities. Claims of foreign states to immunity should henceforth be decided by courts of the United States and of the States in conformity with the principles set forth in this chapter. FURTHER DECLARATION FOR CLARITY The enumerated, specified and distinct Jurisdictions established by the ordained Constitution (1789), Article III, Section 2, and under the Bill of Rights (1791), Amendment VII, were fundamentally changed in 1982 to include Admiralty Jurisdiction, which was once again brought inland. "This is the FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE necessary to effect unification of CIVIL and ADMIRALTY PROCEDURE. Just as the 1938 Rules ABOLISHED THE DISTINCTION between ACTIONS AT LAW and SUITS IN EQUITY, this change would ABOLISH THE DISTINCTION between CIVIL ACTIONS and SUITS IN ADMIRALTY." (Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1982 Ed., pg. 17; also see, Federalist Papers No. 83; Declaration Of Resolves Of The First Continental

Congress; Oct. 14, 1774, Declaration Of Cause And Necessity Of Taking Up Arms; July 6, 1775, Declaration of Independence; July 4, 1776, Bennet vs. Butterworth, 52 U.S. 669.) [ALSO, SEE 18 USC Sec. 7] 77 Stat. 630-631, P.L. 88-243 (1963) and P.L. 88-244 (1963) introduces and "makes law" providing the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) as Private Law enacted for the municipal District of Columbia and the United States (federal government). These laws/actions were/are expressly in force and effect on citizens of the federal government. PL 88-243, 77 Stat 630 is "AN ACT To enact the Uniform Commercial Code for the District of Columbia, and for other purposes." This is where the uniform commercial code enters as the implied "law of the land." [SEE also, H.J. Res 778, December 10, 1963, 77 Stat 775] "It is well settled that "United States" et al is a corporation, originally incorporated February 21, 1871, under the name "District of Columbia"". 16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62 Under the "Buck Act," 4 U.S.C Secs. 105-113, the federal government has created a "Federal area" within the boundaries of the several states. This area is similar to any territory that the federal government acquires through purchase, conquest or treaty, thereby imposing federal territorial law upon the people in this "Federal area," and in Sec. 110(d): The term "State" includes any territory or possession of the United States. The Buck act affects the actions of all federal departments within the 50 states. There in 4 U.S.C. Sections 105, the federal "State" is defined “(also known as), "The State of xxxxxxx." The Supreme Court says, “There has been created a fictional federal "State (of) [name of state] within a state." We have numerous references to this. Howard v. Sinking Fund of Louisville, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S.Ct. 465, 476, 97 L.Ed. 617 (1953); Schwarts v. O'Hara TP School District, 100 A 2d. 621, 625, 375, Pa. 440 Remember, Claimant is a Category 4 Native American of mixed Scottish and Cherokee/Delaware ancestry. I am FOREIGN to the “UNITED STATES” located within Washington, District of Columbia (U.C.C. 9-307(h)). Claimant needs your immediate attention and assistance to prevent Claimants’ vessel from being stolen by the Pirates mentioned herein. A printed copy of this follows by U.S. Post. My temporary phone number is (870) 365-3768, call me if you wish, but, please understand, I cordially request and (as Sovereign Elect upon the Soil) corporeally demand that you, as overseer of military matters within the Admiralty Jurisdiction, stop these Pirates from further injury of the Private Man. I am attempting to send a copy of this information to the Department of the Interior. Thank you.

Douglas M. Duff, Injured American

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful