Section Summary:   

Key to the enforcement of any law or the imposition of any legal duty is the concept of “jurisdiction”.

Every legal entity such as a state, city or county must have proper jurisdiction over a person, place or a subject matter to exercise police power, zoning authority, taxing authority, etc.  These jurisdictions are as one might surmise, limited primarily and simultaneously by geographical area and subject matter.  A legal entity can operate only within a fixed, limited boundary and only over subjects it can legally control.   

This is also true of our federal government.

Our Constitution’s singular purpose was to explicitly LIMIT the powers granted to the federal government by the states and by the People.  Additionally, the Constitution  reiterates that the government is to protect the unalienable and unenumerated rights of the People.

Simply, the Constitution says what the government can do and where it can do it.  The federal government’s legislative legal authority is based on “limited territorial jurisdiction”, that is, legislative jurisdiction based on a strict geographical delineation.  

Per the Constitution, this delineation only includes Washington DC and federal territories and possessions such as Guam, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.

There are additional matters the government has jurisdiction over by virtue of the “interstate commerce” clause, post office clause, etc.  They also have jurisdiction for military forts and arsenals, etc. within the 50 states, but only where both the land and legal jurisdiction have been formally ceded by the state in writing to the federal government.   

Contrary to the accepted notion in the public and the media, our government, has in fact,  very limited Constitutional authority to enact laws that affect us directly in the fifty states.  The Constitution was designed to keep power decentralized in the states.

Because the federal government lacks bona fide legislative jurisdiction within the fifty states, they also lack the authority to tax there.

The government can’t tax what it can’t legislate and where it can’t legislate. 

To remove or ignore this Constitutional structure would be to nullify the very sovereignty and existence of the states as legal entities, and give birth to the very tyranny the Constitution was designed to protect us from.  

The questions asked in this section examine who and what are the subjects of this tax and where geographically the are these income tax laws applicable.

As you examine the evidence and sworn testimony, try to extrapolate how this evidence affects other aspects of government as we currently know it.  How can much of what our government does be legal if it conflicts with the Constitution?  Do we still have a Constitution? 

Is the issue of jurisdiction a “Pandora’s box” the federal government does not want opened?