Message and Implications of Civil Action No. 1-14-Cv-02128-WBH

Justice
Has Come
Mrs. Tamah Jada Clark
Page 1 of 7
This item is not for sale. No purchase
necessary.
www.JusticeHasCome.com
A Brief Expos on the Why and How of

Encroachment upon Americans Human Rights:
The Implications and Message of Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-02128-WBH

Tuesday, April 28, 2015
FOREWORD: No Intelligent adult would sit down to a game of poker, with a significant wager on
the table, without first knowing the rules of the game. Ironically, otherwise intelligent adults sit
down to the game of life everyday without knowing the rules that govern the game. The
rules are called American Jurisprudence and not many Americans understand them. Needless
to say, the wager on the metaphorical game table of life is much more hefty and significant than
in a poker game. But, just HOW big of a wager are Americans risking? This Expos sets out to
answer that question and more.

PART I
-The Premises-

Civil Action Number 1:14-cv-02128-WBH was a federal lawsuit commenced in
July of 2014, for the purpose of asserting claims to human rights. Said action
was brought in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia (Atlanta Division), under presiding Senior Judge, Willis B. Hunt, Jr.

In the 38-page Complaint, under the Statement of Claims section that begins
on page 5, the Plaintiffs detail numerous counts of individual instances of
human rights violations, in accordance with the dictates of the United Nations
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Bill of Rights in the U.S.
Federal Constitution.

Interestingly, in his Order directly preceding the final Judgment, dated March
31, 2015, Senior Judge Willis B. Hunt, Jr. unintentionally reveals the following:

Reference Guide for Legal

Terminology
Action: A lawsuit or other legal
proceeding that involves a legal
case of one form or another.
Complaint: The initial
document/paperwork used to
commence legal action, which
delineates the Plaintiffs
accusations against the
Defendant.
Statement of Claims: The
component of a given complaint
in which all of the Plaintiffs
accusations against the
Defendant are listed one-byone. Said claims form the basis
of the proceedings that will take
place and determine what
questions of law will come into
play for the purpose of
resolving the suit/action.
Plaintiff: The person(s)
claiming a right to redress of
grievances against another, in a
legal proceeding.
Judgment: The decision of the
court, as determined based upon
presumably unbiased legal
determinations and findings of
the presiding judge.

LEGAL NOTICES: The information contained herein does not constitute legal advice and Mrs. Tamah Jada Clark is not your legal counsel. The
information provided is for informational purposes, but does not come with any form of warranty or other guarantee. The contents of this document are
based upon the principles of American Jurisprudence only and may or may not apply to other law systems outside of the United States of America. Please
use said materials in a manner consistent with applicable law(s). Do not alter or monetize materials in any way. Justice Has Come is a trademark of
Mrs. Tamah Jada Clark, who retains exclusive ownership of this document and the intellectual property contained herein. All rights Reserved.
Page 2 of 7
necessary.

There is no cause of action in this Court under any document
published by the United Nations.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a document published

by the United Nations. In its Preamble, it is explained that the UDHR is an
international proclamation that sets forth a common standard of achievement
for all peoples and nations for the safeguarding of inherent dignity and of the
equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family. Disturbingly,
however, per the very words of the Senior Judge, U.S. Courts do NOT observe
the UDHR.

The aforementioned Order then further states:

Plaintiffs only avenue of relief against state officials for her
claims of constitutional violations is under 42 U.S.C. 1983.

The referenced code section, (42 U.S.C. 1983), forms part of The Official
Code of the United States, and reads, in part, as follows:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,
regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the
District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
citizen of the United States or other person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law,
suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress

Terminology
Order: A document that
contains the decision on a
particular question and/or
request that arises duringand
sometimes before or after
legal proceedings.
The Official Code of the
United States: The official
law book of the United States
Federal Government. It is a
compilation of federal statutory
laws and is the source against
which most legal questions are
answered in U.S. Federal
Courts. U.S.C. is the
abbreviation used to reference
said Code, which stands for:
United States Code. The U.S.C
is second only to the Organic
Laws of the United States,
which are The U.S. Founding
Charters, and include: The
Declaration of Independence
1776, Articles of
Confederation1777,
Ordinance of 1787: The
Northwest Territorial
Government, and Constitution
of the United States1787.

CRITICAL THINKING
(Questions:)
1) What is the first legal premise presented in Part I?
2) What is the second legal premise presented in Part I?
Plaintiffs only avenue of relief against state officials for her claims of constitutional violations is under 42 U.S.C. 1983.

There is no cause of action in this Court under any document published by the United Nations.
(Answers:)
1)
2)

Page 3 of 7
necessary.
PART II
-The Analysis-

The prevailing, yet immensely incorrect perception is that unalienable rights
are derived from the Federal Constitution; and thus, many attempt to invoke
said Constitution for the assertion and protection of such rights. However, the
Founding Fathers, beyond a shadow of a doubt have declared that humans
are:
[] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure
these rights, Governments are instituted among Men [].

(Declaration of Independence1776)

Thus, from the words of the Founding Fathers who themselves established the
Federal Constitution, human rights come from a Higher Power, not from
governments; nor are they given from one man to another through statutory
laws. That is, unalienable rights are not derived from a constitution; they exist
from the moment of birth, whereas constitutional rights come about as a
result of being a member of the society created by the respective constitution.

Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as constitutional rights in a literal
sense; there are only constitutionally-protected rights and constitutionally-
granted rights. It is to be foremost understood that a constitution is a social
compact between men and women [or between states] who have come
together to form their resulting government. They do so to combine their
strengths for the protection of their individual inherent rights with which
they are born/created.

Terminology
Unalienable Rights: Inherent
rights bestowed upon every
man and woman, by their
Creator, from the moment they
are born. The terms
unalienable rights and
human rights are oftentimes
used interchangeably, being that
all humans are born with
unalienable rights.
Statutory Law: A form of law
based upon statutes. Statutes
themselves are created through
legislation, by the Legislative
Branch of a given government,
state or federal.
Constitutional Rights: A
fallacious misnomer often
employed by those attempting
to assert unalienable human
rights under the U.S Federal
Constitution.
Social Compact: A species of
legal agreement and/or contract
that binds the members of
society one to another. It need
not bear the signature of every
member of society for it to be
legally enforceable; one need
only identify with the society
created thereby, which is prima
facie evidence of his/her
belonging to said society and
thus it is proof of their having
agreed to be bound by the
dictates of the governing
constitution for that society.

Page 4 of 7
necessary.
Therefore, constitutionally-protected rights of men and women are more

properly referred to as unalienable human rights; and constitutionally-granted
rights are more properly referred to as civil rights, which come about as a
result of being a member in a civil society.

As the foregoing quotation from the Declaration of Independence correctly
states: men (and women) erect governments among them in order to secure
their natural, unalienable, human rights. This means that all members of the
society created by and through a given constitution are implicitly party to said
constitution; it is immaterial whether or not each person has signed their
name to said social compact.

A constitution, itself, is a legal charter issuing from a union of individuals,
deriving its power from the inherent freedoms with which each composing
member is born/created; said liberty is also referred to as sovereignty. This is
why it is often said that the People are the source of sovereignty in the United
States of America: because American state governments were formed by each
of the original founders relinquishing a portion of their inherent rights with
which they were born, in order to jointly forge a social compact that resulted
in the erection of their respective state government.

Upon entrance into a civil society, a person relinquishes a portion of their
inherent freedomsabsolute sovereignty includedto become a citizen.
(Questions:)
1) What is the source of unalienable rights?
2) What is the source of statutory rights?
Civil Society: A group of

individuals united by a social
compact (e.g. constitution) as a
People.
Constitution: A legally binding
and enforceable grant of
authority to one party, by
another, for the former to act on
behalf of the latter in the
instances, ways, and for the
purposes specified in said
charter.
Charter: A (usually written)
legal instrument emanating
from a sovereign power
containing a grant of authority.
Sovereignty: Limitless
freedom; absolute selfdetermination and selfsufficiency. The right and
power to govern internal affairs
without foreign/outside
dictation; complete
independence.
1)
2)
Statutory law issuing from a Legislature

The Higher Power/Creator
(Answers:)
Civil Rights: Rights and

privileges obtained as a result
of being a member of a given
civil society; civil rights are
interrelated with citizenship.
One is not born with civil
rights, per say; such rights are
acquired in connection with
matters of citizenship.
Citizen: A member of a society

possessing the rights/privileges
thereby afforded under its
constitution and subject to all
corresponding duties.
CRITICAL THINKING

Terminology

Page 5 of 7
necessary.
There is no such thing as a sovereign citizen; the term is oxymoronic. The

People of each state, as a whole, is the source of that particular states
sovereignty by and through the state constitution. This is what is truly meant
by the mantra for the people, by the people. However, the Federal
Constitution is not directly for the people, by the people. To be exact, it is for
the states, by the states.

Individual men and women are not party to the Federal Constitution; the
actual States of the Union are. When the various state delegates signed the U.S.
Constitution, they were not signing on their own behalf, they were signing on
behalf of the specific state that had commissioned them.

If one is not a party to a social compactin this case, the Federal
Constitutionthen there are no constitutional rights to be had pursuant to
said agreement.

PART III
-The Conclusion-

Senior Judge Willis B. Hunt, Jr. makes it very clear that U.S. Courts
do not recognize/acknowledge any claims brought under any
document published by the United Nations. His exact words are:

There is no cause of action in this Court under any document published
by the United Nations.

Terminology
State Constitution: A social
compact between individual
American men and women that
serves as a charter for a state
government. A state
constitution delineates the
agreed upon inner workings of
the resulting state government,
but commences with the
enumeration of a BILL OF
RIGHTS that establishes the
unalienable human rights upon
which the state government
may never encroach through
legislation (statutory law) or
otherwise.
Federal Constitution: A social
compact between the States of
the Union that served as a
charter for the Federal
Government. The Federal
Constitution delineates the
agreed upon INNER
WORKINGS of the Federal
Government. The Bill of Rights
(Amendments 1-10) contained
therein reaffirms unalienable
rights of state citizens already
secured by the respective state
constitutions and prohibits the
Federal Government from
encroaching upon said rights
through legislation or
otherwise.
Delegate: Someone
commissioned to act in the
stead of another.
The UDHR is a document published by the United Nations.

Page 6 of 7
necessary.
Therefore: U.S. Courts do NOT recognize The Universal

Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Senior Judge Willis B. Hunt, Jr. also makes it very clear that relief
sought for unconstitutional violations of personal rights can only
be had pursuant 42 U.S.C. 1983. His exact words are:

Plaintiffs only avenue of relief against state officials for her claims of
constitutional violations is under 42 U.S.C. 1983.

Human rights are unalienable rights with which one is born, as

proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence1776. Statutory
rights are those derived from statutes that are created by
Legislature, which is a function of government. If the only claims
that can be brought for unconstitutional violations of rights is
pursuant statutory law, then the only type of rights that U.S.
Courts recognize are statutory rights.
Therefore: U.S. Courts only recognize statutory rights.

IMPLICATION # 1
U.S. Courts do NOT recognize The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR).

IMPLICATION # 2
U.S. Courts only recognize statutory rights.

Overall Message

Human rights are those granted by The Creatorirrespective of

who/what that might be, statutory rights are those granted by
government; these two species of rights are as different as night
and day. The former belong to all humans, given to them by their
Creator and cannot be arbitrarily taken away, whilst the latter
belong to the U.S. Government and can be taken at will.

Page 7 of 7
necessary.
Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-02128-WBH was NOT filed as a civil

rights case despite the lies that have been circulated throughout
American media. It was filed as a HUMAN RIGHTS case.
Throughout the proceedings of the case, Senior Judge Willis B.
Hunt, Jr. did everything in his power to prevent the assertion of
Plaintiffs HUMAN RIGHTS. He did everything from altogether
deny Plaintiffs access to the court, delete and remove Plaintiffs
documentation and evidence from court records, continuously
and intentionally misclassify the suit as a civil rights case
pursuant 42 U.S.C. 1983, etc.

The aforementioned situation and circumstances was the true
cause of the outburst contained in the Notice to F*ck This Court
and Everything that it Stands For. , in which the Senior Judge was
called a treacherous, lying, spineless, bastard son-of-a-b*tch and
a traitorbecause he is knowingly and intentionally tricking
Americans out of their human rights.

One cannot stake claim to HUMAN RIGHTS in U.S. Courts; the
Courts only recognize statutorily granted civil rights, which are
the property of the Federal Government. All of this was proven
during the court proceedings, but again, the Senior Judge
removed every trace of it from court records, immediately after
which, he promptly issued the final Judgment wherein the lawsuit
was dismissed, claiming that Plaintiffs had not opposed the
dismissalwhich is an outright LIE.

Senior Judge Willis B. Hunt, Jr. has thus revealed that THERE ARE
NO HUMAN RIGHTS TO BE HAD IN U.S. COURTS. When
Americans walk into U.S. Courts, they are not being adjudged
based upon the principles of unalienable human rights; they are
being adjudged based upon the principles of U.S. civil rights
which are privileges that may be granted and revoked at the will
of their creator, e.g. government. This leaves Americans at the
complete mercy of the judge and the court over which he/she
presides, and is hence, the source of the rampant injustice that
undeniably takes place in U.S. Courts. Justice is being sold to the
highest bidder at the expense of the American People.

WARNING: Mrs. Tamah Jada Clark has only presented information and is not advising any particular course of action for anyones legal
proceedings or otherwise. To the contrary, Mrs. Tamah Jada Clark is only suggesting that Americans seek out an unbiased education
concerning American history, civics, and Law based upon valid historical fact that will in turn empower them to assert the inalienability of
their human rights on American soil, bequeathed unto them as such, by their Forefathers/mothers. All legal liability is hereby relinquished.


Message and Implications of Civil Action No. 1-14-Cv-02128-WBH

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Message and Implications of Civil Action No. 1-14-Cv-02128-WBH

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Justice

A Brief Expos on the Why and How of

The Implications and Message of Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-02128-WBH

Reference Guide for Legal

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a document published

Reference Guide for Legal

Reference Guide for Legal

Therefore, constitutionally-protected rights of men and women are more

Civil Society: A group of

Statutory law issuing from a Legislature

Civil Rights: Rights and

Citizen: A member of a society

Reference Guide for Legal

There is no such thing as a sovereign citizen; the term is oxymoronic. The

Reference Guide for Legal

The UDHR is a document published by the United Nations.

Therefore: U.S. Courts do NOT recognize The Universal

Human rights are unalienable rights with which one is born, as

Human rights are those granted by The Creatorirrespective of

Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-02128-WBH was NOT filed as a civil

S-ar putea să vă placă și