Common Law Grand Jury Orders to All Federal Judges

Scanned Retina - A Resource for the People!

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

8-25-2014 National Liberty Alliance to all Federal Judges


COMES  NOW  Unified  United  States  Common  Law  Grand  Jury  to  Demand  that the  clerk perform only a ministerial function, that the clerk not perform any tribunal functions, and that the clerk file the attached. Any clerk who fails to obey the law shall be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Any attorney or judge advising or intimidating clerks to violate the law will also be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Clerks, attorneys, judges and other officers of the court are expected to know the law. – Clerk is to file.  18 USC § 2076 Whoever, being a clerk of a district court of the United States, willfully refuses or neglects to make or forward any report, certificate, statement, or document as required by law, shall be fined under…

View original post 5,742 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

State Sovereignty

This is the fastest way to control the fed prior to and after an election…

State’s Sovereignty Act

Detective Krum
The State’s Sovereignty Act is action by the States in the union to
reassert their duly owned State’s Rights. These actions, by the
states are NOT for seceding the union nor are they to call for a
constitutional convention where the Constitution could be
completely rewritten. The State’s Sovereignty Act is where the
state’s of the union of these united states of America put a federal government which was created by the states and the people, on notice that the states will no longer comply with unconstitutional actions such as Real ID, The Patriot Act, Gun Control, National Health Care, Nationalizing Banks, and selling America out to foreigners including foreign bankers.
The actions by the States show they are tired of collecting tax dollars from their state constituents and sending their money to Washington DC to a federal government for that federal government to send 1/3rd of it back to them with strings attached. If the states kept their own money, they would not be in financial hardships and the federal congress would be out a job while state legislators are held accountable to their people per the Constitution.
As Americans become more upset over each new “bailout” and the federal Congress has a deaf ear, the people have learned they have no representation – taxation without representation.
Please contact your state legislators, not your representatives to Washington DC but your local State Representatives and ask them if they support or oppose the State Sovereignty Right and if they will sponsor legislation or co-sponsor legislation declaring State Sovereignty as the Constitution declares. Feel free to send your representative to this sight for more information as we will be tracking the states.
Please post here, your representatives name and phone number and how they responded to your request.
One final point, as American patriots fought the British for about 8 years in the American Revolution, remember, it was a group of people who formed a state and then another state and so forth. Then these people who formed these states formed a federal government with limited powers. All powers rest with the people who created both the states and the federal government and it is the people who, as creator, can remove abusive powers.
The State’s Sovereignty Act is based on the united states of America Constitution:
U.S. Constitution: Ninth Amendment
Ninth Amendment – Unenumerated Rights
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
U.S. Constitution: Tenth Amendment
Tenth Amendment – Reserved Powers
The powers not delegated to the united States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Charge Obama with TREASON NOW !!!

Date: Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Subject: [New post] Lieutenant Colonel Lakin’s Defense More Completely Constructed

Lieutenant Colonel Lakin’s Defense More Completely Constructed
thejaghunter | Wednesday, 8 September 2010 at 11:17 | Tags: Lieutanant Colonel Terrence Lakin | Categories: Colonel Lakin’s Defense, Uncategorized | URL:

JAG HUNTER here with Sergeant of Marines Timothy Joseph Harrington:
Major General Carla G. Hawley Boland and Colonel Denise R. Lind are behind a ruling in the Lakin attainder Court-martial handed down last Thursday (2 September).
Boiled down to its essential aspect Hawley-Boland and Lind are prepared to act on their own authority to incarcerate Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin, if for no other reason, so as not to embarrass the thug, punk criminal occupying the White House.
This represents a counter-argument to the Hawley-Boland/Lind writing.
Infiltrator Soetoro-Obama’s Treason against the United States Constitution manifests a clear and present danger.
Soetoro-Obama’s armed opposition to the Constitution works at installing a competing, rival and totalitarian regime. Soetoro-Obama’s decapitation of a civilian commander in chief represents a constitutional emergency.
SOBama’s war on the Constitution, his open rebellion against the United States–his Treason threatens our American way of life.

Soetoro-Obama was in residence in the White House only forty-nine days when SOBama issued “palpably” illegal orders deploying 23 U.S. Army military policemen into the small Alabama town of Samson.
SObama’s Alabama adventure issuing illegal orders actively “pervaded the activities of civilian law enforcement officials” and “subjected [American Citizens] to the exercise of military power that was regulatory, proscriptive and compulsory in nature.”
Under SOBama’s orders Army troops forcibly restricted “the freedom of movement of civilian persons.”
SOBama hourly commits Treasonous acts against the United States enjoying extraordinary success in the destruction of our American way of life.
Last September SOBama the infiltrator assumed the title and duties of the principal officer of a principal “organ” of the United Nations (click here).
In discussions with Marine Sergeant Timothy Joseph Harrington, Tim pointed out that SOBama’s accepting a foreign government position under the United Nations flag perfectly demonstrates an act of TREASON.
A legitimate president of the United States can not during term of office collaterally hold any other government position under the constitution of a foreign sovereign state?

SObama can not be at the same time president of the United Nations Security Council and president as commander in chief of the United States of America.
SOBama’s September 2009 swearing in as president of the U.N. Security Council set an international precedent. SObama proclaimed the United States chief executive and commander in chief can be a citizen of any county. In this act of Treason SObama reduced America (and its armed forces) to state status under the U.N. secretary general and U.N. constitution (its charter).
SOBama and his treasonous partners are subjecting Americans and the United States Constitution to death by a thousand cuts.
SOBama and his treasonous partners are all about the wholesale extermination of United States Sovereignty.
There are military governors in SOBams’s wild bunch–COMMAND RACKETEERS–who like Army Major-General Carla G. Hawley-Bowland and Colonel Denise Lind who are no more obedient to the United States Constitution than the Traitor-Infiltrator SOBama.
Lieutenant Colonel Lakin’s Defense More Completely Constructed
You must comprehend, as it stands, we citizens of the United States must know SOBama is a Treasonous foreign-born Domestic Enemy.
No one can credibly claim ignorance.
Our silence as an American people–manifested in our impotence to oust SOBama as a treasonous infiltrator–is our agreement before the international community that the United States Constitution is formally abandoned.
In was in the environment of SOBama’s war against the Constitution described above that U.S. Army Doctor Terrence Lakin stood up and spoke out.
Last week Convening Authority Major-General Carla G. Hawley-Bowland and military hearing officer Denise R. Lind acted together in aiding and abetting SOBama in his treasonous war on America.
In ruling upon Colonel Lakin’s defense Lind and Bowland betrayed Doctor Lakin, they betrayed themselves, and they betrayed the Constitution (read their ruling here).
We shall here more completely construct Colonel Lakin’s defense (his defense of America) while exploiting an opportunity to eviscerate the Bowland-Lind’s ruling.
Doctor Lakin challenged SOBama at a point in time when SOBama was a confirmed and self-confessed Traitor.
The magnitude of SoBama’s Treason had become legendary.
Colonel Lakin enjoys the protection of criminal complaints of filed by other commissioned officers of the United States armed forces signed under oath naming SOBama a Traitor. Military officers holding standing acted against SOBama naming the infiltrator a Traitor before Colonel Lakin acted.
SObama’s silent admission taken together with SOBama’s written confession in Treason protects Colonel Lakin in further naming SOBama an illegitimate commander in chief.
Said differently: SOBama’s near total silence regarding questions going to his legitimate command of the Unites States Armed forces invited, maybe even emboldened Colonel Lakin to act.
It was in any event Colonel Lakin’s duty!
SOBama’s intransigence has certainly emboldened others to do their duty.

It remains a basic military duty, designed in part for the benefit of subordinates, to challenge the authority of superior officers when that authority is in question.
The “superior officer” must be one authorized to give the order; else indeed his command would not be a lawful one. (Winthrop’s Military Law and Precedents, p. 577)
It is of no consequence that Colonel Lakin advances a different theory in charging SOBama criminally than those criminal charges naming SOBama advanced by other commissioned officers.
Timely and uncounted challenges to the constitutional validity of the SOBama’s standing as commander in chief were in place fully a year before Colonel Lakin’s.
Most challenges go unanswered. But one criminal charge of Treason is conceded (unlawful deployment of Army troops into Samson, Alabama).
Many criminal complaints naming SOBams, no matter their status, pre-date Colonel Lakin’s actions.
De facto commander in chief?
Lind’s and Bowland’s assertion that SOBama is a de facto commander in chief is unsustainable and deadly (click here).
For the soldier, sailor or Marine there can be no question, no doubt whatsoever regarding the legitimacy of the commander in chief.
All the duties of his life (the soldier’s) are according to the theory of military obedience, absorbed in that one duty of obeying the command of the officer set over him…” (Winthrop and others p. 571).
Lind and Bowland summon only work to excite the full fury and focus of military subordinates trotting out the government position that SOBama may be in fact an illegitimate commander in chief.
Lind and Bowland then opine it is “impossible” for Lakin’s court-martial assembly to “undertake independent resolution of whether [SOBama]…is qualified under the Constitution” to command American forces.
In fact, resolving SOBama’s Treason remains Bowland’s and Lind’s first duty.
An “order” is an Executive mandate. (Winthrop, p. 576)
“…All military authority and discipline are derived from one source—the Sovereign, so in our army every superior, in giving a lawful command, acts for and represents the President as the Commander-in-chief and Executive power of the Nation, and the source from which [the senior officers’] appointment and authority proceed. Hence the dignity and significance of a formal military order and hence the gravity of the obligation which it imposes upon the inferior to whom it is addressed.” (Winthrop on page 572)
An illegal order emanating from the president can confer no authority. A command not lawful may be disobeyed, no matter from what source it proceeds. (Winthrop, p. 575)
And with that “there is nothing better settled, as well by the civil and military laws, that neither officers nor soldiers are bound to obey any illegal order of their superior officers, but on the contrary it is their bounden duty to disobey them”…no illegal act can be justified, no matter how high the source from which it emanates, by an order from a superior authority. The soldier is still a citizen, and as such is always amenable to the civil authority. (Winthrop with others, p. 575)
Bowland and Lind admit even they don’t know whether SOBama is legitimate! But they’re going to Court-martial Colonel Lakin anyway.
Huh? How can this be?
Courts-martial are creatures of orders! (Winthrop, pg. 49)
Bowland and Lind don’t know for themselves whether SOBama’s orders are legal in a situation where both officers are duty-bound to KNOW from where their authority flows.
Bowland and Lind treasonously evade their duty by describing the dilemma on the table as a “political” or “policy” question when–in reality–the question regarding the source and nature of orders is supremely military in concept and concern!
No other obligation must be put in competition with obedience to orders; neither parental authority, nor religious scruples, nor personal safety, nor pecuniary advantages from other services. All the duties of his life (the soldier’s) are according to the theory of military obedience, absorbed in that one duty of obeying the command of the officer set over him…” (Winthrop and others p. 571).
Detachable Links
Bowland and Lind’s opinion regarding the chain of command is irreconcilable with that of Colonel Winthrop’s.
Colonel Winthrop clearly and repeatedly asserts the authority of military officers to issue orders and the concomitant duty of military service members to obey such lawful orders depends directly upon whether the president as commander in chief is qualified under the Constitution to command.
Lind and Bowland sail a reverse course by claiming officers subordinate to the commander in chief enjoy an “independent authority” to issue “lawful” orders.
Lind and Bowland manifest their belief in an “independent authority” to issue “lawful” orders by proceeding independently in the Court-martial of Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin based solely upon their own authority (click here).
One must wonder whether Army policeman,Lieutenant Colonel Scott Weill, believed he was acting on his own authority as he led his men into Samson, Alabama back in March 2009.
Lind and Bowland repeatedly claim that they themselves, or officers like Scott Weill are allowed to issue orders on their own authority “whether SOBama is a natural born citizen or is qualified under the Constitution” to command U.S. forces.
As unsettling as their view regarding the American military’s chain of command Lind and Bowland continue to incite even greater fear. Lind and Bowman tell us we’re not even allowed to explore the question about SOBama’s outlawry in the face of “an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political policy decision already made.”
Lind and Bowman explain that the “potential for embarrassment” to the infiltrator SOBama triumphs over very real concerns and questions regarding the outrageously illicit criminal conduct of Barack Obama and SOBama’s criminal assistants.
Recall that in the late 1930’s and into the early 1940’s officers of the German army embraced “an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political policy already made.”
Boiled down to its essential aspect Major General Carla G. Hawley Boland and Colonel Lind are prepared to act on their own authority to incarcerate Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin, if for no other reason, so as not to embarrass the thug, punk criminal occupying the White House
We as an American people must not let Colonel Lakin be led to slaughter. We, just as much as Doctor Lakin, are duty bound to resolve the question regarding Barack Hussein Obama’s TREASON now before us.
Here endth the lesson!

Source note: Military Law and Precedents: A Martial Law Classic
“Written by William Winthrop (1831 – 1899), Colonel, United States Army, this second edition (1895) is the revision and enlargement of the work. This comprehensive treatise details early military law [and martial law], written and unwritten, and explains the intricacies of the courts martial process. It remains the most important historical reference source for military justice practitioners. It is still frequently cited by military appellate courts. It has been called ‘a masterpiece of painstaking scholarship, brilliant erudition, and lucid prose.”
Colonel Winthrop formally held the position of Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


Courts Martial Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin

Issued September 3, 2010

World Net Daily (WND), which has been following the Lakin trial step-by-step from the beginning, is reporting – “FT. MEADE, Md. – A career officer in the U.S. Army [Col. Denise R. Lind] acting as a judge in the prosecution of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin today ruled that the military is no place for Barak Obama’s presidential eligibility to be evaluated.”

According to the WND report, presiding authority Col. Denise R. Lind used the following arguments to deny LTC Lakin proper access to a defense, summarized in the following three paragraphs taken from the 40 minute long reading of her decision –

Army Col. Denise R. Lind today ruled in a hearing regarding the evidence to be allowed in the scheduled October court-martial of Lakin that he will be denied access to any of Obama’s records as well as any testimony from those who may have access to the records.

With her decision, Lind mirrored a number of federal judges who have ruled on civil lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility. They have without exception denied the plaintiffs’ access to any requested documentation regarding the president’s eligibility.

Lind ruled that it was “not relevant” for the military to be considering such claims, that the laws allegedly violated by Lakin were legitimate on their face and that the chain of command led up to the Pentagon, and that should have been sufficient for Lakin.
We find foundational flaws in Col. Lind’s decision, which Lakin’s defense team must seize upon in order to alter the current course of this trial.

Lind’s authority is derived from the same place as LTC Lakin’s and all other members of the United States Military – from the supreme command of the office of Commander-in-Chief, the President of the United States.
Lind is attempting to use her authority under her Commander-in-Chief to break the military chain of command, isolating the Commander-in-Chief of the US Military specifically, exempting the President from his position of authority in the chain of command, without which, Lind herself has no authority to convene the Courts Martial.
Lind then reaches outside of the US Military Justice system to the Civil Court, relying upon civil court precedent to deny Lakin any access to discovery and thereby, a proper defense guaranteed him by the US Constitution and UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Civil Court precedent has no legal standing in a UCMJ criminal proceeding. In fact, the UCMJ is based upon the Articles of War (aka War Articles) and is a “penal system” unlike the US Justice System – as explained by Col. William Winthrop in Military Law and Precedents. As a result, precedents set in courts outside of the UCMJ are without legal standing in any UCMJ proceeding.
Not even in the UCMJ can the United States government deny the accused his/her right to a trial, complete with discovery of related evidence. Yet Lind attempts to do so, under the authority derived from her Commander-in-Chief. If the chain of command is broken, then Lind herself has no authority.
Lind’s statement that the legality of the Commander-in-Chief is “not relevant” in matters of military command is false on its face. As stated in a sworn affidavit filed by LTG Thomas G. McInerney executed on August 20, 2010 – “In refusing to obey orders because of his doubts as to their legality, LTC Lakin has acted exactly as proper training dictates. – By thus stepping up to the bar, LTC Lakin is demonstrating the courage of his convictions and his bravery. – That said, it is equally essential that he be allowed access to the evidence that will prove whether he made the correct decision.”
Lind attempts to break the chain of command at The Pentagon level, which she claims has no issue with the current Commander-in-Chief and that this should be good enough for Lakin. Yet she cannot break this chain of command without eliminating her own authority, and Lakin’s oath requires that he decide for himself whether or not his orders are legal, as affirmed in LTG McInerney’s sworn affidavit.
At issue is not whether or not LTC Lakin refused orders, but rather whether or not he “unlawfully” refused orders. If his orders were not “lawful,” including but not limited to, emanating from a “lawful” chain of command which begins with a lawful Commander-in-Chief, then Lakin must be found NOT GUILTY of “unlawfully” refusing orders.

At the heart of the matter is whether or not his orders to deploy were “lawful.”

LTC Lakin has questioned whether or not his deployment orders were “lawful” on the basis that he believes that the Commander-in-Chief from which those orders are issued, may not be “lawful,” therefore making any orders from the top of military command “unlawful.”

To determine whether or not Lakin is correct in his decision to refuse orders, it is paramount to discover with certainty whether or not his orders were issued by a “lawful” command.

As we know, Article II – Section I requires that only a “natural born citizen” of the United States can hold the office of President, Commander-in-Chief.

In this regard, a fatal misstep in the Lakin defense has opened the door for the illegitimate statements now being made by Col. Denise R. Lind.

LTC Lakin failed to directly assert that Barack Hussein Obama is NOT legal in his command on the basis that we know with certainty that he is not a “natural born citizen,” – and that LTC Lakin is “lawfully” refusing to follow orders on this basis.

Instead, LTC Lakin only asked the “birth place” question and tied that question to whether or not Mr. Obama could and would present an official “birth certificate” proving once and for all that he was indeed born in Hawaii, making the wrong assumption that if he could and would provide proof of said birth via an official birth certificate, which has never been released to date.

The fatal error revolves around the reality that Obama’s birth place is of no consequence in the matter of his status as a “natural born citizen” eligible for high Command of the US Military under Article II – Section I of the Constitution.

Although there is no shortage of opinions on the subject of what the term “natural born citizen” means, there is no honest debate on the matter either.

Every Supreme Court Justice knows exactly what the term “natural born citizen” means, where it came from, why it exists in Article II requirements for the office of President and that Barack Hussein Obama is NOT a “natural born citizen,” indeed ineligible for the office he currently holds.

They know that LTC Lakin is right to “lawfully” refuse orders from an illegal Command.

We know this on the basis of the following critical facts –

The term “natural born citizen” is derived from the Law of Nations. An international treaty establishing a set of rules used to establish a “nation,” the issue of nation and citizen sovereignty, and internationally recognized definitions of universal terms, including the term “natural born citizen.”
The Law of Nations is specifically mentioned in the US Constitution as an enumerated power of Congress under Article I – Section VIII – Item X – “To define and punish offenses against the Law of Nations;” (Note that in the original Constitution, Law of Nations is capitalized, referring specifically to THE Law of Nations.)
From Emerich de Vattel’s 1758 book on The Law of Nations, Chapter 19 § 212. – Of the citizens and natives – Vattel establishes – “in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
In a letter from Founder John Jay to then President of the Constitutional Convention George Washington, Jay stated – “Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”
It was later learned that President George Washington had actually taken out Vattel’s book on the Law of Nations from the local library in order to study proper implementation of law in our newly formed nation, and never returned that book.
On the basis of known history and facts behind the Constitutional term “natural born citizen” which is based upon “natural law” explained in the Law of Nations as stated referred to in the US Constitution, the proper assertion is not at all related to the actual “birth place” of Barack Hussein Obama, II. The ongoing search for a Hawaiian birth certificate has no bearing on the subject of “natural born citizen” status for Barack Hussein Obama, II.

The only relative question is –

Was Barack Hussein Obama’s birth father a legal citizen of the United States of America at the time of his birth, no matter where in the world he may have been born?

Without a birth father who was a legal citizen of the United States at the time of his birth, Barack Hussein Obama, II cannot be a “natural born citizen” of the United States of America, he is not without divided national loyalties, and cannot serve as President of the United States or Commander-in-Chief of the United States Military as a result, creating a national security and a full blown Constitutional crisis.

According to the two autobiographical books by Barack Hussein Obama, II – his birth father is Barack Hussein Obama, a British subject at the time and a legal citizen of Kenya. According to public family history, Barack Hussein Obama was at no time in his life a legal citizen of the United States.

On this basis alone, LTC Lakin is right (and lawful) in refusing to accept orders from an illegal command. The US Constitution and the Law of Nations, upon which our sovereign nation was formed, are very clear on the matter.

As a result, the need for LTC Lakin to gain access to the Hawaiian birth records for Barack Hussein Obama, II is eliminated.

LTC Lakin need only assert the following –

On the basis of Article II – Section I of the US Constitution, supported by Article I – Section VIII – Item X concerning the Law of Nations and the term “natural born citizen,” – I hereby refuse any and all illegal orders issued by the illegal Commander-in-Chief of the United States Military, President Barack Hussein Obama, on the basis that he does not meet Constitutional requirements for the office he currently holds and must further hereby demand that he be removed from office and immediately relieved of Command of the United States Military. I further assert that due to the illegal status of existing Military high Command that this Court Martial has no authority under which to proceed.

Under this assertion, there is no need for access to the birth records of Barack Hussein Obama, II, unless Mr. Obama chooses to respond by stating that Barack Hussein Obama is not his real birth father, in which case Mr. Obama is admitting to fraud during his pursuit of the Oval Office.

In the event that the UCMJ chooses to challenge the historically accurate definition of the term “natural born citizen” described herein, the US Supreme Court is the only court in the land with proper authority to rule on the true meaning of the term “natural born citizen” – as stated by the Constitutional protections that LTC Lakin has sworn a lifetime to protect and defend.

With this assertion in place, LTC Lakin does not have to prove that his assertions are true and accurate. As Commander-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama must prove that Lakin’s assertion is false in order to proceed with the government prosecution of LTC Lakin on the grounds that he has “unlawfully” refused orders.

In short, Mr. Obama must prove that his orders are in fact “lawful.” If Obama is either unable or unwilling to do so, then LTC Lakin is in fact NOT GUILTY of “unlawfully” refusing orders.

This particular case is not about one soldier refusing deployment orders. It is about a nation allowing a precedent to stand which makes it possible for any individual with any foreign allegiance to hold the highest office in this land, with no obligation whatsoever to demonstrate or prove national loyalties before holding the office of President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief.

This case is about whether or not the US Constitution stands as the official Law of this land.

NOTE: Past challenges on the term “natural born citizen” have been improperly argued upon cases revolving around the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment relates to “immigration” and “naturalization” laws, not “natural law” used to establish “natural born citizenship” status of an individual. Therefore, any and all cases pertaining to Fourteenth Amendment arguments are moot on the matter of “natural born citizen” claims.

Researched and Prepared By:

J.B. Williams and Timothy Harrington
The United States Patriots Union, LLC
Sheridan, Wyoming

Researched and Reviewed By
The United States Bar Association

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


This Ordinance was written up by David O’Connor for the purpose to support our federal and state law’s, ( HB 1804 ). This Ordinance was sampled from Mayor Barletta’s Ordinance of Pa. With Mayor Barletta’s approval. We WILL continue to push for this Ordinance in the city of Tulsa and any other that may ask for it’s use.

David Lee O’Connor, Mayoral Candidate 2009.


July 28th, 2006
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “City of Tulsa Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance”
The People of the City of Tulsa find and declare:
That illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates, contributes to over crowded classromms and failing schools, subjects our hospitals to fiscal hardship and legal residents to substandard quality of care, contributes to other burdens on public services, increasing their costs and diminishing their availability to lawful residents, and destroys our neighborhoods and diminishes our overall quality of life.

That the City of Tulsa is authorized to abate public nuisances and empowered and mandated by the People of Tulsa to abate the nuisance of illegal immigration by dilligently prohibiting the acts and policies that facilitate illegal immigration and punishing the people and businesses that aid and abet illegal aliens.
This ordinance seeks to secure to those lawfully present in the United States and this City, whether or not they are Citizens of the United States,the right to live in peace free of the threat of illegal alien crime, to enjoy the public services provided by this city without being burdened by the cost of providing goods, support and services to any whose presence in the United States in contrary to it’s laws and to be free of the debilitating effects on their economic and social well being imposed by the influx of illegal aliens to the fullest extent that these goals can be achieved consistent with the Constitution and Laws of the United States and the State of Oklahoma.
Whenever used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
“City” means the City of Tulsa.
“Contract employer” means any person who obtains the services of one or more individuals through a day labor agency.
“Illegal alien” means any person whose initial entry into the United States was illegal and whose current status is also illegal as well as any person who, after entering legally, has failed to leave the United States upon the expiration of his or her visa.
“Legal Work Status” means that a person’s employment is not in violation of any law of the United States, the State of Oklahoma or this ordinance.
“Vehicle” means a vehicle as defined in the Oklahoma Vehicle Code as the same now reads or may hereafter be amemded.
Any entity or any parent, affiliate, subsidiary or agent of any entity (other than a charity recognized as exempt from federal income taxation under Sec. 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of the United States and which has obtained and continues to have in force an exemption from federal income taxation), that employees, retains, aids or abets illegal aliens or illegal immigration into the United States, whether directly or by or through any agent, ruse, guise, device or means, no matter how indirect, and even if the agent or entity might otherwise be exempted from this section, or violates any provision of this Ordinance, shall from the date of the violation or it’s discovery, whichever shall be later, be denied and barred from approval of a business permit, renewal of a business permit, any city contract or grant as follows:
(1) For the first violation for a period of five years.
(2) For any subsequent violation, for a period of ten years.
“Aids or abets” includes, but is not limited to:
Hiring or attempted hiring of illegal aliens.
Providing, renting or leasing real or personal property to illegal aliens.
Funding or providing goods and services to illegal aliens, except as provided in Sec. 4 C.
Funding, providing goods and services to or aiding in the establishment or continuation of any day labor center or other entity providing similar services, unless the entity acts with due dilligence to verify the legal work status of all persons whom it employs, provides job assistance for or in any way assists or facilitates in obtaining employment.
Except as provided in C, any action or failure to act done within the boundaries of the City that aids and abets illegal aliens or facilitates their avoiding detection and apprehension anywhere in the United States, it’s territories or possessions, violates this ordinance.
This Ordinance shall not be construed to prohibit rendering emergency medical care, emergency assistance or legal assistance.
Illegal aliens are prohibited from leasing or renting property. Any property owner or renter/tenant/lessee in control of property, who knowingly allows and illegal alien to use, rent or lease their property shall be in violation of this section.
Any person or entity that violates this Ordinance shall be subject to a fine of not less than $1,000.00.
A seperate violation of the Ordinance shall be deemed to have been committed on each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues.
The City of Tulsa declares that English is the official language of the City.
Unless explicitly mandated by the federal government, the State of Oklahoma or the City of Tulsa, all official city business, forms, documents, signage will be written in English only.
If any part or provision of this Chapter is in conflict or inconsistent with applicable provisions of federal or state statutes, or is otherwise held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such part or provision shall be suspended and superseded by such applicable laws or regulations, and the remainder of this Chapter shall not be affected thereby.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Welcome !

Welcome to the new home for Citizens For Fair And Clean Government. We have moved from our NING account to here. Please feel free as you did on our previous site.
REMEMBER PLEASE, Without US keeping each other informed then we become ignorant of our future.

I pray God will bless this site and people will come seeking TRUTH ALWAY’S.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment