Richard Koenig: A process for Californians who accept corporate dominance, by which to sever all fraudulent corporate relationships.

On Mar 23, 2016, at 5:57 PM, Richard Koenig <> wrote:

Check out the attachment which is the subject of the original email. I found it to be very enjoyable reading.

Richard L. Koenig


———- Forwarded message ———-

From: Richard Koenig <>

Date: Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 5:48 PM

Subject: Re: California Citizenship


George, My mind is whirring from all the unasked questions remaining. This California case provides a basis for each State’s courts to do what California’s district courts were eligible to do, admit foreigners to state citizenship.

One of the questions, the one I would ask of a court of competent jurisdiction, of record, non-appellate, common law, is, When a man regarded as a United States citizen, now possible (perhaps) under the fourteenth amendment, arrives in a State, who is to say that the US citizen has not acquired status as a citizen of that State? The possible answers are at least two, One, a court of competent jurisdiction may… and two, a court of competent jurisdiction may not.

The question of whether a man be a US citizen, is to be decided under another set of criteria, including the validity of the notion that the fourteenth amendment was properly ratified and what was intent of Congress. Perhaps this question is a “political” one which is not properly before the court, but rather subject of examination under rules of legislative construction. I won’t be asking it, at least not until the first question is disposed of.

Thanks for keeping your nose in the high courts.

Richard L. Koenig

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:23 PM, George Daniel <> wrote:

This is a short, really interesting California Supreme Court case

(1855) because it defines “Citizen” and rules that the States can

“naturalize” aliens, but under the process defined by the U.S.

Congress. It would be really great if someone tested this doctrine,

by applying for California Citizenship through the Superior Court.

It certainly should work for people born on other States, as well as

those born on foreign lands. Even if we are born on California soil,

there may be an argument that the STATE OF CALIFORNIA made

us “foreign” to the California Republic through the Birth Certificate.

Since this process would involve only a Declaratory Judgment,

then we could possibly do it in Small Claims or Probate. And after

“naturalization”, we could apply for a California Passport.

At the least, is would test THE SYSTEM to see what obstacles

were placed before us. And at most, we would have “official”

acknowledgement of State Citizenship and a “get out of jail free”

card, since the corporate “government” would no longer have

a claim on us.

We must be careful to swear allegiance only to the California Republic, because then we would be under its Jurisdiction.

But since that is not the same as the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, there should be no problem following the De Jure Laws.

Comments welcome.

Which county corporate officer would be ultimately responsible?

Orange County Corporations

Is your Public Servant an Impostor—Impersonating a lawful public servant? How would you know?

Washington Post: Fraudulent IRS Targeting slammed by federal appeals court 

Richard L. Koenig

Richard L. Koenig

About arnierosner

As an American I advocate a republic form of government, self-reliance, and adherence to the basic philosophy of the founding fathers and the founding documents, I ONLY respect those who respect and "HONOR" their honor. No exceptions!
This entry was posted in Civil Rights Violations. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s