Moorish National Republic Federal Government Societas ......Upon Our Nobility and Private Status and Commercial Liability, We, affirm, being duly affirmed under oath and upon the five

Moorish National Republic Federal Government ~ Societas Republicae Ea Al Maurikanos ~ Moorish Divine and National Movement of the World

Northwest Amexem / Southwest Amexem / Central Amexem / AdjoiningAtlantis and Americana Islands

~ Temple of the Moon and Sun ~The True and De Jure Natural Peoples – Heirs of the Land

~ I.S.L.A.M. ~

Apostille No.: 239357-2-617487-157Session: One Supreme Court

Issued By; Secretary of The Republic of Michigan, "Self-Authenticating": Rule 902 (3), Federal Rules of Evidence;

"Superior Proof of Official Record": Rule 27,

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure: Rule 44 (a)(2) &1991 Amendments, Federal Rules of .Civil Procedure

Act of State (Immutable Autonomous Nationals Statement)

Expressed Administrative Hearing (pursuant to Title 5 U.S.C. § 551-559)

Private Law Rule 301 Rebuttal (pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 301)

Mandatory Judicial Notice (Rule 201 (d), Federal Rules of Evidence)

*WRIT FOR A FREEMAN'S RIGHT TO TRAVEL* *JUDICIAL NOTICE AND COMMAND FOR AUTONOMOUS

AUTOCHTHON MOORS BY AFFIRMED AFFIDAVIT*

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL AND NOTICE TOPRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENT

APPLICABLE TO ALL SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS

Status: Indigenous, (Blood-Type A+)Trust A-1; Freehold by Inheritance AA222141.... I.S.L.A.M

TO ALL OFFICIALS AND PUBLIC SERVANTS OF FEDERAL, STATE AND CITY MUNICIPAL, STATUTORY AND CIVIL LAW/CODE OF THE LAND, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS.

Upon Our Nobility and Private Status and Commercial Liability, We, affirm, being duly affirmed under oath and upon the five points of light – Love, Truth, Peace, Freedom, and Justice, squarely affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; and having knowledge and belief of the adjudicated facts contained herein, and being competent to make this affidavit in our own writing,

Page 1 of 10 Affidavit to Travel

Aboriginal and Indigenous Peoples' Documents: Northwest Amexem / North Africa / North America / 'The Moroccan Empire' –

Continental United States: 'Temple of the Moon and Sun': Non – Domestic, Non – Resident, Non-Subject – Being the Rightful Heirs

and Inheritors of the Land.

state and declare the following facts to be true, correct, certain, complete, complete not misleading, and not intended for any improper purpose to wit.

We are the indigenous Sundry Free and Autonomous, Private Mu'urs*, possessingfreehold inheritance status to travel upon the Roadways, Byways, and Highways of America as a matter of asserted Royal Law, Common Law, Muslim Customary Law, Treaty Law, the Great Law of Peace, the Law of Nations, the Free Moorish Great Seal Zodiac Constitution and the 1791 United States Republic Constitution.

True Nobles of the Al Moroccan Empire are recognized as Autonomous Autochthon and UnitedMoorish America Aboriginal Republic, (bearers of the names / titles Ali, Al, El, Bey, Dey, and Dun, the True Nobles of Americas, the Land of Their Moorish forefathers and mothers of Moroccan descent. Autonomous Autochthon Mu'urs have freehold inheritance and retain all substantive rights and immunities, enjoy and operate upon consummated, vested Constitutional Rights and Immunity (ise) from TAXATION, CRIMINAL AND CIVIL JURISDICTION by, and of, the Union States Rights Republic (USA), pursuant to, but not limited to United States Supreme Court Acts of State to wit: "Every Sovereign State (people) is bound to respect the independence of every other Sovereign State (people) and the courts of one country ( People) will not sit in judgment on the government of another, done within (the same or) its own territory ... "

That the present Union States Municipal and Civil Laws and Codes of the Land are anincorporated political unit of self-government established by the political powers of the GeneralAssembly, of each state of the Union and initiated in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in the yeareighteen fifty-four (1854). It governs "ONLY" the rights of conduct of "WHITE PEOPLE",Christians and Jews, of the eighteen sixty-three (1863) Union States Rights Re- public under the Magna Carter, the Knights of Columbus Code and Klu Klux Klan Oath.Forever said Union States Rights Republic denies citizenship in the United States Republic(US) to the descendants of the Moorish Nation in the Western Hemisphere, referred to andmislabeled as Negroes, Blacks, Coloreds and African- American, etc."

In addition, the Supreme Court of the United States in the Landmark case of Dred Scott v.Sandford 60 US 393 (19 Howard 393 (1857) held that Negroes-slave or free-were not includedand were not intended to be included in the category of "citizen" as the word was used in the USConstitution ... " Therefore based upon these facts of the established law of the land, the TrueNobles of the Al Moroccan Empire (Free Moors) "were not included and were not intended tobe included in the category of "citizens" (subjects) of the Union States Rights Republic.Resultantly, the True Nobles of the Al Moroccan Empire ( Free Moors ), bearers of the names Ititles Ali, AI, EI, Bey, Dey, and Dun, are excluded from Union States Rights Republic (US)jurisdiction. The True Nobles of the Al Moroccan Empire are Autonomous Autochthons, andSelf-Governed by an ONLY obligated to the Free Moorish Zodiac Constitution, and theprincipals and standards embodied in the Moorish National Flag, Love, Truth, Peace, Freedomand Justice.

The True Nobles maintain a NON-OBLIGATORY respect for the Union State Rights Republic(US), its members, laws, ordinances, codes, customs and tradition, pursuant to: the FreeMoorish Zodiac Constitution Article IV and VI; the Moroccan Treaty of Seventeen-HundredEighty-Seven (1787 ); the National Constitution of the Continental United States Article III,Section 2, Amendment V - Liberty Clause, and Amendment IX-Reservation of the Rights of thePeople; the United States Department of Justice Moorish Credentials; Free Moorish ZodiacConstitution, Truth A-I Classified; the US Copyright Certificate Number AA 222141 Clock ofDestiny; the Moorish Nationality Identification Card; Free Moorish Zodiac Constitution; theFile of the House of Representatives, Resolution Number Seventy-Five, April 17, 1933 MoorishAmerican Society and Use of Their Names; and the United Nation Right of Indigenous People. Whereas, in light, this firmly establishes a square WANT OF JURISDICTION on the part of the Union States Rights Republic (US), and ITS AGENTS AND OR ASSIGNS legally in force





under National and International Law. And, Affiant does not consent to a public hearing, NON-COMPLIANCE IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE.

That We assert Our Autonomy as Free Autochthon Mu'urs (natural beings) pursuant to wit: theFree Moorish Zodiac Constitution-The Great Seal, the 1787 Moroccan Treaty of Peace andFriendship, the 1790 Sundry Free Moors Act, the 1791 organic united States Constitution, theMoorish Federal Financiers Act (Union States Army 1861-1863), the 1854 Roman CatholicMagna Carta, the Knights of Columbus Code, the Klu Klux Klan Oath, the

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights XV, the United Nations Charter Article55 (c), the United States Supreme Court Acts of State, the Executive Order BI07-Implementation of Human Rights Treaties, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 28 USC1602, et. Seq., the Convention on International Road Traffic of the 19 th Day of September1949, the World Court Decision, the Hague Netherlands, the 21st day of January 1958. That theorganic 1791 united States Republic Constitution is the supreme law of the land and all treatiesunder the united States Flag of Peace pursuant to United States Code Title 4, Chapter 1; and anylaw that is Repugnant to the Constitution is Null and Void. Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137,174, 176, (1803).

That the United States Supreme Court has determined that State Laws are unconstitutionalshould they mandate restrictions on licensing, registration, and insurance requirements asfollows:

1. The Right to Travel, Right to Mode of Conveyance, and Right to Locomotion are all absoluterights and the Police can not make void the exercise of rights. State v. Armistead, 60 s.778,779, and 781;

2. The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege buta common and fundamental right of which the public and natural Beings can not rightfully bedeprived. Chicago Motor Coachv.Chicago 337 ILL 200, 169 NE 22, ALR 834, Ligare v.Chicago 139 ILL 46, 28 HE 934, Boone v. Clark 214 SW 607,25 AM jur (1st Highways,sec.

3. The Right to Park or Travel is part of the Liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprivedwithout due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. Kent v. Dulles 357 US 116,125

4. The Right of a citizen to Travel upon the public highways and to transport one's propertythereon, either by carriage or automobile, is not a mere privilege which a City may prohibit orpermit at will, but a common right which he/she has under the right to life, liberty and thepursuit of happiness. Thompson v. Smith 154 SE 579;

5. State Police power extends only to immediate threats to public safety, health, welfare, etc.Michigan v. Duke 266 US at 476 Led at 449; which driving and speeding are not. Californiav. Farley Ced. Rpt. 89, 20 CA3d 1032 (1971);

6. The State is prohibited from violating substantive rights, Owen v. City, 445 US 662 (1980);and it can not do by one power (eg. Police Power) that which is for example, prohibitedexpressly to any other such power (eg. Taxation/eminent Domain) as a matter of Law, US andUT v. Daniels, 22 P 159, nor indirectly that which is prohibited to it directly, Fairbanks V US181, US 283, 294,300; Traveling in an automobile on the public roads was not a threat to thepublic safety or health, and constituted no hazard in so to the public, and such a traveler orowner owed nothing more than "due care" (as regards to tort for negligence) to the public, andthe owner owed no other duty to the public (eg. State), he and his auto, having equal rights toand on the roadway/highways as horses and wagons etc. this same right is still substantive rule,in that speeding, running stop-signs, traveling without license plates, or registration are notthreats to the public safety, and thus are not arrest able offenses. Whereas The Amurican ( Moorish) Nation Permanent Mission has internationally registered ouridentity as a Private Nation of , Sentient, Aboriginal Americans through the Michigan Republic





ApostiIle "Reaffirmation ... " (#239357-2-617487-157 attached, and referenced as if incorporated herein) and,

Whereas in Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364 and Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 the legaldetermination was made, "if it can be read, it is lawful process from any citizen ... " and,

Whereas the public record is the highest form of evidence, We, The Amurican ) Moorish NationPermanent Mission are hereby timely creating public record by declaration with this Notice ofthe Unalienable Right to Travel in the Nature of a Declaration of Fact and,

Whereas, service upon the principal is service upon the agent and service upon the agent isservice upon the principal, all necessary parties, including but not limited to ALLmembers/agents of the STATE OF MICHIGAN are hereby provided notice and opportunityand,

Whereas the STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WAYNE, the CITY OF DETROITand are instrumentalities of the UNITED STATES CORPORATION whereby Governmentofficers/commissioners/secretaries/personnel are responsible and potentially liable for theconduct of the STATE OF MICHIGAN officials, and employees especially since ultra viresactivity can result in dissolution of the charter pursuant to QUO WARRANTO and,

Whereas We have researched the organic laws of the united States of America and Americancase law (i.e. common law), We now declare that We have the unalienable and fundamental andunregulated right to travel upon the public highways in my private conveyance, duly conveyed,unhindered by any private or statutory law or Department of Finance and Administrationregulation or so called requirement. This unalienable right to travel is guaranteed by the 9th and10th Amendments of the Constitution for the united States of America and Bill of Rights, andupheld by many court decisions at all levels in support of that right (see below). We nowexplicitly Reserve, Assert and Defend that right and,

Whereas "since the claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime,there can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of hisconstitutional rights." Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d 486,; Sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 2d 946 and, Whereas according to Shuttleworth v. Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262, " ... if the State doesconvert a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity, "and "Sincethe injured party has relied on prior decisions of the Supreme Court, he has the perfect defensefor willfulness." See U.S. v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 and,

Whereas Congress, pursuant to the authorization given it by the Commerce Clause of Article I,Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution for the united States of America, demands that only(commercial)"motor vehicles" (see 18 USC § 31) are required to be registered/licensed toinclude a driver's license/registration to operate that (commercial)"motor vehicle" and,

Whereas 18 USC § 31. Definitions states in part, "Motor vehicle" means every description ofcarriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used (or commercialpurposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, orproperty or cargo (emphasis mine); and, Whereas 18 USC § 31. Definitions states in part, "used for commercial purposes" means thecarriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate charge or other consideration, or directly orindirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit; and,

Whereas "Vehicle" is not defined in Title 18 USC § 31 since under the Commerce Clause onlycommerce is to be controlled, and our state codes and laws are in compliance with United StatesCode, because this is what is required and, Whereas there is no mention of any requirement fora state-issued identification plate for a (non-commercial) vehicle, either state or federal and,

Whereas our private property is a vehicle, by established definition and the wording on adocument entitled "Certificate of Origin for a Vehicle", and as such is not a "motor





vehicle"subject to registration, We are not required to register our private vehicle (not used incommerce) under any 'Motor Vehicle' law and,

Whereas no assessment of our "private property" vehicle (as distinguished from "personalproperty" which can only belong to the legislatively-created fiction represented by the all capsenumeration of the entity) is required and,

Whereas the public highways are the property of the People, the only allowable restrictions as totheir use is by regulation under the Commerce Clause by the Congress of the United States ofAmerica; the statutes and codification of this State are in total agreement with the fact thatusage is the key, as all licensing and descriptions of conveyances are strictly limited to"commerce" and "commercial vehicles" (motor vehicles) and,

Whereas it is the duty of the state to administratively/ministerially report (see 23 USC §§ 303(c)& 402(a)) all such "motor vehicle" and "school bus" registration/licensing/driver licenseregistration of those in commerce and commercial activities to the federal government forregulation by Congress and,

Whereas Title 49 USC (which is entitled "Transportation") Subtitle III, § 5702 states:"Transportation" means anymovement of propertv in commerce(including intrastate commerce)by a motor vehicle or rail vehicle and,

Whereas the courts have uniformly upheld the unalienable Right to Travel freely upon thePublic Highways, the following citations are offered in affirmation of that Right and, Whereas When government passes an unlawful act, such as the licensing of a Right, peopleneed to know they have no obligation to obey it, for it is void from the time it was enacted: "Anunconstitutional legislative enactment, though law in form, is in fact not law at all. It confers norights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protec-tion; it is in legal contemplation as inoperativeas though it had never been passed." Bonnett v.Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908);Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 442. and,

Whereas "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mereprivilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfullybe deprived. "Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221. and,

Whereas "Personal liberty largely consists of the right of locomotion-to go where and when onepleases--only so far restrained as the Rights of others make it necessary for the welfare of allother citizens. The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport hisproperty thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon or auto-mobile, is not a mere privilege whichmay be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under the Right tolife, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, there-fore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in publicplaces, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering withnor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safeconduct." American Jurisprudence 1st Edition, Constitutional Law,Sec. 329, p. 1135. and,

Whereas "Those have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they have the rightto do as such license would be meaningless." City of Chicago v. Collins. 51 NE 907, 910. and,

Whereas "This right of the people to the use of the public streets of a city is so well establishedand so universally recognized in this country, that it has become a part of the alphabet offundamental rights of the citizen. " Swift v. City of Topeka, 23 Pac. 1075,1076,43 Kansas671,674. and,





Whereas "All citizens of the United States of America have a right to pass and re-pass throughevery part of it without interruption, as freely as in their own state." Smith v. Turner,48 U.S.283, 12 LEd. 702. and,

Whereas "The rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens exist notwithstanding there is nospecific enumeration thereof in state constitutions. These instruments measure the powers ofrulers, but they do not measure the rights of the governed... " Thiede v. Town of ScandiaValley, 217 Minn.218,225; 14 N.W. 2d 400 (1944). and,

Whereas " ... reasonable regulations of an inalienable right do not include compelling a citizento waive his constitutional rights by submitting him to licensing, the very nature of whichsubjects the licensee to rules that can be unreasonable or a further trespass on his rights ...Legislative statute or fiat cannot change the nature of a constitutional right. The right or libertyto travel freely, which had existed when the Constitution of Connecticut was adopted, existstoday, as the right is unchangeable ... "Du Pont v. Du Pont,85 A. 2d 724, 728 (Del. B 1951).and,

Whereas constitutional powers can never transcend constitutional rights, and the police power istherefore subordinate to constitutional rights, the police power cannot possibly license the exercise of such a right, and thereby transcend such a right and put itself in a superior position., and,

Whereas "We realize that the police is elastic to meet changing conditions and changing needs,yet it cannot be used to abrogate or limit personal liberty or property rights contrary toconstitutional sanction." City of Cincinnati v. Cornell, 49 N.E. 2d 412, 414; 141 Ohio St.535. and,

Whereas Licensing cannot be required of free people, because taking on the restrictions of alicense requires the surrender of a right; "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved,there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them. "Miranda v. Arizona,384 U.S. 436, 491. and,

Whereas "The claim and exercise of a right cannot be converted into a crime. " Miller v. U.S.,230 F. 486, 489. and,

Whereas "Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a citizen has theRight to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right doesnot extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business forprivate gain. " Willis v. Buck, 263 P.I 982; Barney v. Rail- road Commissioners,17 P.2d 82.and,

Whereas to deprive all persons of the Right to use the road in the ordinary course of life andbusiness because one might, in the future, become dangerous, would be a deprivation not onlyof the Right to travel, but also the Right to due process, and,

Whereas "We find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be surrendered inorder to assert another. " Simons v. United States, 390 U.S. 389. and,

Whereas "As a rule, fundamental limitations of regulations under the police power are found inthe spirit of the Constitutions, not in the letter, although they are just as efficient as if expressedin the clearest language. " Mehlos v. Milwaukee, 146 N.W. 882. and, Whereas in the instant matter, the state, by applying commercial statutes to all entities, naturaland artificial persons alike, has deprived this free and natural person of the Right of Liberty,without cause and without due process of law, and "The right to travel is part of the Liberty ofwhich a citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. Thisright was emerging as early as the Magna Carta. "Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116 (1958). and,





Whereas the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the Citizen's Right to travel uponthe public roads, by passing legislation forcing the citizen to waive his Right and convert thatRight into a privilege, and,

Whereas "Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severeConstitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the power to tax a Right, thiswould enable the state to destroy Rights guaranteed by the constitution through the use ofoppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the Right to travel by theordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legislative object of the state taxation. Theviews advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of taxingpower of states has been repeatedly considered by the Supreme Court. The Right of the state toimpede or embarrass the Constitutional operation of the us. Government or the Rights which thecitizen holds under it, has been uniformly denied" McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316. and,

Whereas "If, therefore, a statute purported to have been enacted to protect ... the public safety,has no real or substantial relation to those objects or is a palpable invasion of Rights secured bythe fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to theConstitution." Mulger v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 661. and,

Whereas "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to bedefeated under the name of local practice. " Davis v.Wechsler263 U.S. 22,24.

Whereas it could be said that the state would suffer a monetary loss, "Economic necessitycannot justify a disregard of Constitutional guarantee. "Riley v. Carter, 79 ALR 1018; 16Am.Jur.(2nd), Const. Law, Sec. 81. and,

Whereas the state cannot lose money that it never had a right to demand from the SovereignPeople in the first place and,

Whereas it could be argued that the licensing scheme of all persons is a matter of public policy,"No public policy of a state can be allowed to override the positive guarantees of the U.S.Constitution." 16 Am.Jur. (2nd), Const. Law, Sec. 70. and, Whereas no notice is given to people applying for driver's licenses that they have a perfect rightto use the roads in non-commercial pursuits without any permission, and that they surrendervaluable rights by taking on the regulation system of license, the state has committed a massiveconstructive fraud. This occurs when any person is told that they must have a license in order touse the public roads and highways and,

Whereas the license, being a legal contract under which the state is empowered with policingpowers, is only valid when the licensee takes on the burdens of the contract and bargains awayhis or her rights knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily and,

Whereas We, Moorish (Muurican) Nationals cannot in good faith apply for, renew or accept astate-issued driver's license because to do so would be to commit Perjury, attesting that we arecitizens of, resident of (fiduciary, surety for) the corporate STATE OF MICHIGAN when thealready established facts by Apostille are that We are not citizens of, franchisee of, or resident(agent) of the STATE OF MICHIGAN or federal UNITED STATES and,

Whereas therefore, We have determined and hereby state the facts by declaration and by virtueof our declared autonomy and American case law, that WE are not required to have governmentpermission to travel freely upon the public highways, not required to have a driver's license, notrequired to register our private property, nor to surrender the lawful title of our duly conveyedproperty to the State as security against government indebtedness and the undeclared federalbankruptcy. Any administrative rule/regulation or statutory act of any State legislature orjudicial tribunal to the contrary is unlawful and clearly unconstitutional, thus null and void and,





Whereas "The state is to protect against any encroachment of a constitutionally secured liberty and such constitu-tional provisions for the security of a person and property should be liberally construed." Boved v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616. Therefore my right must be interpreted in favor of me,the citizen, the beneficiary of the trust, because "it is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. "Bryars v. U.S., 273 U.S. 28, 16 AmJur 2nd § 97. and,

Whereas it is not the job of government to make sure that the citizens are not in error, it is theduty of the citizens to make sure that the government is not in error, and since the Constitutionis the supreme law of the land as stated in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, "The State may notimposed a charge for the enjoyment of a right protected by the Federal Constitution nor converta liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.. "as stated in Murdock v.Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 and,

Whereas We regard it as just and necessary to give notice to the above-named proponent (see #5) and its principals (see # 6) of the consequences of any failure to abide by the Constitution forthe united States of America (1791) and the

Constitution of the STATE OF MICHIGAN (1836) and its oaths and duties in this matter,since it can result in the proponents committing acts of treason, usurpation and tyranny. Suchtrespasses would be clear and gross violations of the unambiguous Rights secured by theConstitution which allow no room for construction, as amply demonstrated by the numerousadjudications cited herein and,

Whereas Judge Cooley in Constitutional Limitations, page 71, writes, "Acquiescence for nolength of time can legalize a clear usurpation of power, where the people have plainly expressedtheir will in the Constitution." In this instant matter, although the MICHIGAN Motor Vehicleand Traffic Laws and State Highway Commission Regulations has been promulgated as "publiclaw" for decades, that cannot be held as justification for any member of the executive or judicialbranch of government ("servants") to continue to usurp power by the continued conversion ofRights into privileges where such conversion is manifestly contrary to the enumerated Rights ofthe People and,

Whereas "That IF two or more persons shall band or conspire together, or go in disguise uponthe public highway, or upon the premises of another, with intent to violate any provision of thisact (enforcement act of May 30, 31, 1870), or to injure, oppress, threaten or intimidate anycitizen, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise and enjoyment of any rights orprivilege granted or secured to him by the Constitution or Laws of the United States, or becauseof his having exercised the same, such person shall be held guilty of felony, and, on convictionthereof, shall be fined or imprisoned, or both, at the direction of the Court, the fine not to exceed$5, 000 and the imprisonment not to exceed ten years; and shall, moreover, be thereafterineligible to, and disabled from holding, any office or place of honor, profit, or trust created bythe Constitution or Laws of the United States. " 16 Stat. 140-14l. and,

Therefore In Summary We seek to function according to and within the Private Law and to beafforded the protections of Private Law, while recognizing the lawful, proper jurisdiction of thePublic Law, We will not false swear to the Public Law which seeks to make driver's licensesand vehicle registration "mandatory" for all citizens and all vehicles through a processcharitably described as "constructive fraud" and to which the unsuspecting fall prey and,

Whereas We seek to acquire the items necessary to pass and repass throughout 'MICHIGANand this nation without harassment or interference and,





Whereas the STATE OF MICHIGAN has no authority to grant, and is not empowered, absentcontract entered into knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily by both parties, to issue "tabs"or "plates" for the registration or identification of the purely private property (privateconveyance/vehicle not engaged in commerce) of private, sentient, civilian, absolute indigenouscitizens, We will secure a plate for our own identification purposes. It shall be linked to theunique number, MACG000000049(Apostille #239357-2-617487-157, issued by the Republic ofState Michigan Secretary of State) as described- (GREEN) FIVE-POINTED STAR IN THECENTER OF A RED PLATE and will be mounted and maintained in the space provided forsuch identification on our 2005 SATURN (Four) 4-Door V.I.N. 1G8AK52F85Z102303 TITLE#MI0000505819 private conveyance. [PHOTO ATTACHED]

Whereas We are under no obligation to contract with the STATE OF MICHIGAN for a ‘driver'slicense", We will nonetheless secure for ourselves a "Right to Travel/Way Notification"card, in lieu of the "license", which will likewise bear my internationally unique MOORISHMAC FEDERAL NUMBER MACG000000049, photo and other identifying information.

WHEREAS, there is no question that (under contract) a bench appearance Summons, detention,arrest and ticket or citation issued by a Police Officer or others for traveling with no driver'slicense, foreign driver's license, current registration, mandatory insurance, which carries a fineor jail time, is a penalty or sanction and is indeed converting a right into a crime', thus violatingsubstantial rights. It is reasonable to assume that these judicial decisions are straight to thepoint, that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rightsbelonging to the people (whom are not under contract.)

WHEREFORE, you are authorized by this writ, pursuant to National and International Law, tohonor all Substantial rights and Constitutional Immunities for the indigenous Sundry Free,Private Autochthon Mu'urs. You are to enlist all available and appropriate measures to ensurethat all Our Substantive Rights are not breached. The Sovereign Beings named herein, are not tobe arrested or held for detention under any circumstances. The being named herein are immunefrom Customs, tariffs, taxation, and any hindrance or restriction of his or her freedom ofmovement within member or non-member states. The bearers of this document are to be treatedwith due respect, and all available and appropriate measures are to be taken to prevent injustice,harm or attack on the Being's person, property, freedom, and/or dignity. Explicit Reservation ToAll Peace Officers: Our use of All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice UCC1-308,1-103indicates the reservation of our rights whereby we may reserve our Substantive Rights andConstitutional Immunities not to be compelled to perform under any Contract or Agreement thatwe have not entered into knowingly, voluntarily or intentionally; and this reservation servesNOTICE upon all Administrative Agencies of Government, National, State, and Local that wedo not accept the liability associated with the "COMPELLED BENEFIT" of any unrevealedCommercial Agreement.

I,: Kennedith:Fitzgerald-Martin El witness as, a real live flesh and blood, breathing naturalnon fictional being, do solemnly, sincerely, and squarely affirm that the foregoing factscontained in this Constructive and Actual Judicial Notice by Affirmed Affidavit are, to thebest of my knowledge and belief, true, correct, complete, and not misleading, the truth, thewhole truth, and nothing but the truth.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE UCC 1.308,1-103



