Maritime Law, Sovereign Citizens, and Constitutional Interpretation: A Historical and Contemporary Overview
I. Introduction
The intersection of maritime law, sovereign citizen beliefs, and constitutional interpretation has become a hotbed of controversy and misunderstanding in recent years. This article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of these complex topics, their historical contexts, and their modern-day implications.
Disclaimer: The author is not a legal professional. This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. Readers should consult qualified legal experts for any legal matters.
II. Early American Legal Foundations
Common Law Heritage
The American legal system has its roots in English common law, a system based on judicial precedents rather than codified laws. This foundation continues to influence U.S. law today.
Maritime Law in Early America
Maritime law, also known as admiralty law, has been a distinct part of American jurisprudence since the country's founding, primarily dealing with navigation and commerce on the seas.
Adoption of the Constitution and Initial Amendments
1787: Constitutional Convention
1788: U.S. Constitution ratified
1791: Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) ratified
III. Key Constitutional Developments
The 14th Amendment (1868)
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, including former slaves, and guaranteed all citizens "equal protection of the laws."
Misinterpretations by Sovereign Citizen Groups
Some groups misinterpret the 14th Amendment as creating a new class of citizenship, separate from the original constitutional citizenship. This interpretation is not supported by legal scholarship or court decisions.
The 1871 District of Columbia Organic Act
This act, which incorporated Washington D.C., is often misinterpreted by conspiracy theorists as fundamentally altering the U.S. government structure. In reality, it merely established a government for the District of Columbia and did not affect the constitutional structure of the United States as a whole.
IV. The Civil War and Its Legal Aftermath
The 1861 Sine Die Adjournment of Congress
Contrary to some claims, the sine die adjournment of Congress in 1861 did not dissolve the Union or nullify the Constitution. Congress reconvened in July 1861, maintaining constitutional continuity. Here are specific examples that demonstrate this:
1. Chronology of Congressional Sessions:
- March 4, 1861: The 37th Congress was officially seated, as mandated by the Constitution.
A view of Lincoln’s inauguration in 1861, when a replacement dome for the Capitol was under construction.Credit...Benjamin Brown French, via Library of Congress
- March 28, 1861: The Senate adjourned sine die at the end of a special session.
- July 4, 1861: Congress reconvened in a special session called by President Lincoln.
- August 6, 1861: This special session adjourned.
- December 2, 1861: The regular session of the 37th Congress began.
Source: United States Senate, "Dates of Sessions of the Congress"
2. Legislative Actions:
- During the July 4-August 6, 1861 special session, Congress passed several significant pieces of legislation, including:
a. Authorization for President Lincoln to call up 500,000 volunteers for military service
b. The First Confiscation Act, allowing the seizure of rebel property
c. Approval of Lincoln's prior actions in response to the rebellion
First Reading of the Emancipation Proclamation by President Lincoln
Source: Library of Congress, "Civil War Legislation"
3. Constitutional Procedures:
- The calling of the special session by President Lincoln was in accordance with Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, which gives the President power to "on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them."
4. Judicial Continuity:
- The Supreme Court continued to function during this period. For example, on March 25, 1861, the Court decided the case of The Brig Amy Warwick, which dealt with the blockade of Southern ports.
Source: Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
5. Executive Branch Continuity:
- President Lincoln continued to exercise his constitutional powers, including signing legislation passed by Congress and issuing executive orders.
6. State Representation:
- While representatives from seceded states were absent, Congress continued to function with a quorum from the remaining states, maintaining its constitutional authority.
7. Later Constitutional Amendments:
- The fact that the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were proposed and ratified in the years following 1861 further demonstrates the continuity of constitutional governance.
These examples clearly show that despite the turmoil of the Civil War, the basic structures and functions of the U.S. government, as established by the Constitution, continued to operate. The sine die adjournment in March 1861 was a procedural action, not a dissolution of government, and the subsequent reconvening and actions of Congress demonstrate the continuity of constitutional governance.
Lincoln's Suspension of Habeas Corpus
President Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was a controversial wartime measure, later upheld by Congress in 1863. It did not alter the fundamental structure of the government or the Constitution.
Ex parte Milligan (1866)
This Supreme Court decision limited the power of military tribunals over civilians, reinforcing constitutional checks and balances.
V. The Rise of Sovereign Citizen Theories
Origins in the Posse Comitatus Movement
The sovereign citizen movement has its roots in several anti-government and racist ideologies that developed in the mid-20th century, with the Posse Comitatus movement of the 1970s being a significant precursor. Here's a detailed look at its development:
1. Early Influences (1950s-1960s):
- The movement's ideological foundations can be traced back to anti-tax and anti-government sentiments that gained traction in the 1950s and 1960s.
- The John Birch Society, founded in 1958, promoted many ideas that would later influence sovereign citizen ideology, particularly regarding government overreach and international conspiracies.
Source: Berlet, Chip, and Matthew N. Lyons. "Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort." Guilford Press, 2000.
2. Posse Comitatus Movement (1970s):
- The term "Posse Comitatus" means "power of the county" in Latin.
- William Potter Gale, a Christian Identity minister, is credited with founding the movement in 1971.
- The movement promoted the idea that county sheriffs were the highest legal authorities in the United States.
- They believed that citizens had the right to form posses to enforce the law as they interpreted it.
Source: Levitas, Daniel. "The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right." Macmillan, 2002.
3. Key Claims and Beliefs:
- Rejection of federal authority beyond the powers explicitly granted in the Constitution.
- Belief that the 14th Amendment created a separate form of citizenship, inferior to "sovereign" citizenship.
- Promotion of "common law courts" outside the recognized legal system.
Source: Anti-Defamation League. "The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement." 2012.
4. Transition to Sovereign Citizen Movement (1980s-1990s):
- As Posse Comitatus declined in the 1980s, many of its ideas were absorbed into the emerging sovereign citizen movement.
- The farm crisis of the 1980s led many struggling farmers to adopt these beliefs as a way to resist foreclosures.
Source: Southern Poverty Law Center. "Sovereign Citizens Movement." Intelligence Report, 2010.
5. Influence of Other Movements:
- The tax protest movement, which gained prominence in the 1970s and 1980s, significantly influenced sovereign citizen ideology.
- The Patriot movement of the 1990s also shared many beliefs with sovereign citizens, particularly regarding government legitimacy.
Source: Pitcavage, Mark. "Camouflage and Conspiracy: The Militia Movement from Ruby Ridge to Y2K." American Behavioral Scientist, 2001.
6. Modern Development (2000s-present):
- The movement has grown significantly in the 21st century, partly due to economic downturns and the spread of information via the internet.
- The FBI has classified sovereign citizens as a domestic terrorism threat due to violent incidents involving adherents.
Source: FBI Counterterrorism Analysis Section. "Sovereign Citizens: A Growing Domestic Threat to Law Enforcement." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 2011.
Development of "Maritime Law" Conspiracy Theories
Maritime Law Theories in Sovereign Citizen Ideology: A Summary
Sovereign citizen groups have developed a complex web of theories regarding maritime law and its supposed governance over the United States. These theories are often based on misinterpretations of legal history, terminology, and actual maritime law. Here's a comprehensive overview:
1. The Claim of Maritime Law Governance:
- Many sovereign citizens believe that the U.S. is secretly operating under maritime or admiralty law, rather than constitutional law.
- They argue this shift occurred either after the Civil War or in the early 20th century, often citing the abandonment of the gold standard in 1933 as a key event.
Source: J.M. Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe," Program on Extremism, George Washington University, 2016.
2. Misinterpretation of Legal Terms:
- Sovereign citizens often misinterpret legal terminology, particularly the use of capitalization in legal documents.
- They claim that names in all capital letters on official documents represent a "corporate entity" or "strawman," distinct from the individual.
Source: Southern Poverty Law Center, "Sovereign Citizens Movement," Intelligence Report, 2010.
3. The Flag Fringe Theory:
- Some believe that gold-fringed flags in courtrooms indicate admiralty jurisdiction.
- In reality, flag decorations have no bearing on the court's jurisdiction or authority.
Source: United States v. Greenstreet, 912 F. Supp. 224 (N.D. Tex. 1996)
4. Birth Certificates and Maritime Law:
- A common claim is that birth certificates create a contract with the government, placing individuals under maritime law.
- This misinterprets the purpose of birth certificates, which are simply records of birth with no legal bearing on citizenship status or applicable laws.
Source: "The Sovereign Citizen Movement," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, September 2011.
5. Attempts to "Opt Out" of Maritime Law:
- Some sovereign citizens believe they can "opt out" of maritime law and reclaim their status under common law through various pseudo-legal procedures.
- These attempts have no legal basis and are not recognized by any court.
Source: Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (Canadian case extensively analyzing sovereign citizen claims)
6. Historical Misinterpretations:
- Sovereign citizens often cite historical events, like the Civil War or the creation of the Federal Reserve, as moments when maritime law supposedly took over.
- These claims misunderstand both the nature of maritime law and the continuity of constitutional governance in the U.S.
Source: Eric Mark, "Sovereign Citizens: A Clear and Present Danger," Police Chief Magazine, May 2016.
7. Actual Scope of Maritime Law:
- In reality, maritime law (also known as admiralty law) is a specialized area of law dealing with navigation and commerce on the seas and navigable waters.
- It coexists with, but does not supersede, other areas of law such as constitutional, criminal, or civil law.
Source: Thomas J. Schoenbaum, "Admiralty and Maritime Law," West Academic Publishing, 6th edition, 2018.
8. Legal Consequences:
- Attempting to apply these maritime law theories in legal proceedings invariably fails and can lead to serious consequences.
- Courts have consistently rejected sovereign citizen arguments based on maritime law theories.
Source: United States v. Mitchell, 405 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Md. 2005)
9. Psychological Appeal:
- These theories often appeal to individuals facing financial or legal troubles, offering a seemingly simple explanation for complex systems.
- The allure of "secret knowledge" that can supposedly free one from legal obligations is a powerful draw.
Source: Sullivan, Francis X., "The 'Usurping Octopus of Jurisdictional/Authority': The Legal Theories of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," Wisconsin Law Review, 1999.
10. Broader Impact:
- While these theories have no legal merit, their spread can lead to clogged court systems, confrontations with law enforcement, and potential violence.
- Understanding these beliefs is crucial for legal professionals, law enforcement, and the general public to address and debunk these misconceptions effectively.
Source: Anti-Defamation League, "The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," 2012.
This summary encapsulates the key aspects of maritime law theories within sovereign citizen ideology, providing a comprehensive overview of their claims, origins, and the realities that contradict them. It serves as a capstone to our series, tying together the various threads we've explored throughout our articles.
VI. Maritime Law in the U.S. Legal System
Actual Scope and Application
Maritime law in the U.S. is a specialized area of law dealing with navigation and commerce on the seas and navigable waters. It does not supersede constitutional or common law in other areas.
Relationship to Common Law and Statutory Law
Maritime law coexists with common law and statutory law in the U.S. legal system, each applying to its specific domains.
VII. Contemporary Sovereign Citizen Activities
Case Study: Oregon Statewide Jural Assembly
This group claims to have "returned Oregon to a de jure republican Common Law form of government" in 2022, a claim without legal basis or recognition.
Claims about "De Jure" vs "De Facto" Government
Sovereign citizen groups often distinguish between what they see as the original, legitimate ("de jure") government and the current "de facto" government they consider illegitimate.
VIII. Legal and Historical Realities
Addressing Specific Misconceptions
1. Claim: "The sine die adjournment of Congress in 1861 dissolved the Union and nullified the Constitution."
Reality: The sine die adjournment of Congress in 1861 was a procedural action related to the Civil War, not a dissolution of government.
Congress reconvened on July 4, 1861, in a special session called by President Lincoln.
The 37th Congress (1861-1863) passed significant legislation, including authorizing troops and financing the war effort.
Constitutional governance continued uninterrupted, as evidenced by the functioning of all three branches of government.
Source: United States Senate, "Dates of Sessions of the Congress"
2. Claim: "President Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus in 1861 undermined constitutional authority."
Reality: While controversial, Lincoln's action was later upheld by Congress and was a wartime measure, not a permanent alteration of the Constitution.
The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act of 1863 formally endorsed Lincoln's action.
The Supreme Court, in Ex parte Milligan (1866), later limited the use of military tribunals, reinforcing constitutional checks and balances.
Source: Farber, Daniel. "Lincoln's Constitution," University of Chicago Press, 2003.
3. Claim: "Any Congress since March 28, 1861, is illegitimate."
Reality: Congress has functioned continuously under the Constitution since 1789.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were all legally ratified after 1861, expanding civil rights.
Every subsequent Congress has been seated and functioned according to constitutional procedures.
Source: Library of Congress, "America's Story: Amending America"
4. Claim: "The Act of 1871 created a new constitution and turned the U.S. into a corporation."
Reality: The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 merely incorporated Washington D.C. for administrative purposes.
It did not create a new constitution or alter the government structure of the United States.
The Act has no bearing on the constitutional status of U.S. citizens or the nation as a whole.
Source: National Archives, "Records of the Government of the District of Columbia"
5. Claim: "Maritime/Admiralty law secretly governs the United States."
Reality: Maritime law is a specialized area of law dealing with nautical issues and does not supersede constitutional or common law in other areas.
U.S. courts operate under constitutional authority, not maritime law.
The presence of gold fringe on a flag in a courtroom is decorative and does not indicate admiralty jurisdiction.
Source: Federal Judicial Center, "Jurisdiction: Admiralty and Maritime"
6. Claim: "Sovereign citizens can opt out of U.S. law by declaring themselves separate from the 'corporate' U.S."
Reality: U.S. citizenship and the applicability of U.S. law are not optional for those within U.S. jurisdiction.
Numerous court decisions have rejected "sovereign citizen" arguments.
Attempts to "opt out" of U.S. law have no legal standing and can result in criminal charges.
Source: FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, "Sovereign Citizens: A Growing Domestic Threat to Law Enforcement"
7. Claim: "The 14th Amendment created a new, inferior form of citizenship."
Reality: The 14th Amendment expanded and clarified citizenship rights, particularly for former slaves and their descendants.
It did not create a separate or inferior form of citizenship.
The Amendment has been consistently interpreted by courts as strengthening, not diminishing, citizenship rights.
Source: U.S. Constitution Annotated, "Fourteenth Amendment"
8. Claim: "Common law supersedes statutory law and the Constitution."
Reality: While common law principles are part of the U.S. legal system, they do not supersede the Constitution or properly enacted statutes.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, as stated in Article VI.
Statutory law, when constitutional, takes precedence over common law.
Source: Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, "Common Law"
These rebuttals address some of the most common misconceptions propagated by sovereign citizen groups. They demonstrate that while sovereign citizen theories may seem compelling to some, they have no basis in U.S. law or history. Courts have consistently rejected these arguments, and attempting to act on these beliefs can lead to serious legal consequences.
The Constitutional Amendment Process
The U.S. Constitution outlines its own amendment process in Article V, which has been followed for all 27 amendments.
IX. Implications and Consequences
Legal Risks of Sovereign Citizen Beliefs
Adhering to sovereign citizen beliefs can lead to serious legal consequences, including criminal charges for activities like filing false liens or evading taxes.
Real-World Examples of Legal Consequences for Sovereign Citizen Activities:
1. Filing False Liens:
Case: United States v. Judy Caldwell (2019)
- Judy Caldwell of Georgia was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison for filing false liens against government officials.
- She filed fraudulent liens totaling more than $4 billion against federal government officials who were involved in the prosecution of her husband.
Source: U.S. Department of Justice, "Georgia Woman Sentenced to 25 Years for Targeting Federal Officials with False Liens," October 18, 2019.
2. Tax Evasion:
Case: United States v. James Timothy Turner (2013)
- James Timothy Turner, the self-proclaimed "president" of the sovereign citizen group "Republic for the United States of America," was convicted of multiple tax crimes.
- He was sentenced to 18 years in federal prison for conspiracy to defraud the United States, attempting to pay taxes with fictitious financial instruments, obstructing the IRS, and failing to file a tax return.
Source: U.S. Department of Justice, "Self-Proclaimed President of Sovereign Citizen Group Sentenced to Federal Prison for Promoting Tax Fraud Scheme," July 31, 2013.
3. Fraudulent Financial Schemes:
Case: United States v. Donna Zauner, et al. (2018)
- Three sovereign citizens in Oregon were convicted for a scheme involving fictitious financial instruments.
- They attempted to pass more than $100 billion in fake "International Bills of Exchange" and were sentenced to multi-year federal prison terms.
Source: U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Oregon, "Three Sovereign Citizen Tax Defiers Convicted at Trial," May 25, 2018.
4. Violent Confrontations with Law Enforcement:
Case: Jerry and Joseph Kane (2010)
- Jerry Kane and his son Joseph, sovereign citizens from Ohio, fatally shot two police officers during a traffic stop in West Memphis, Arkansas.
- Both Kanes were killed in a subsequent shootout with police.
Source: Anti-Defamation League, "Two Police Officers Killed by Anti-Government Extremists in Arkansas," May 21, 2010.
5. Squatting and Real Estate Fraud:
Case: State of Maryland v. Lamont Butler (2013)
- Lamont Butler, claiming sovereign citizen status, broke into a vacant 12-million-dollar mansion in Bethesda, Maryland, and claimed ownership.
- He was convicted of theft, burglary, and illegal possession of a regulated firearm, receiving a sentence of 20 years in prison.
Source: The Washington Post, "Squatter in Bethesda mansion convicted of theft, burglary," September 13, 2013.
6. Interference with Court Proceedings:
Case: United States v. Cherron Phillips (2014)
- Cherron Phillips, a sovereign citizen from Chicago, was sentenced to seven years in federal prison for filing false maritime liens against former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and other federal judges and prosecutors.
- Her actions were in retaliation for the prosecution of her brother in a drug case.
Source: Chicago Tribune, "Woman who filed false liens against judges, prosecutors gets 7 years," October 14, 2014.
7. Fraudulent Debt Elimination Schemes:
Case: United States v. Winston Shrout (2017)
- Winston Shrout, a prominent sovereign citizen "guru," was convicted of 13 counts of issuing fake financial documents and 6 counts of willful failure to file income tax returns.
- He was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison and ordered to pay over $191,000 in restitution to the IRS.
Source: U.S. Department of Justice, "Former Oregon Resident Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison for Tax Fraud and Fictitious Financial Instrument Scheme," October 22, 2018.
These cases demonstrate the wide range of legal consequences that can result from adhering to sovereign citizen beliefs and acting upon them. From lengthy prison sentences to violent confrontations with law enforcement, the outcomes are invariably negative. It's crucial to understand that courts consistently reject sovereign citizen arguments, and attempting to apply these beliefs in the real world often leads to serious criminal charges.
Importance of Accurate Constitutional Understanding
A clear understanding of constitutional history and law is crucial for responsible citizenship and effective engagement with the legal system.
X. Conclusion
This article has explored the complex interplay between maritime law, sovereign citizen theories, and U.S. constitutional history. While alternative interpretations of law and history can be intriguing, it's crucial to rely on established legal scholarship and historical evidence when considering these topics.
There are many sections of this article that can and will be expanded upon. Although this is published, I will update particular sections to provide the reader more robust context to each section that deserves it. It may lead to future articles as this continues to be a historically relevant topic as generations change, and the Constitution along with its government continues to be challenged.
Sources and Further Reading
Constitutional and Legal History:
U.S. Constitution - National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
The Civil War and the Constitution - Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/collections/civil-war-and-reconstruction-1861-to-1877/
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866) - Supreme Court decision. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/71/2
District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 - Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/41st-congress/session-3/c41s3ch62.pdf
Constitutional Amendment Process - National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution
Timeline of the United States Constitution - U.S. Senate. https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/ConstitutionalAmendments.htm
The Reconstruction Amendments - National Constitution Center. https://constitutioncenter.org/learn/educational-resources/historical-documents/the-reconstruction-amendments
Sovereign Citizen Movement and Ideology:
J.M. Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe," Program on Extremism, George Washington University, 2016.
Southern Poverty Law Center, "Sovereign Citizens Movement," Intelligence Report, 2010. https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/sovereign-citizens-movement
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, "Sovereign Citizens: A Growing Domestic Threat to Law Enforcement," September 2011. https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/feature-articles/sovereign-citizens-a-growing-domestic-threat-to-law-enforcement
Anti-Defamation League, "The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," 2012.
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/lawless-ones-resurgence-sovereign-citizen-movement
Sullivan, Francis X., "The 'Usurping Octopus of Jurisdictional/Authority': The Legal Theories of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," Wisconsin Law Review, 1999.
Maritime Law and Legal Concepts:
Thomas J. Schoenbaum, "Admiralty and Maritime Law," West Academic Publishing, 6th edition, 2018.
Federal Judicial Center, "Jurisdiction: Admiralty and Maritime" https://www.fjc.gov/history/courts/jurisdiction-admiralty-and-maritime
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, "Common Law"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/common_law
Historical Context and Analysis:
Levitas, Daniel. "The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right." Macmillan, 2002.
Berlet, Chip, and Matthew N. Lyons. "Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort." Guilford Press, 2000.
Pitcavage, Mark. "Camouflage and Conspiracy: The Militia Movement from Ruby Ridge to Y2K." American Behavioral Scientist, 2001.
Government Documents and Reports:
Farber, Daniel. "Lincoln's Constitution," University of Chicago Press, 2003.
18 U.S.C. § 1385 - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Elsea, Jennifer K. "The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters: The Use of the Military to Execute Civilian Law." Congressional Research Service, 2018.
Doyle, Charles. "The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters: A Sketch." Congressional Research Service, 2020.
Kapp, Lawrence. "The Use of Military Forces to Respond to Domestic Unrest." Congressional Research Service, 2021.
Legal Cases:
United States v. Mitchell, 405 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Md. 2005)
United States v. Greenstreet, 912 F. Supp. 224 (N.D. Tex. 1996)
Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (Canadian case extensively analyzing sovereign citizen claims)
News Articles and Press Releases:
U.S. Department of Justice, "Georgia Woman Sentenced to 25 Years for Targeting Federal Officials with False Liens," October 18, 2019.
U.S. Department of Justice, "Self-Proclaimed President of Sovereign Citizen Group Sentenced to Federal Prison for Promoting Tax Fraud Scheme," July 31, 2013.
The Washington Post, "Squatter in Bethesda mansion convicted of theft, burglary," September 13, 2013.
Chicago Tribune, "Woman who filed false liens against judges, prosecutors gets 7 years," October 14, 2014.
What a great library of the history, background and the sovereign citizen movement. Thank you for this very extensive article! Blessings to you and your family.🙏🇺🇸