Now we come to the heart of this course, how to effectively challenge authority. It is important that you fully understand what has gone before so if you have any questions, you should resolve them before going on. If you have questions that you cannot answer on your own, feel free to email us and we'll try to help. If you think you're ready, then let's begin.
You should now know that you are, in fact, a sovereign individual. You should also have decided in your own mind that you are free and have decided to live free.You should know that since all law is contract, no law applies to you unless you have personally accepted the contract. You also know, however, that some laws get applied to you anyway unless you learn how to protect yourself. You now understand that just because some bureaucrat thinks he has the right to tell you what to do, that doesn't mean that he actually has the right. In fact, no bureaucrat has the right to tell anyone to do anything. Some bureaucrats, however, do have the authority to tell you to comply with certain rules, regulations, and statutes. How do they get this authority?
When the government you are dealing with (local, county, state, federal, whatever) was formed, there were certain functions assigned to that government and the bureaucrats that were to administer these functions were given authority to tell people that they must comply with the rules that enable the government to perform those functions. Bypassing for the moment that the original contract is probably flawed, because of the way it was implemented, this is where the bureaucrats get their authority. This authority can be delegated to lower level bureaucrats but they must be able to trace their authority back up the chain to the bureaucrat who was originally granted the authority. If they cannot do this, then they have no authority.
Most government organizations have a very large number of rules and regulations. Most bureaucrats have no idea, or a very limited idea, of what those rules and regulations say. Instead, they just do what they think the job requires and don't bother with the rules. So one way to protect yourself against bureaucratic interference is to learn what the bureaucrat's rules are and make them comply with their own rules. The problem with this method is that you have to know more about the rules than the bureaucrat does plus you have to know this for a number of bureaucrats. This is a difficult problem since you have limited time in which to study rules and regulations. Fortunately, there's an easier way.
As stated above, most bureaucrats have no idea of what the rules and regulations actually say. So, when a bureaucrat tells you that you have to comply with some rule or regulation, you simply ask them to prove to you that they have the authority to tell you to do that. This means that they will have to go research the rules and regulations, thousands of them, to find where their authority is specified and will probably also have to locate their delegations of authority. If you're lucky, they won't even have the authority, either because they are doing something outside their granted authority or because their delegation of authority doesn't exist. But even if they do have the authority, they still will probably go on to someone else since it will take them a significant amount of time to do the research. This technique is very successful and is even supported by the following US Supreme Court cite:
"Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority... and this is so even though, as here, the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority." Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 at 384 (1947).
A Texas lawyer (there are a few good ones) has developed a general government response letter. Study it, especially the structure of it, for pointers on how to challenge a bureaucrat's authority. (You might also consider subscribing to the magazine. It's a pretty good one.) Keep this letter and it's structure in mind, or even refer back to it, as we go through a couple of real-world examples of how this process works.
Note: Although the case your are about to review has had personal identifying information removed for privacy, there is a real person behind the case. You can contact this person via the anonymous email address: joesov@wepin.com. WEPIN Store guarantees that your email will be forwarded to the real person although we cannot guarantee that the person will answer you.
Review the IRS Unvolunteering Case. Don't forget to return to this page when you are finished. Keep in mind that this is a case in progress so you may want to return periodically to see what has happened since your last visit. Be sure to follow some of the links. I think you will find they contain some very interesting information. Also, be sure to compare the response letters to the general government response letter as this is the key to the whole process.
Note: Although the case your are about to review has had personal identifying information removed for privacy, there is a real person behind the case. You can contact this person via the anonymous email address: george@wepin.com. WEPIN Store guarantees that your email will be forwarded to the real person although we cannot guarantee that the person will answer you.
Review the Local Tax Case. Don't forget to return to this page when you are finished. Keep in mind that this is a case in progress so you may want to return periodically to see what has happened since your last visit. Note that this individual makes a basic error of arguing his case in the response letters. (A basic tenet of law is that the first person to traverse loses.) The process is designed to make the government official do the research and try to figure out where his authority comes from. By putting legal arguments in the response letters, this individual is making it easier on the government official since all he now has to do is show that the arguments are specious.
By now, you should be able to see that the process of effectively challenging authority is very simple. All you do is send a response letter to any written communication from a government official summarizing what the communication said, stating that you don't believe they have the authority to demand that, and giving them the opportunity of proving to you that they do have the authority. How about non-written communications?
First, you should not have telephone communications with a government official. It is way too easy to say something that will get you into trouble. And many officials routinely record their phone conversations so whatever you say to get yourself in trouble will be brought up in any legal proceedings. You should not have in-person communication with a government official, either. If a government official demands that you communicate with them via a telephone or in person, politely refuse, state that you certainly want to cooperate but that you have been advised to keep all communications in writing, and state that if the government official will only put his request(s) in writing, you will respond.
By the way, if you decide to use this process, we would be interested in posting your case to the web site. The more examples we have, the easier it will be for others to follow. We can post the information so that you cannot be identified or you can boldly post your name and address for the world to see. If interested, contact us via email and we will discuss details with you.
Continue on with Parting Comments.
Copyright at Common Law, West El Paso Information Network, 1998