Nice article, thanks FFA. I could spend a good part of my day exploring the links in it, too, but have work to do, LOL!

"In law, standing or locus standi is a condition that a party seeking a legal remedy must show they have, by demonstrating to the court, sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case."

I have 32 years connection to the law with my willful participation in commercial licensure to contract for transportation services or be employed as a driver for another commercial endeavor ..... to be compensated expecting profitability.

I have withdrawn my applications unilaterally from commerce upon the public roadways and the State "believes" it has the power to prohibit my Right to Travel (upheld in over 100 cases within State Supreme and Fed District courts unilaterally) over the past 100+ years.

Where the State loses strict scrutiny is noted as a State Statute to qualify me as a participatory licensee for Fed funding only. This does not adhere to the requirements of the Fed Regs.

This is one small step in bringing awareness to those who would question the law in any context. It shows methodology for the redress of grievance in a constructive manner without getting prosecutorial. Basically I'm approaching the Court and Municipalities as an educator, allowing for a time that they may "cure" the inequity. Should they keep proceeding in the inequity I may ask for the formation of a Grand Jury dejure; 24 citizens of the County or State to take up investigation.

So, back to "standing" .... The State, Municipality, etc does not have standing, as I bring no harm under law. All I have done is to withdraw from contract.

Regarding Freedom's post, If I don't investigate the law I shall not know and then be prosecuted/persecuted due my ignorance. I found the rules of engagement. The globalists tried to set up their own rules and are finding they are not impervious strict scrutiny. A gamble that is failing.

I'm just making sure I have enough popcorn, butter and salt to get through the show.

One of the indicators of success lies in the absence of District Court and State Supreme Court cases since 1970ish.
More cases can be defended at municipal level due the long standing rulings of the aforementioned. Probabilities.
Thanks for the well wish.

I've been looking at the function of the US Constitution through the perspective of the Objectivist's Ethics.
Rand has the clearest philosophical statements to evaluate.
I don't like the idea that I had to "accept" indoctrination into this construct, or be arbitrarily penalized. I would have much preferred informed consent as a methodology. I've always been contrary to established "rules". I challenge all authority with better insight as I learn the history and mechanisms; political, economic and social, of human behaviors.

I don't need a Constitution to govern my behaviors. I trade in equity within interpersonal and commercial endeavors. I need a constitutional government to protect me from strategic usurpation of my natural rights, that I may not have to resort to violence to protect such.

I'll have you know this about the dino. Once upon a time I used to donate to the GOP, the RNC, whatever.
That ended due to stomach turning RINO behavior early on during Obama's first term. After all this time, THEY STILL CALL ME FOR DONATIONS!
Has to have been several hundred times and countless are snail mail envelopes thrown away unopened.
Sometimes they send snail mail.with Trump's face on it. That doesn't work with me.. I donate directly to Trump. Never through the GOP I don't trust with my money.
This morning the phone rang with RNC on my caller I.D. I'm way done talking to them, Just to let them know that, I push the phone button to answer the call, I count to three and then I push the OFF button to hang up.
I will vote for Trump. MAGA!

But SCOTUS said "Shallenberger, who was clearly censored because of our Federal Government pushing tech companies... Did NOT have standing".

They used the ONE step removed concept.
The FBI has EVERY RIGHT to contact and pay a company for a relationship. And to SHARE information about YOU with said company.

And if that company DECIDES to ban you, shadow ban you, or whatnot... After such a meeting. Then it is THAT company doing it, not the government (directly). Therefore, you cannot go after the government."

Roughly what they did. 1000% wrong.
if the government uses a 3rd party to do what they are NOT DIRECTLY entitled to do.
And, furthermore, they PAY to do that.
Then the government violated your rights.
That's my take.

Asking for a government friend who is trying to take a contract out on me... But I have no standing until I am killed... And Latches if I wait...

I would argue that collectivists do have some logic behind their views. The problem is with their wish to force it on people unwilling to join them.

It's owned by the Richest People and the Deep State. They have slithered up to the LEFT because they could help them the most.
Believe me. They partied with the RIGHT whenever that made the most sense.

The problem is that we are in the end game, and only the Left agrees to "No Hold Barred" type attacks. And don't have the sense to see it.

Much like that muslim guy who said "Of course side with the left. Because ONCE they get rid of the right... They will not stand a chance against us!"

ROTFLMAO.
All by design, because we are Chattle!

IMHO most people have an incorrect understanding of the world. All these terms you are using are misleading. I view both, democrats and republicans, as the bad guys due to them both being statists.

I don't know if you saw the post in which I described my views:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

Khrushchev may have been right with the prediction about the collapse of the west, but not due to the reason that he thought. Human predation is what will cause it, as was the case with Soviet Union itself.

I don't think things under Trump will improve much. Based on what happened during his previous term, it seems things will just continue to deteriorate, although maybe at slightly slower pace. What is needed is a major change, such as cutting spending to 10% of current level, getting rid of most taxes, firing most of government employees, etc. I don't think Trump wants to do that. But even if he wanted to, the situation is so bad that it would take a miracle to turn things around and would require more than 4 years.

Of course if I was there, I would do much more radical things, such as privatizing the entire government, removing statism from the constitution, etc. Unfortunately, the majority of people want statism, so we continue to suffer.

Hmmm.

Great article FFA. Thanks for the post!

But I do have standing. 32 years commercial driving privilege. I have "Interest". State statutes require conformity to Fed. Fed has determined "strict scrutiny" criteria only under commerce (UCC). The State arbitrarily slid the encumberances under Statute that must narrowly adhere to Fed. Where there is conflict Fed precedes.

The only thing I did was non-renewal of contract for registration.
The license number was made up and assigned without my knowledge, consent or signature. Fraud and conversion, with deprivation of rights and conspiracy of rights.

Municipal employees are not immune from prosecution. Only Fed employees, under Bivens v US, have some immunity.

With the internet, if you succeed, it won't stay quiet, but I hope you do succeed.

If we act local this stays nice and quiet. I'm in a municipal court with a healthy constitutional backing by the Sheriff.
The revenues lost if this is exposed are in the billions.
Yes, I'm hanging my butt out, not unlike some worthy folks 250 years past. Yet, the things I deal with here are precedented within the County. Just so happens my grandfather's business partner set it up 60 years ago under same jurisdictions.

we've been screwed for a long time now

the real question "when will it all fall apart and what comes after"

2024....

I THINK WE'RE F***ED...

there are many inconsistencies and errors in the constitution which need to be fixed. Over the 200 years, a number of these have been exploited by power brokers wanting to get around the essence of the constitution itself.

Libs would not like "people skilled in formal logic" coming up with anything for not first swooning to "feelings, so many feelings."
One of the best college courses I ever took as a sophomore with a journalism degree on my mind was Philosophy 101 aka Basic Logic.
That was decades before I ever heard of Ayn Rand when my most conservative brothers Christmas gifted me the AS DVDs.
After watching those, I stumbled into The Gulch for researching Ayn Rand.

You got it pretty much right on. the power brokers have practically no limits, with a few constitutionally prohibited things off the table. Its very scary when they try to assassinate Trump, although assassination attempts on Reagan and Ford were tried, and an actual assassination of JFK and RFK was accomplished. I hope Trump lives long enough to become our next president. He better get security independent of the secret service

We live in country owned by the left wing power brokers who will do anything and everything to keep their positions of power- including killing off anyone who opposes them in any way that's effective.

Me dino long time ago came to view (if not to lump together) such looter and parasite entities as ravenous for power over others globalist termites hellbent on gnawing away at their despised foundations of our just as loathed Constitutional Republic.
IMO, these wannabe real for really real commies are not merely our "Enemy" but are our "Great Enemy."
Old dino recalls Khrushchev predicting (and I'm paraphrasing) that some day we would eat ourselves alive fro the inside out.
Currently they, including most Democrat Party leaders in Congress) unconstitutionally cheering on that great open border invasion invented to create new voters while repetitiously virtually chanting how much they want to "save our democracy, save our democracy, etc., ad nauseum."

as FFA mentions

expect to be hit with "you do not have standing"

to keep the con under wraps

Your participation in social security might be used against you, although the court is
unlikely to make that clear since that would expose the con. If you are near to
exposing the con, the court will use 'other means' to assure that the con stays hidden.
You will need expert, unassailable, incorruptible protection.
Just my opinion based on observation of how the state responds when threatened.
Your quest is an important one and vital to the future of individual liberty.

Give it a rest, the US constitution is far from perfect, but I guess maybe better than what we have now. What we need is the final solution, pardon the pun, a document that would be provably perfect. This would require people skilled in formal logic, not judges and lawyers who are ill-fit to work through the deep meaning of things. We would need to find axioms to base it on, not some assertions supported by hopium that are made by the US constitution, case law, etc.