Well, our first question is, did you read the trust eBook? In particular, did you read the section on the different types of law on pages 5 through 7?
In there, we tried to make it very plain that the trust is not subject to the jurisdiction of any government or any body of law – – including the Constitution or the Supreme Court. While we do sometimes cite US Supreme Court cases to show the agreement of the court with the universal right to contract, such as Hale v. Henkle, it in no way suggests that the trust derives its authority to exist from the court.
Therefore it is irrelevant whether the court can set aside the Constitution or not. For two or more individuals to enter into a private contract with each other, without the obstruction or interference by any government, is a universal right – – as long as the actions emanating from that contract are not violating the rights of others.
One of the reasons we say our NLT has a 100% success rate is that it has never been invalidated. In fact, it cannot be invalidated by any authority, because its right to exist derives from Natural Law, which transcends any individual human body of law. Furthermore, it has never been penetrated.
We say it is sovereign because its right to exist is not subject to any jurisdiction. The problem of trust officers potentially committing crimes is solved by the fact that their individual actions CAN be subjected to limited jurisdiction – – specifically to address those actions – – and those actions only. The trust itself transcends any jurisdiction.
Your question is a good one . . . and thank you for giving us the opportunity to clarify; but that is why we have tried to make it very plain in the eBook that nothing any government does and nothing any court does has any effect on the trust’s right to exist.
