Theories Debunked

Various pseudo-legal theories have made their way around the internet. Here's a list of some we've investigated.

Is the United States still under Lincoln's martial law from the civil war?
Did the 14th amendment limit the rights of State citizens?
Is there a right to travel by automobile in the United States?
Is the United States a for-profit corporation, like McDonald's?
Is filing a commercial lien a good way to enforce rights?

Please note: This site relatively new. More debunking is coming very soon. Check back and follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Google+!

Ideas for future articles

Based on population and statistics, is police violence out of control in the US? [No, there's about a 0.0005% chance you'll be killed by a cop in a given year.]

Can individuals use 12 USC 95(a)(2) to discharge debt? [No, these are emergency banking powers only for the President.]

Is there a difference between legal and lawful? Is there a duality in the system? [No, there is only one system and the same laws apply to everyone. Courts use the terms interchangeably.]

Was the real US Constitution replaced with a fake or corporate one? [No, there is only one hand-written constitution that everyone uses and cannot be ignored. You can view it in high-res here. You can see exactly how the courts interpret constitutional rights in many places, such as in publications about law, public court decisions, etc. Nothing any branch of government does, short of following the proper amendment procedure, can change or supersede the Constitution.]

Is the Federal Reserve private, foreign and unaccountable to the US? [No, it was created by Congress via the Federal Reserve Act and Congress can amend or repeal the Act if it wants to. The President and Senate maintain a degree of control and influence over the banks, including choosing and confirming board members. Shareholders of each particular reserve bank are required to be local to its area of influence. The vast majority of profits are returned to the federal US Treasury.]

Is modern, fractional reserve, central banking and fiat currency a new concept developed in the 1930's? Is it dangerous? [No, it developed in the 16th and 17th centuries responding to the needs of commerce and stable government.]

What is a natural person? Can I appear in law without a person? [A natural person is a man in law. A man must use a person to use law. Whether a man has a birth certificate or is stateless, if he appears in law individually it's as a natural person. The person holds the rights and duties ascribed to the man, and is always subject to all local law.]

Is the Constitution copyrighted? [The Constitution isn't copyrighted, per se, because there's no law at that level to copyright it under. Outside of nation-states, there's no law but your own (that nobody cares about). If you want a nation-state to care about your version of law, start a nation in accordance with public international law, build up some economic and military power and form treaties or declare war.]

If you "lose the name" do you win the game? [Not representing the name on the birth certificate does not necessarily make you invisible to law. Even as a stateless individual without a birth certificate you can still appear in law as a natural person subject to the local nation-state.]

If you would like us to consider another theory, please post a comment!

  • Chris
    • Ken S. to satisfy your craving for bizarre, meandering screeds that make no sense.


      The courts use the terms interchangeably. You can use them however you like if you make your own country, courts and laws, though. We might do an article about it. Thanks for the comment.

    • Kennyb

      Love how you base your ideals on an interpretation of law that suits your purpose. Here in the real world, we look at the decisions handed down by courts.

  • Susan Loveland

    I would like to tell you how much I love this site!!! Please grow, grow, grow. More ridiculous theories: individual sovereigns and Moors (cuz Bey), UCC conspiracy theory (did you know you are property of the government and are traded on the stock market??? You can't make me a slave, I'm not stupid!!), the REAL 13th Amendment (that's just — wow), the oath public officials take is a binding contract (which of course Obama has breached many times), and oh so many more.

    • Alex R.K.

      I too would like to see this site debunk more of those stupid pseudo-legal piles of BS that those SovCits are spewing out.

  • Sam

    Do you seriously believe the Federal Reserve is NOT private and unaccountable to Congress? They have testified under oath in court that they are private and do not have to answer to congress. They refuse to be audited. The constitution does not grant Congress the authority to delegate it's duties to private interests.

    Do you seriously believe that the government gives a crap about the constitution? Try to bring it into a court and see what you get. Many judges threaten those who do with contempt of court.

    pseudolaw is a great name for a website based on perpetrating a false view of the law on the masses.

  • disqus_arYJhbVRHw

    Oooh, I would love the one on fractional reserve banking. I was suckered in at like 11 by the Zeitgeist movies largely because of that stuff.

  • Alex R.K.

    Please debunk more pseudolegal theories!

  • wodaji

    Your site also applies to Libertarians. Love it!

  • Jerry Coker

    I love to come here and read all of the Boot lickers comments to their master commenters and followers, it's damn lame, but yet hilarious..

  • Pk

    How about the claim that birth certificates are actually some sort of bond and that you can collect on it… it goes into even more craziness about how you don’t really have to pay your bills or some ridiculous fantasy.

    Another idea where I see a lot of these theories are people who are fighting CPS. They often claim its illegal for CPS to remove children from their care because their children are their property so it is an illegal sezuire of property…

    • Alex R.K.

      Yeah, the sovcits tend to buy into those kinds of nonsense legal theories propagated and perpetuated by those self-proclaimed legal gurus who want to scam people out of their money by playing on their fears and distrust of the government.