Justice of the Peace or "District Judge"
Which is constitutional and lawful … which is a sham?
Today we are constantly told that the local, elected magistrate is a "District Judge", not a Justice of the Peace. But a close examination of Article V "THE JUDICIARY" in the Pennsylvania Constitution reveals only the use of the words "Justice of the Peace" when referring to this constitutionally authorized office.
Putting aside for now the proven fact that the complete rewrite of Article V of the Pennsylvania Constitution in the 1968 Constitution (actually done prior to the Constitutional Convention by those in the Pennsylvania Bar Association) is, and always has been, unconstitutional; the current Pennsylvania Constitution only makes references to "Justice of the Peace" in Article V.
The Pennsylvania Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" in Pennsylvania, which can only be defeated by the limited conflicting powers specifically delegated to the federal government in the Constitution for the United States of America and by the federal laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof.
In most cases or situations, the federal government, its Constitution, its laws and treaties do not lawfully apply to Pennsylvania, or to the Citizens of Pennsylvania.
Further, the Pennsylvania Constitution, like all Constitutions in America, is a written common law document that means the same today as it did in the language-of-the-day when it was written.
So what happened to the office of "Justice of the Peace" in Pennsylvania?
Research reveals that based on the alleged authority of the 1968 Pennsylvania Constitution, certain judges and attorneys wrote and pushed through the General Assembly an extensive judiciary revisions statute known as Act No. 142 P.L. 586 (1976).
Among the 230 pages in this Act/Statute (that, among other things, was a total rewrite of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedures) is Section 1511, on page 641, which states:
"District Justices. There shall be one district justice in each magisterial district."
The Justices on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently changed by a "rule" the word "Justice" to "Judge" in all references to the local magistrate because they (the Supreme Court Justices) apparently believe that they alone are Justices.
The alleged offices of "District Justice" were apparently created by the statute, Act No 142, Section 1511, which, along with the rest of this Act/Statute, went into effect on June 27, 1978. The specific duties and responsibilities of the State-created office of a "District Justice" (now "Judge") were/are defined by statues, rules, codes, practices and procedures, and court decisions.
In other words "District Justices"/"Judges" were arbitrarily created by those in government, not constitutionally by we the Citizens of Pennsylvania. All "District Justices" or "District Judges" report to and are controlled by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, while all Justices of the Peace report directly to the Citizens who elect them and are independently controlled by their "oath of office".
The common law office of "Justice of the Peace" has existed in Pennsylvania Province since its establishment by William Penn in 1682 (Article XXXIV of the Laws Agreed Upon In England) and was continued as a constitutional office in the first Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, created on September 28, 1776. This lawful constitutional office has been in place continuously in Pennsylvania ever since.
Putting aside for now the proven fact that Act No. 142 P.L. 586 (1976) was based on an unconstitutional authority and thus is totally null and void as a matter of law, clearly, when a statutory provision (section or statement) conflicts with the Constitution, "the Constitution strikes with nullity that which does violence to its provisions."
Therefore, the magistrates in our local courts are not "District Judges" or "District Justices", because this alleged office does not exist at all as a matter of law.
Each of these local elected judicial officers must discharge the duties of their office as a Justice of the Peace, a common law, constitutionally created government officer charged by solemn "oath of office" to primarily "support, obey and defend" our individual inherent and indefeasible God-given rights. These rights are not given to us by those in the government!
The next time you are with your local judicial officer, ask him or her the question: Are you a "District Judge" or a Justice of the Peace? The answer will surely be "District Judge".
Then ask: Is the Constitution or a Statute superior when concerning a question of law? The answer to this question will most likely be "the Constitution".
Then give the local magistrate a copy of the current Pennsylvania Constitution and ask if he or she will please show you in Article V of this Constitution where the holder of his or her office is referred to as a "District Judge" or "District Justice".
When the local magistrate cannot show you these words, you are now prepared with the facts to prove that he or she must "set the court" and perform the duties of his or her constitutional office only as a Justice of the Peace. To do otherwise would be, among other things, "perjury of oath", a very serious State and federal crime.
This most apparent conflict, intentionally created by certain judges and attorneys, should provoke the broader question: What else have these treasonous individuals done to our republican form of governments?
The evidence that clearly proves the answer to this very important fundamental question can be found in our historical documents, in various court decisions and elsewhere, by courageous, truth seeking Patriots of today. Please join the growing movement to reclaim our lawful constitutional republican form of governments.
It is time to intelligently question the actions of all those in government and to repeatedly demand that they always act only with proven constitutional authority. For them to do otherwise is a serious violation of their "oath of office" and violates our constitutionally protected, secured, and guaranteed rights, privileges and immunities.
To keep liberty and freedom requires eternal vigilance by we the people. It is past time for us to do as those that signed the "Declaration of Independence" did in 1776. As they bravely did, we need to firmly rely on Divine Providence and "to mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.