Sovereign Citizens (SovCits, Nationals, or whatever the flavor of the month is as far as how they identify themselves) will tell a police officer that they are not obligated to obey statutory laws (laws enacted by the state, county or city), but are under common law (judicial rulings setting precedent, such as case laws) and also Maritime/Admiralty laws. As strange as it sounds, they claim that the international Maritime laws apply to dry land as well. The laws of the high seas become the laws of the land in their ideology.
They will seek to educate law enforcement that they are Maritime agents because many of them have a gold trim around the American Flag patch or pin they wear on their uniform. They will also unwisely chastise the judge for his or her ignorance concerning the fringe on the American Flag as being evidence that the court they preside over is a Maritime court. Their premise is usually dismissed quickly and they are summarily convicted.
So, why do they even try this absurd argument? Basically, one of the main reasons is that most countries declare that no one has the right to board a vessel without the captain’s or owner’s permission. They will equate the boarding of a vessel with a “boarding” of a motor vehicle (uh, sorry Mr and Ms SovCit, your conveyance as you please) in order to search it, even though the police officer has a search warrant or probable cause to search the vehicle. They will call this piracy and that the police officers (who, according to them, are only revenue agents) are land pirates when they end up also towing and/or impounding the vehicle.
Keep in mind, this explanation may vary from one SovCit to the next, but generally this is the jest. So, are they right? Let’s examine this.
When speaking of whether or not Maritime, or sometimes called Admiralty laws are enforced on dry land, we have to research where the jurisdictional boundary is. In the United States Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual section 670 entitled Maritime Jurisdiction we find this exerpt that explains exactly where Maritime laws are enforced:
Section 7 of Title 18 provides that the “special territorial and maritime jurisdiction of the United States” includes:
(1) The high seas, any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, and any vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States or any citizen thereof, or to any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States or of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof, when such vessel is within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State.
Until recently the term “high seas” was always understood as intending the open and unenclosed waters of the sea beginning at low-water mark. In re Ross, 140 U.S. 453, 471 (1891); Murray v. Hildreth, 61 F.2d 483 (5th Cir. 1932); see also United States v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249 (1893) (Great Lakes). Although it has become common of late to use the term to describe waters beyond a marginal belt or “territorial sea” over which a nation claims special rights, see, e.g., United States v. Louisiana, (Louisiana Boundary Case), 394 U.S. 11, 22-23 (1969); United States v. Postal, 589 F.2d 862, 868 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 832 (1979), the classic definition, contemporaneous with this statute’s development, is the correct one. The territorial sea was extended from 3 to 12 nautical miles by Presidential Proclamation 5928 of December 27, 1988. (taken from https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-670-maritime-jurisdiction)
So, in mapping out where these law could be enforced, it mentions the “high seas”, not the land. It also informs us that in 1988, the Presidential Proclamation 5928 extends the original boundary of 3 nautical miles from land to 12 nautical miles from land. No where in the manual does it ever give way to applying these laws to traffic stops. The question I would like to get an answer from those who believe this, is why is it, if what they say is true, can you not enforce these laws within twelve nautical miles from the coast, but you can enforce them on dry land? The only difference of course is those waters within the United States that can be navigationed by foreign commerce. I usually hear crickets, and then they move on to the “corpus dilecti” them of their argument (read about it in my blog entitled, “Where’s The Corpus Dilecti (The Injured Party“) or their definition of who a driver is (read about this in my blog, “I’m Not Driving, Officer. I’m Traveling!!”).
Let’s discuss now who a pirate is. Cornell Law School website provides this for us:
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Article 101 defines piracy as: “any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew of the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft. . . on the high seas against another ship or aircraft. (taken from: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/piracy#:~:text=The%20United%20Nations%20Convention%20on,another%20ship%20or%20aircraft.%20.%20.)
And again we see the phrase “high seas”, not high land, which I guess that would mean mountains, uh…forget it. It speaks of private ships and even private aircraft, not motor vehicles. This reminds me of someone stretching the meaning to the point it snaps, like a rubber band. Worse, it doesn’t even come close to what they claim.
Just hold on a second Cravey!! What about the gold fringe on the flag? Doesn’t that mean that the courts are Maritime or Admiralty Courts? Well, first, it needs to be said that Maritime laws can only be heard in Federal or Superior Courts, and not in your city’s or county’s traffic court. To make a claim that just because the American Flag in the court makes it a Maritime court makes as much sense as someone dressed in a clown outfit makes wherever he is a circus.
We will now go to history (SovCits hate history because their claims fall apart in light of it). What group first utilized the fringe on the American Flag? I can tell you this much–it is a branch of the military. The Navy? Nope. It was the Army in 1895 who added it first to their flags as ornamenation for parades and other special events. It is also noteworthy that most maritime vessels have no fringe on their flags, as high winds would damage the fringe.
Once again, there is no level of absurdity SovCits will not attempt in the pursuit of escaping personal responsibility of their behaviors. In their minds, if you cannot abide the laws of the land, substitute them for the laws of the high seas. Rename EVERYTHING to make it fit the application. You are not a driver, you are a traveler, or even captain of your vessel that has wheels and rides on the highway. When my kids were very young, I would expect them to make the crazy claims much like what the SovCits do, in order to keep from getting punished.
Below is a video that is put out by a SovCit where he attempts to instruct the viewer on how to get the judge to state the jurisdiction he is operating under. Be forewarned, he intends to sound serious, but he utilizes a creepy animated frog to narrate the instruction. You can look for yourself in other videos that this tactic never works and should not be taken seriously.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
KEEP YOURSELF SAFE FROM THOSE WHO WISH YOU HARM!! CLICK BELOW NOW!!
