"The laws of Congress in respect to those matters do not extend
into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in
the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government," Caha v. United States, 152 U.S., at 215. "We think a proper examination of this subject will show that the United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in and to the territory, of which Alabama or any of the new States were formed..."
"[B]ecause, the United States have no constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty, or eminent domain, within the limits of a State or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted..." "Alabama is therefore entitled to the sovereignty and jurisdiction over all the territory within her limits, subject to the common law," Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 221, 223, 228, 229."
GENERAL CASE LAW ON JURISDICTION
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.
is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial
jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefor.” U.S. v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).
“The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative and
judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no
protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct
collateral attack.” Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381; and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.
United States is entirely a creature of the Federal Constitution, its
power and authority has no other source and it can only act in
accordance with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
rights and liberties of the citizens of the United States are not
protected by custom and tradition alone, they are preserved from the
encroachments of government by express/enumerated provisions of the
Federal Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
prohibitions of the Federal Constitution are designed to apply to all
branches of the national government and cannot be nullified by the
executive or by the executive and the senate combined.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
rights as secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no
rule making or legislation which will abrogate them.” Miranda v. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966).
“Congress may not, by any definition it may adopt, conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution.” Eisner v. McComber, 252 U.S. 189 at 207.