One of the 2 defendants (Beeks) appears to believe the "sovereign citizen movement."
>>>Beeks, an ex-Broadway star who is representing himself but has access to standby counsel . . . questioned whether the court has jurisdiction over him, signaling ties to the “sovereign citizen movement” he has referenced in court documents.
Adherents to that movement believe that the U.S. government is illegitimate and use that as reasoning to evade laws,
according to the Anti-Defamation League.<<<
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4089274-judge-to-decide-fate-of-two-oath-keepers-who-breached-capitol-on-jan-6/
The sovereign citizen movement is completely nutty because no one ever wins in court with these arguments. It's been going on for years and years and the results are always the same. But people continue to believe it for some reason. see, e.g. United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934 n.3 (9th Cir. 1986).
"Studley contends that she is not a "taxpayer" because she is an absolute, freeborn and natural individual. This argument is frivolous. . . .
[T]his argument has been consistently and thoroughly rejected by every branch of the government for decades. Indeed advancement of such utterly meritless arguments is now the basis for serious sanctions imposed on civil litigants who raise them."
Read United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
This is not a harmless belief. People who fall for this often suffer severe consequences.