uReport

City of Bloomington, Indiana

Search

Fields to display

Search Results: (11)

closed #182331

Inaccessible Parking

Case Date:
12/27/2022

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Wheeler+Mission/@39.1638096,-86.5673226,19z/data=!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x886c671883f2f739:0xb1f035533dd9655d!2sRose+Hill+Cemetery!8m2!3d39.1656677!4d-86.5453634!3m4!1s0x886c66c275b2d6f9:0x1432f5f5499e3e7b!8m2!3d39.1635017!4d-86.5673232 https://www.visitbloomington.com/listing/rose-hill-cemetery/332/ https://bloomington.in.gov/locations/rose-hill-cemetery-office ... Attachments Rose Hill Cemetery Guidelines for Plot Owners, May 2018.pdf (993.75 KB) Cemetery prices brochure updated 2020_1.pdf (2.75 MB) Cemetery Decorations Permitted and Not Permitted.pdf (7.44 MB) History compiled and written by Donald Matson There are no written records of burials at Rose Hill Cemetery until October 6, 1897. The oldest section of the cemetery is located in the southeast corner bordered by Maple and Third Streets, and was probably begun about 1818-1820 by the County Board and was selected by the Commissioners, and was announced that the location...

closed #182023

Smoking Violation

3131 B W Venture BLVD

Case Date:
11/8/2022

Coworker refuses to stop vaping in the office and management will not enforce the no smoking policy in the office.

closed #181397

Other

Case Date:
9/6/2022

This past weekend my car was towed by Chandler Towing at 4am Sunday morning. I was staying the night at my partner’s apartment at 406 e 11th st. which is leased by Parker management. I was given verbal consent to park my car there while visiting by an employee at their office when I helped her pick up her keys to the apartment on the 1st of August. Given that it was a holiday weekend and I have no other way to get to work I opted to but the bullet and go get my car before trying to file any complaints. I was charged the legal maximum of $160 dollars which I understand and did not choose to raise any questions at the Chandler office. Afterwards I emailed Parker to ask if they would be willing to either reach out to Chandler to get me a refund or reimburse my partner via deducting that cost from her rent balance next month. I was told that an employee would never tell me I can park here and that they cannot do anything. I understand that given the city ordinance put in place a couple years ago as well as state laws require that I am given 24 hours notice prior to being towed for abandoning my vehicle and the only exception is if there is an emergency OR I am preventing a business from performing as intended. The lot in which I parked has not once been close to full this year so far and I was not preventing other tenants from accessing parking spaces. My car was only there for 8 hours before being towed without notice. The affidavit written by the towing company did not provide any testimony as to what circumstances allowed them to tow my car without a notice. I was also told by the towing company that they do not file police reports when towing a car and I cannot find any legal precedent on this matter. If you have an answer as to whether that is legally required I would appreciate clarification on that matter. If there is a formal way for me to file a complaint on this issue please let me know. I would like to proceed as respectfully as possible while not allowing myself to be taken advantage of. Thank you!

closed #180908

Other

Case Date:
8/5/2022

Cresent Union Leasing Office requested my vehicle to be towed without any warning. My 2001 Chevy Tahoe was parked legally and within apts guidelines parked in their visitors parking lot approx 3am on or about June 17 and by noon the next day vehicle was gone. Stryker stated they requested the tow and when he arrived my back passenger tire was flat. Tire wasn't flat when I parked. I now have several photographs date time stamped their lot several piles of broken glass multiple days with no clean up. Unbeknownst to me when I parked and with no time to see or attempt to fix tire. So many stories of tenants and guest vehicles being towed at this complex people whom are already experiencing financial hardship lol sing your transportation...new management since. I'm stranded and vulnerable..they are required to post 24 hr warning and violated that law me and many others. Thank you for your consideration stephaniepersohn@yahoo.com 8126662549

closed #180884

Parking Meters and Citations

Case Date:
8/4/2022

Crescent Union Apts and Stryker Towing my vehicle was parked in visitors with proper tags ect...parked 3am by 11am it was gone. Stryker stated the leasing office requested it towed claimed flat tire.. it wasnt flat when I parked it there. The lot was riddled with broken glass. They also claim two vehicles same as mine both towed within 48 hrs timeframe...so many people whom already face financial hardship are getting their transportation taken and unable to pay fees. After two days it was already $265... that day I called was told they'd get back with me no one was there at lot to release my vehicle. It's now $1350 I'm medically frail and now stranded here homeless no way to get back to my hometown. Please help? Cresent Union Apts on the hill towed 2001 white Chevy Tahoe Stephanie Persohn 812-666-2549 stephaniepersohn@yahoo com

closed #178457

Other

705 E Eddington CT

Case Date:
12/21/2021

This complaint was issued to the Monroe County Branch of the NAACP BY Mr. Marlon Smith. December 3 2021 between 4p-4:30pm my 11 year old son was physically assaulted by a school bus driver for mccsc transportation the incident happen while my son was aboard the school bus in route home and the approximate location/place at the time of the incident are streets Leighton and Wickens(The Highlands),however immediately after learning of the incident I headed for mccsc school transportation fast as I could drive, calling 911 in route.BPD officer Tibbs and BDP officer Kruse responded to the call.Although the incident happened in vicinity to where Monroe County Sheriff Department would respond a Bloomington Officer responded and handled the proceeded to perform an investigation.Officer Tibbs myself Lucas Smith,Noah Smith,mccsc Brad Lucas and transportation supervisor were all in a room at mccsc transportation department. Officer Tibbs interviewed my children.The exact day of the incident December 3 2021 Officer Tibbs said he would not file charges on the bus driver "without" 1.examining my son injury for any sign of bruise/marking from the bus driver grabbing my son 2.Without speaking to the school bus driver at all 3.Without interviewing any witnesses/students from the school bus who actually observed the incident besides my children 4.Without verifying if there was video footage available 5.Without ever seeing medical documentation related to my son injury from health care physician Brad Lucas and other staff at mccsc never once showed concern for my son injury they didn't ask to see the area on my son leg that the bus driver injured and they never had the driver submit to a drug screen to see if he see if he was under the influence.I was told by Brad Lucas school bus driver that assaulted my son was allowed to take the bus home on weekends and so he never did arrive at the mccsc transportation office while I was there December 3 2021 and I was there at least 2 hours.On December 3 2021 As far as I know Brad Lucas,mccsc transportation supervisor had not spoke to the driver and neither did officer Tibbs interview the driver on this particular day.Brad Lucas told me that he would review video footage over the that weekend December 4th 2021 Officer Tibbs winding down his interview with my children without asking to see any physical evidence of the assault said he would not file charges on this driver this is Jeff Hauswald school district and he isn't doing anything.December 6 2021 mccsc school bus transportation told me there was no video of the incident although supposedly all busses are equipped with the latest state of the art safety and video surveillance to protect our children. DCS in involved however DCS is doing a extremely terrible lazy job.Althought the driver admitted to physical grabbing my son to Department of Children Services the DCS case worker Trina Staten is telling me that without video footage of the incident she can't prove the driver had malicious intent.He grabbed my son near his genitals and DCS caseworker is saying she doesn't know if there was malicious intent.The bus driver isn't supposed to touch the kids period in general they are not supposed to touch kids and this bus driver not only touched my son he assaulted him and nobody is doing anything and I strongly feel the driver did this and felt comfortable enough to do it is because my son is black and as well law enforcement feel they don't have to respect an African American or my family its like they just tell us get over it and deal with it.Officer Tibbs so much as told me that it seemed like the driver was dealing with a situation on the bus as if that justify grabbing my son between his legs hard enough to cause bleeding.My son is bi sexual and just was starting to be comfortable with who he is and understanding what he identify with and this driver doing something so heinous is uncalled for and my son needs therapy and further medical attention.I have called the Bloomington Police Department to speak to Officer Tibbs shift supervisor several times and not once did a supervisor contact me the bus driver who identity I do not know could very wheel still be driving school bus with student aboard.On December 3 2021 the day of the incident as I was in my vehicle leaving the mccsc transportation department I clearly saw Brad Lucas talking to officer Tibbs who by then was in his patrol car.Although I don't know what they were discussing it looked damned suspicious and definitely a conversation outside of the one we all had inside the mccsc transportation .Please help cause they are just trying to blow me off and sweep this matter under the rug they don't give a damn about my son or what he suffer. I'm very disappointed its sad that all the resources and advocate supposed to be for children not even doing anything and this driver who identity I still don't know could very well be driving school bus with students still he never submitted to a drug and alcohol screen following the incident and this is something DCS should have even checked for drugs in the bus driver system.The bus driver was white and my son is black so of course the mccsc or police not doing anything they lied to DCS and just moving on.Im a black man and had I been that driver and touched a white kid I'd definitely loose my job they would throw me under the jail with several felony charges on me and I'd have to submit to a drug screen.This man not only assaulted my son he basically groped and molested him and nobody doing anything Thank you Marlon Smith 812 272 2208

closed #178253

Business

Case Date:
11/23/2021

Office lounge turned away combat veteran with ptsd service dog. Owner is defiant and un-american! Place should be shutdown for illegal discrimination. Doesnt look good for Bloomington.

closed #169304

Other

2500-2560 S Walnut St, Bloomington, Indiana, 47401

Case Date:
7/7/2019

From Complainant Davon Patton: Hello, I contacted the NAACP about a retaliatory arrest for the Education Department and my accusations of police misconduct in 2018 and was advised to contact you once the dispute with the school was adjudicated. After doing some research on my claims the statute of limitations starts on the date of the occured action. For example; the statute of limitations on my false arrest claim began to accrue when i was arrested. The only claim that begins to accrue after the charges are dropped is malicious prosecution as one of the elements is a termination of a prosecution in my favor. I am preparing to file a suit pro se while my claims are still fresh but would like assistance finding a pro bono or contingency based lawyer and a statement from the NAACP in support of the lawsuit. My claims are as follows: 1. Free speech retaliation (Denying my petition for reinstatement in March 2018 was out of Retaliation for whistleblowing and accusations of discrimination and police misconduct) 2. Violations of Title IV of the Civil rights act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation act of 1974(Denying my petition in March 2018 was discriminatory) 3. Spoliation of Evidence(The IUPD omitted exonerating evidence from discovery) 4. Perjury (The IUPD committed perjury by including false statements in a probable cause affidavit and showed reckless disregard for the truth) 5. Defamation (The IUPD and university officials defamed me of my character by lying about the emails to the department of education and by filing false charges against me) 6. False Arrest (The University had me arrested on a false arrest warrant alleging intimidation for sending the provost a Kanye West Song) 7. Retaliatory arrest (I was arrested in June of 2018 for engaging in free speech and federal protected activities) 8. Retaliatory prosecution (I am being prosecuted out of retaliation for free speech and engaging in federal protected activities 9. Vindictive Prosecution (I was arrested and prosecuted because of racial animus). 10. Intentional Inflection of emotion distress 11. Abuse of Legal Process (I was prosecuted for illegal motives) 12. obstructing a pending proceeding before Congress or a federal administrative agency(I was arrested out of retaliation for the department of education) 13. conspiracy to injure using unlawful means(school has letter from therapist talking about how I’ve recovered from the trauma of being wrongfully arrested in 2016 University again wrongfully arrests and prosecutes me in 2018) Claims waiting to be filed: 1. (Malicious prosecution will be amended to complaint once charges are dropped at the time of this complaint my lawyer is getting ready to file a motion to dismiss on multiple grounds) 2. I am still researching other possible claims A refresher on my story can be found here local groups such as the Bloomington DSA, YDSA Bloomington, and Btown Antifa have shared the story aswell: https://bloomingtonsolidaritynetwork.tumblr.com/post/176958755178/who-will-survive-in-america Those CC'd are those who you had CC'd in an earlier email to me, Vauxx Booker, and Kevin Brown an IU professor who is suing the IMPD.

closed #166215

Inaccessible Parking

2520 S Rockport RD

Case Date:
10/12/2018

Handicap parking being used by vehicles that do not have parking permits. How about having an online way to report villagers since community office won't tow the vehicles.

closed #150822

Other

Case Date:
2/28/2016

LAWFULLY CLAIMED. I, Robierre Jomo Kenyatta McNeil, Hereby declare that Robierre Jomo Kenyatta McNeil am/a/are "sovereign" Hebrew Israelite(s) de jure American national(s) of one of the nation/state, originally born as a de jure national of one of the nation/state... So called African-American, Negro, Black, Colored etc are fake nationalities with no languages of their own and no such nation of people exit., Africa is one continent with fifty (50) plus countries and is not a nationality nor does it has its own language. America is three continents, North, South, and Central American, they are not nationalities nor do they have their own language. Negro, Black, Colored etc are all labels, neither are nationalities and not one of them have its own language. According to the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality. States shall introduce safeguards to prevent statelessness by granting their nationality to persons who would otherwise be stateless and are either born in their territory or are born abroad to one of their nationals. States shall also prevent statelessness upon loss or deprivation of nationality. http://www.ohchr.org/…/RuleOfLaw/Pages/RightNationality.aspx So called African-American, Negro, Black, Colored etc is a fiction and stateless national people of the UNITED STATES Federal government democracy under the Fourteenth Amendment pursuant to the UNITED STATES CODE 8 USC § 1101(a)(22), The term "national" of the United States means (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. A nation of Sovereign Hebrew Israelite American Nationals republics are being murdered everyday in the streets with impunity under disguise of so called African-American, Negro, Black, Colored etc slaves by Europeans inquisition occupying foreign land acting outside of the organic constitutional fold of government under color of law So called African-American, Negro, Black, Colored etc are now declaring their true and rightful status as Sovereign Hebrew Israelite American Nationals republics individually and collectively as a nation free born of the several union states of the United States of America republic pursuant to UNITED STATES CODE 8 USC § 1101(a)(21), The term “national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state” I, Robierre Jomo Kenyatta McNeil, Hereby declare that Robierre Jomo Kenyatta McNeil am/a/are "sovereign" Hebrew Israelite(s) de jure American national(s) of one of the nation/state, originally born as a de jure national of one of the nation/state... "COUNTRY: By country is meant the state of which one is a member. Every man's country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born." Bouvier's Law, 1856, Title 8, USC 1101(a)(21), 1984 U.S. government Style manual, chapter 5.22/5.23, Law of Nations. Country: "The portion of earth's surface occupied by an independent nation or people, or the inhabitants of such territory." Blacks Law Dictionary, 4th edition. Country: "The territory occupied by an independent nation or people, or the inhabitants of such territory. In the primary meaning of "country" denotes the population, the nation, the state, or the government, having possession and dominion over a territory." Blacks Law Dictionary, 6th Edition. "A nation-state is a specific form of state (a political entity), which exists to provide a sovereign territory for a particular nation (a cultural entity), and which derives its legitimacy from that function. The compact OED defines it as: "a sovereign state of which most of the citizens or subjects are united also by factors which define a nation, such as language or common descent." Typically it is a unitary state with a single system of law and government. It is almost by definition a sovereign state, meaning that there is no external authority above the state itself." Wikipedia Encyclopedia. "In regard to the protection of our citizens in their rights at home and abroad we have no law which divides them into classes, or makes any difference whatever between. A native and a naturalized American may, therefore, go forth with equal security over every sea and through every land under heaven, including the country in which the latter was born." 9 Op. (US) Att.-Gen. 360 (1859). All 50 states of the union are "nations" according to law, and hold sovereign rights above any "United States government" nation rights. All nationals of these nation/states are sovereign and hold all rights of common law and the organic Constitution. The 14th Amendment created a "Federal nation" as compared to the sovereign "state nations" comprised of the 50 sovereign states of the union. This Amendment created a de facto citizenship which every Israelite American "became" through unwitting acquiescence, thereby placing them under "privilege" of such citizenship and also allegiance to, and subject under the laws to same. Case law supports this premise. Section. 1. (Clause one) All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they "reside." (Clause two) No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; (Clause three) nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 1. Section. 1. (Clause one) All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. This clearly creates a de facto "dual citizenship" status never before existing for the sovereign state citizens: Dual Citizenship: Citizenship in two different countries. Status of citizens of the United States who reside within a state; i.e. persons who are born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside." Blacks Law Dictionary, 6th edition. Naturalized: "To grant full citizenship to (one of foreign birth). American Heritage Dictionary Prior to the 14th Amendment "citizens of the United States" meant a "citizen" of one of the United States of America, however, this was NOT defined by Congress.** Because this phrase is NOW used in the 14th amendment, this sets forth a specific terminology and can no longer mean anything else, other than a "citizen of the federal government..." a "United States Citizen" naturalized as such at birth without informed consent. **Previous court case law touched on this de facto entity, the "Citizen of the United States," in Ex Parte- Frank Knowles, California Supreme Court, July term - 1885. In this case the court stated that there was no such thing as a "citizen of the United States," that is, to say, there was no such thing as a citizen of the Federal State, only a citizen of one of the united states. "... This section (section 1) contemplates two sources of citizenship and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance..." Elk v Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884). The use of the words, "their" and "them" indicates a de facto power created to be ABOVE the Israelite American People, something NO Israelite American willingly accepts and no organic law supports. "... and whereas it is claimed that such American citizens, with their descendants, are subjects of foreign states, (foreign to the United States) owing allegiance to the governments (of the states) thereof; and whereas it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim of foreign allegiance "should" be promptly and finally disavowed." Preamble of the Expatriation Act. Case law prior to 14th Amendment passage: ("Should" indicates no such legal requirement exists, but is what they want all de jure citizens to do.) "... for it is certain, that in the sense in which the word "Citizen" is used in the federal Constitution, "Citizen of each State," and "Citizen of the United States," are convertible terms; they mean the same thing; for the "Citizens of each State are entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States," and "Citizens of the United States" are, of course, Citizens of all the United States." [44 Maine 518 (1859) Hathaway, J. dissenting] Italics in original, underlines and C's added] Case law AFTER passage of the 14th Amendment: "It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual." [Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36] (1873) "The first clause of the fourteenth amendment made so called African-Americans, Negroes,, Black People Black Folks, Colored People, Colored Folks, etc citizens of the United States, and citizens of the State in which they reside, and thereby created two classes of citizens, one of the United States and the other of the state." Cory et al. V. Carter, 48 Ind. 327 1874 head note 8 - emphasis added. "We have in our political system a Government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own...." U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 1875. Emphasis added. "One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States." Thomas v. State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443. McDonel v. State, 90 Ind. 320, 323, 1883. I/we Israelites applied for no such dual citizenship of the insurgent United States de facto government, (created about the time of the so-called "civil" war, which was actually an International war against the sovereign nation/states of the union) apart from or in addition to, my/our natural born Israelite American de jure nationality received at birth. I/we Israelite(s) reject such de facto citizenship of the United States, and retain my/our de jure Israelite American nationality of the sovereign nation/state in which I/we Israelite(s) am/are domiciled at any given time, based on my/our original Israelite American de jure nation/state nationality. Law of Nations; Title 8 USC 1101 (a)(21) Section 1, (Clause two) " No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" This portion of section 1 clearly defines that such "United States de facto citizens" do not have natural rights, but are "granted" privileges for being such a de facto citizen, thereby removing them from de jure status as Israelite American nationals of their respective states, including all natural rights such sovereigns would otherwise enjoy. Government does NOT grant natural rights, it is to UPHOLD them. "... all naturalized citizens of the United States, while in "foreign states," (one of the several American Republics) shall be entitled to, and shall receive from this government, the same protection of persons and property that is accorded to native born citizens in like situations and circumstances." Expatriation Act, Section 2. "The term "foreign states" includes outlying possessions of a foreign state, but self-governed dominions or territories under mandate or trusteeship shall be regarded as separate foreign states." Title 8 USC 1101(a)(14) This is trying to imply that all de facto citizens of the de facto United Stated are being given all the same de jure rights that de jure citizens (read NON-citizens of the United States but citizens of de jure states) have, but this is NOT true as all U.S. citizens are under the jurisdiction of the United States and all "its" laws. These "privileges and immunities" are NOT the same as the ones secured by Article IV, Section 2 of the organic Constitution for NON-14th amendment citizens. "Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associated capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government for the promotion of their general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government... he owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties." U.S. v Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875). This makes all 14th amendment states, dependencies of the federal government, and as such, "colonies of the same: Colony. A dependent political community, consisting of a number of citizens of the same country who have emigrated therefrom to people another, and remain subject to the mother country. Territory attached to another nation, known as the mother country, with political and economic ties e.g. possessions or dependencies of the British Crown. (e.g. Original 13 colonies of the united states). The Neutrality Act of 1939, Preamble, Title 8 USC and Title 22, USC all set forth two different jurisdictions; the de jure jurisdiction, under the constitution, and the de facto jurisdiction, under the 14th amendment. Upon birth, under 14th amendment rules, all Israelite Americans are fictionally (by paper Birth Certificate) transported to Washington D.C., then fictionally (by paper Birth Certificate) transported back to the State wherein they "reside." This quick change of citizenship is done without knowing approval and by fraud, and takes all Israelites who submit to such, OUT of being a sovereign Israelites de jure American nationals of the state of their birth and INTO the de facto "residential" jurisdiction of the federal government and de facto United States within the several states. If one is naturally born into a state/nation, he has NOT legally submitted to such. I/we Israelites have NOT knowingly accepted the "naturalized citizenship" of the 14th amendment related to the United States and reject this de facto fraud. Usurpation, government. "The tyrannical assumption of the government by force contrary to and in violation of the constitution of the country." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856. The United States has accomplished this through legal fraud, deceit and Israelite American's unwitting acceptance of the same through ignorance. I/we Israelite(s) no longer wish to rebel against my/our nation/state and accept the de jure natural and common law jurisdiction which resides with the Israelite People. 3. I/we am/are a sovereign, independent, sui juris live, breathing, flesh and blood Israelites man/woman, NOT having allegiance to the "United States" corporate structure NOR to federal jurisdiction, and not to "state" jurisdictional powers not afforded it by the organic Constitution. sui juris: "One who has all the rights to which a free individual is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like." Bouvier's Law sui juris: "Every one of full age is presumed to be sui juris. Of full capacity. In his own right; capable of entering into a contract. Ballentine's Law Dictionary. "In common usage, the term "person" does not include the Sovereign, statutes employing the word person are ordinarily construed to exclude the Sovereign." Wilson v. Omaha Tribe, 442 U. S. 653, 667 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp., 312 U. S. 600, 604 (1941)). See also United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 275 (1947). Supreme Court Case quotes: "The idea that the word 'person' ordinarily excludes the Sovereign can also be traced to the familiar principle that the King is not bound by any act of Parliament unless he be named therein by special and particular words." Dollar Savings Bank v. United STATEs, 19 Wall. 227, 239 (1874). As this passage suggests, however, this interpretive principle applies only to "the enacting Sovereign." United States v. California, 297 U. S. 175, 186 (1936). See also Jefferson County Pharmaceutical Assn., Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, 460 U. S. 150, 161, n. 21 (1983). Furthermore, as explained in United States v. Herron, 20 Wall. 251, 255 (1874), even the principle as applied to the enacting Sovereign is not without limitations: "Where an act of Parliament is made for the public good, as for the advancement of religion and justice or to prevent injury and wrong, the king is bound by such act, though not particularly named therein; but where a statute is general, and thereby any prerogative, Right, title, or interest is divested or taken from the king, in such case the king is not bound, unless the statute is made to extend to him by express words." "A Sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on which the Right depends." Kawananakoa v. Polyblank, 205 U. S. 349, 353, 27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907). "The majority of American States fully embrace the Sovereign immunity theory as well as the federal government. See Restatement (Second) of Torts 895B, comment at 400 (1979)." I/we Israelites shall have occasion incidentally to evince, how true it is, that States and governments were made for Israelite man/woman; and at the same time how true it is, that his creatures and servants have first deceived, next vilified, and at last oppressed their master and maker." "... A STATE, useful and valuable as the contrivance is, is the inferior contrivance of man; and from his native dignity derives all its acquired importance. ... " "Let a STATE be considered as subordinate to the people: But let everything else be subordinate to the STATE. The latter part of this position is equally necessary with the former. For in the practice, and even at length, in the science of politics there has very frequently been a strong current against the natural order of things, and an inconsiderate or an interested disposition to sacrifice the end to the means. As the STATE has claimed precedence of the people; so, in the same inverted course of things, the government has often claimed precedence of the STATE; and to this perversion in the second degree, many of the volumes of confusion concerning Sovereignty owe their existence. The ministers, dignified very properly by the appellation of the magistrates, have wished, and have succeeded in their wish, to be considered as the Sovereigns of the STATE. This second degree of perversion is confined to the old world, and begins to diminish even there: but the first degree is still too prevalent even in the several STATEs, of which our union is composed. By a STATE I mean, a complete body of free persons united together for their common benefit, to enjoy peaceably what is their own, and to do justice to others. It is an artificial person. It has its affairs and its interests: It has its rules: It has its Rights: and it has its obligations. It may acquire property distinct from that of its members. It may incur debts to be discharged out of the public stock, not out of the private fortunes of individuals. It may be bound by contracts; and for damages arising from the breach of those contracts. In all our contemplations, however, concerning this feigned and artificial person, we should never forget, that, in truth and nature, those who think and speak and act, are men. Is the foregoing description of a STATE a true description? It will not be questioned, but it is. ..." "It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the Sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the prince as the Sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance, and excludes the idea of his being on an equal footing with a subject, either in a court of justice or elsewhere. That system contemplates him as being the fountain of honor and authority; and from his grace and grant derives all franchise, immunities and privileges; it is easy to perceive that such a Sovereign could not be amenable to a court of justice, or subjected to judicial control and actual constraint. It was of necessity, therefore, that suability, became incompatible with such Sovereignty. Besides, the prince having all the executive powers, the judgment of the courts would, in fact, be only monitory, not mandatory to him, and a capacity to be advised, is a distinct thing from a capacity to be sued. The same feudal ideas run through all their jurisprudence, and constantly remind us of the distinction between the prince and the subject." "No such ideas obtain here (speaking of America): at the revolution, the Sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the Sovereigns of the country, but they are Sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called) and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the Sovereignty." Chisholm v. Georgia (February Term, 1793) 2 U. S. 419, 2 Dall. 419, 1 L. Ed 440. "The individual may stand upon his constitutional Rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the STATE, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His Rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the STATE, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his Rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their Rights." Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S. 43 at 47 (1905). My/our Israelite rights of expatriation from "United States nationality" for recovery of my/our de jure Israelite American national several united states of America nationality is covered in Title 8 USC 1481 (a) and Title 8 USC 1502 which I/we hereby claim. I/we declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in the United States of America of the several states republic, the date of this petition or my own signed and dated :"DECLARATION OF SOVEREIGN HEBREW ISRAELITE AMERICAN NATIONAL STATUS TO THE WORLD" document. Signature is in accord with UCC §§ 1-201 (39), UCC 3-401(b) ELECTRONIC Signature ________ROBIERRE JOMO KENYATTA MCNEIL_______________________________   date _02/25/2016__2:01PM_______ Sovereign Hebrew Israelite American National name 28 U.S. Code § 1746(1) LETTER TO Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie Governer of Ohio John Kasich Governor Terry McAuliffe and 56 others Missouri Governor Massachusetts Governor Maryland Governor Florida Governor District Of Columbia Governor Governor Dennis Daugaard Governor Dannel Malloy Governor Paul LePage Governor Mark Dayton Governor John Kitzhaber Governor Matt Mead Governor Brian Sandoval North Dakota Governor Pennsylvania Governor Governor Asa Hutchinson Governor Douglas Ducey Governor Bill Walker Governor Gina Raimondo Governor Pete Ricketts Governor Bruce Rauner Governor David Ige Virgin Islands Governor Northern Mariana Islands Governor Guam Governor American Samoa Governor Texas Governor Governor Susana Martinez Governor Rick Snyder Governor Bill Haslam Governor Nikki Haley Governor Earl Tomblin Governor Peter Shumlin Governor Jay Inslee Governor Margaret Hassan Governor Steve Bullock Governor Dewey Bryant Governor Mike Pence Governor C.L. Otter Governor Sam Brownback President Barack Obama Governor Mary Fallin Governor Steven Beshear Governor Bobby Jindal Governor Terry Branstad Governor Scott Walker Governor John Hickenlooper Governor Andrew Cuomo Governor Jerry Brown Governor John Kasich Governor Chris Christie Governor Gary Herbert Governor Jack Markell Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla Governor Patrick McCrory Governor Robert Bentley Governor Nathan Deal Lawfully to include but not limited to recognize the so called African-Americans, Negroes, Blacks, Coloreds, etc as Sovereign.