Prairie Star National says it is not a ‘sovereign citizens’ organization as referred to in court

Prairie Star National says it is not a ‘sovereign citizens’ organization as referred to in court

Food Safety News last year labeled the Prairie Star National Trust an organization of “sovereign citizens” after a court used the term in the Amos Miller case, which said Miller illegally sold meat without government inspection.

Star National has reached out to Food Safety News to say it has nothing negative to say about our coverage of the Miller case.

However, the organization had a lot to say about some of the terminology that Food Safety News used after the group dealt with the Miller case. “We are indeed a ‘law advocate’ for Americans, probably more rooted in ‘law’ than most law firms,” ​​it said, referring to the “sovereign citizen” organization.

“First of all, you should know that calling someone or a group a ‘sovereign citizen’ is a contradiction in terms. No one can be ‘sovereign’ and ‘citizen/citizen’ at the same time,” Star National said in the Food Safety News comment line. “You don’t even have to be a journalist to get it right — all you have to do is get a dictionary and look up the definitions of the words.”

“A sovereign answers to no one. A citizen/citizen ALWAYS responds to someone or something,” it continued. Star National’s view is that most of us in the United States are corporate citizens answerable in the Admiralty Courts and that we have a duty to the state. “You are not and cannot be ‘sovereign’ and ‘American,'” according to Star National.

“You are a municipal ‘corporate’ citizen of the United States, a citizen of the Foreign (British) United States Service Corporation, you can be just one or the other,” it adds.

Star National claims his brief involvement in the Miller case established Amos and his wife Rachel as native Americans. It states that the US Department of Agriculture is not the government but a non-governmental organization with a DUNSS number. It is an agency of the British Services Corporation which, according to the organization, provides services to the American people. Star National says USDA is not sovereign and has no more authority than McDonald’s.

The USDA has filed civil lawsuits since 2016 to compel Miller to comply with state meat and poultry food safety laws and regulations. Miller and his Miller’s Organic Farm distributed meat and poultry not controlled by the USDA. The most recent civil lawsuit to get him to comply dates back to 2019.

Miller hails from Bird-In-Hand, PA. All litigation was brought in the US District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania. Star National considers the district court “not part of any United States agency.” But as a “foreign company” operating through the American court system.

The District Court is nothing more than a non-governmental organization according to Star National and they cite as their source the very real but very complicated Clearfield Doctrine which the Supreme Court ruled in 1943. It’s about when government agencies act as corporations and lose their sovereign status and then have to be governed as a pure corporation

Star National considers Miller Organic Farm LLC to be the sole legitimate defendant in the ongoing civil lawsuit. “Amos Blank Miller is not a company; he is an ‘American’ and NOT a US CITIZEN, not a citizen of the United States government,” it said.

It says Miller has no contract with the court or the USDA. Star National does not recognize the automatic jurisdiction of the district court. Depending on the outcome of the Miller case, Star National could still “challenge the court’s jurisdiction.” It has asked the USDA to present its treaty with the United States of America.

About a year ago, Miller wanted to fire his Dallas attorney Steven LaFuente and turn to Prairie Star National. Non-attorneys are not allowed to represent others in federal court, and Star National was disqualified in the case. And LaFuente was not released as Miller’s attorney until late 2022, when attorney Robert E. Barnes Esq. from Los Angeles took over.

By early 2023, Barnes had his client on a compliance lead not seen since Miller first attempted to fire LaFuente. If Miller perseveres, he will avoid a civil sentence and reduce fines, which are now set at $300,000.

But the US District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania in Easton before Federal Judge Edward G. Smith set out what Miller must do. It is found in the “second consent decree” filed by Barnes and prosecutors.

Enforcing the court’s permanent injunction against Miller and Miller’s Organic Farm is an alternative. This first injunction prohibits violations of federal meat and poultry laws and was issued on April 26, 2020

The new court documents now require Miller to pay the court clerk $30,000 within 10 days of signing the Second Consent Decree. It says:

“This sum will be used to reimburse: a) Mr. Lapsley’s past fees and expenses; b) US Marshall’s Service fees/expenses for escorting Mr. Lapsley on his farm visit on March 17, 2022; and c) Mr. Lapsley’s ongoing fees and expenses for reporting compliance with certain terms of this Second Consent Decree and the Second Contempt Sanctions Order.”

Lapsley is an agricultural expert appointed by the court to handle the case.

Miller owes an additional $55,065 to the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) for the agency’s investigative work, which must be paid in two installments. The first $27,543 is due January 15, 2023; and the second payment of $27,543 must be filed with the United States Attorney’s Office by April 15, 2023.

There are also some non-monetary details that Miller needs to follow.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *