Laserfiche WebLink
14 <br />0 <br /> <br />p3/9 <br />Demand for Jury Trial (con't) <br />5) Congress is supposed to make the laws and the <br />Executive Branch is supposed to enforce the laws. The Dept. <br />of Interior, as part of the Executive branch is only supposed to <br />enforce theexisting law, not to make new laws. Question for the <br />jury: was the "will of Congress" expressed in 1993 when provisions <br />expressly prohibiting the Dept of INterior from processing <br />patent applications for mining claims(as specifically provided <br />WF2F, <br />for in the Mining Law of 1872,as amended),, buried in 50,000 pages <br />of the General Appropriations, and never specifically debated in <br />Congress, but when the appropriations bill was passed, a <br />"Moratorium" on patents was put into place by Secretary Babbitt, <br />thereby effectively altering the Mining Law, contrary to the <br />actual wishes of Congress, where any change to the Mining Law <br />was consistently voted down in multiple attempts to alter the <br />law during the Clinton administration?? Is this Moratorium on <br />mining claim patents therefore illegal and ineffective?' <br />6) In view of the decisions of the Court in U.S. v Shumway <br />and U.S. v. Lex, can BLM decision contrary to those findings <br />be enforcible? <br />7) I ask that the jury find that my use and occupancy <br />of the Ace#7 claim was authorized by the General Mining Law the <br />instant that the Ace#7 was located. My use and occupancy does not <br />rely on any approval from Mr. John Husband, Rob Ernst, or any other <br />BLM officer--it relies solely on the specific wording and provisions <br />of the General Mining Law as recently confirmed <br />in U.S.v Lex <br />and U.S. v. Shumway(9th Circuit,1999)9616480.