“Strawman” and the All-Capital-Letters Name
The law does operate through legal personalities and legal names. We have not found a court decision treating the all-capitals name as a separate entity from the person it names.
What the theory says
What supporters point to
- Birth certificates and the all-caps names on court papers
- Black's Law Dictionary definitions of "person"
- UCC terms such as "secured party" and "debtor"
What the cited law says
We have not found a statute, rule or court decision that recognizes a separate “strawman” entity created by a birth certificate. In the decisions we reviewed, courts treated capital letters on a caption, license or bill as a formatting choice that does not change who the document refers to. Under state vital-records laws, a birth certificate is a record of a birth; we have not found authority treating it as a financial instrument or as the charter of a separate legal person.
How courts have ruled
The Seventh Circuit rejected sovereign-citizen jurisdictional arguments, holding that a person who claims to be a "sovereign citizen," "secured-party creditor," or "flesh-and-blood human being" is not beyond the jurisdiction of the courts — including a defendant who argued he was not the person indicted because his name was not written in capital letters.
The court denied motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction that relied on UCC arguments, the capitalization of the defendants' names, and the claim that the defendants had not consented to jurisdiction.
The court dismissed claims that the lender lent no real money ("vapor money"), that the loan was paid in "unlawful money," and related strawman theories.
The real legal concepts involved
The theory draws on real legal concepts. The law works through legal personality: a human being is a natural person with legal rights and duties, and the law also creates artificial persons — an ens legis, or creature of the law — such as corporations and LLCs. Federal law itself says that, unless the context indicates otherwise, the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies and joint stock companies, as well as individuals (1 U.S.C. § 1). Courts also identify every party by a legal name. Artificial persons are created under a statute that authorizes them, such as by filing articles of incorporation. What we have not found is any authority treating a person’s legal name, or the recording of a birth, as creating a second legal person separate from the human being.
What has happened in court
In the court decisions we reviewed, judges did not accept these arguments. In those and similar cases, the outcomes have included dismissed claims and defenses, judgments entered against the person raising the argument, monetary sanctions and orders limiting future filings. Separately, federal law makes it a crime to file, or attempt to file, a false lien or encumbrance against the real or personal property of a federal officer or employee on account of the performance of official duties, knowing or having reason to know it is false, punishable by up to 10 years in prison (18 U.S.C. § 1521). We share this so you can weigh the information and make your own decision.
Our findings: The law does operate through legal personalities and legal names. We have not found a court decision treating the all-capitals name as a separate entity from the person it names.
How to check the strawman name claim yourself
If someone offers you a strategy built on strawman name, ask for the court decisions that accepted it. In the decisions cited on this page, courts did not accept it. Instead, read the real statute or rule the claim cites, and then read how courts have applied it. Also, look at the cases listed above. They show what happens when people raise the argument in court. For a real dispute, talk to a licensed attorney in your state. You can start with our directory.
Sources and further reading
Official sources used on this page:
Related reading on Lawtopolis:
Sources
- United States v. Benabe, 654 F.3d 753 (7th Cir. 2011)
- United States v. Mitchell, 405 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Md. 2005)
- McLaughlin v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 726 F. Supp. 2d 201 (D. Conn. 2010)
Sources last reviewed: 2026-10-23
Lawtopolis provides legal information and education, not legal advice. Using this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and court rules vary by jurisdiction and change over time; verify every authority against the official source and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction about your situation.