What Courts Have Said About Sovereign Citizen Arguments

Sovereign citizen arguments raise real questions about how the legal system works. They point to legal names, legal personalities, notes, contracts and a money system that has not been backed by gold for private citizens since 1933. This article lays out the real concepts and what courts have said, so you can weigh the information yourself.

The real concepts behind the arguments

The law does work through legal personality. A human being is a natural person, and the law also creates artificial persons, such as corporations, that exist only because a statute allows them. Federal law even says that, unless the context indicates otherwise, the word “person” includes corporations and other organizations “as well as individuals” (1 U.S.C. § 1).

Likewise, the financial system runs on credit, negotiable instruments and signatures. Those are real parts of the law, and our Theory Review explains each one. The open question is what these concepts allow a person to do in court.

What courts have said about sovereign citizen arguments

In United States v. Benabe, 654 F.3d 753 (7th Cir. 2011), the Seventh Circuit held that a person who claims to be a “sovereign citizen,” a “secured-party creditor” or a “flesh-and-blood human being” is not beyond the jurisdiction of the courts.

Similarly, in United States v. Mitchell, 405 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Md. 2005), the court denied motions to dismiss that relied on UCC arguments and the capitalization of the defendants’ names. Our review of the strawman theory sets out the claim and the record in full.

Payment and account theories

In Bryant v. Washington Mutual Bank, 524 F. Supp. 2d 753 (W.D. Va. 2007), a borrower sent a “bill of exchange” to pay off a mortgage, and the court held that no payment had been made. Likewise, in Gravatt v. United States, 100 Fed. Cl. 279 (2011), the court dismissed a claim to a Treasury account tied to a birth certificate.

Courtroom symbols and admiralty

In McCann v. Greenway, 952 F. Supp. 647 (W.D. Mo. 1997), the court did not accept the claim that a gold-fringed flag turned a state courtroom into an admiralty court. Our review of the gold fringe flag claim explains what admiralty law actually covers.

Making your own decision

We have not found a court decision upholding these arguments. Still, the best way to judge them is to read the sources yourself. First, read the statute or rule a theory cites. Next, read how courts have applied it. Then decide. For a real problem with a debt, a lawsuit or a tax bill, a licensed attorney in your state can explain your options, and our directory is a good place to start.