I've been reading about various groups purporting to be Freeman-on-the-land, which believe that contractual ties between the government and these people are only valid if the people consent to them. However, despite digging quite deep, I have not found a successful defence of such matters. Wikipedia's citation for a lack of legal success only gives examples of failures, but does not in fact make any claims about the success of the legal argument.

Has a Freeman-on-the-land argument ever been successful in court?

  • We want to focus our attention on doubtful claims that are widely held or are made by notable people. Please provide some examples of places where this claim is being made.
    – Jamiec
    Commented Nov 30, 2015 at 17:27
  • 3
    I think this is a notable question. There has been a relatively significant amount of mainstream media coverage on the subject, and Wikipedia's citation for the OP's claim does not in fact answer the question. The question should be edited to include relevant links and background, though.
    – ESultanik
    Commented Nov 30, 2015 at 18:05
  • I edited the question to add relevant links and a bit more context.
    – ESultanik
    Commented Nov 30, 2015 at 18:10
  • 4
    If something "only gives examples of failures" I think we can say that's a claim about the success of the legal argument. Commented Nov 30, 2015 at 19:59
  • 4
    This is asking us to prove a negative. We can cite plenty of learned authorities explaining why it will never be a successful defence, but to prove it has never happened we would need to check every court case in the history of the world. Commented Nov 30, 2015 at 20:18


Browse other questions tagged .