Notice of Removal to Federal Court Example
Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11; 28 U.S.C. § 1441; 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the above referenced State case must be litigated in federal court.
Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court decision in Younger v. Harri, 401 U.S. 37 (1971):
“…when absolutely necessary for protection of constitutional rights, courts of the United States have power to enjoin state officers from instituting criminal actions.”
It is clearly a violation of claimants constitutionally secured right to not only face their accuser and have the signed affidavit of fact of claims made against the accused, but pursuant to Article VI of the constitution (supremacy clause) the constitution for the united States and all Treaties made shall be the supreme law of the land. It is the constitutional and treaty right of all Moors, who have issues or disputes with any citizens of the united States, their right to consul shall not be infringed. See the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between the Moroccan Empire and the Republic of the united States of America of 1786-7. The treaty granted no personam jurisdiction, subject-matter jurisdiction, nor territorial jurisdiction to the united States over any Moor / Moorish Estate, except those which pertain to article 21, which applies to the criminal act of killing or wounding a citizen of the respective nations, to which, the proper venue is consular courts (also see Sundry Free Moors act of 1790). Thus, any proceedings of a case to which a Moor is a party is a violation of that Moors constitutionally secured rights. It is written in the treaty: