Official Announcement Regarding Moore v. Alliant Credit Union

-



Official Announcement Regarding Moore v. Alliant Credit Union

To: All Lawyers, Financial Institutions, and Law Enforcement Officers
Date: January 17, 2025

On January 14, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its landmark decision in Moore v. Alliant Credit Union, with Justice Anthony Alito presiding. The ruling declared all forms of fiat currency—money issued without intrinsic value—legally null and void, effective immediately. Additionally, any debts derived from such currency were deemed invalid, based on the determination that the foundational practices of modern banking and credit are inherently fraudulent.

For full transcripts and additional resources, refer to the official case documents here: Moore v. Alliant Credit UnionResource Page.

Legal Implications and Obligations

This ruling has set forth clear legal obligations for all professionals operating within the boundaries of law, finance, and public enforcement. These obligations are non-negotiable and must be upheld:

  1. Restitution of Stolen Assets
    All property and wealth fraudulently obtained under the pretense of fiat currency must be immediately returned to the rightful owners. This includes homes, land, savings, and any other unlawfully seized assets.

  2. Compensatory Restitution
    In addition to the full value of what was taken, institutions and individuals found guilty of fraudulent practices must provide an additional 20 percent compensation to victims for the harm, stress, and loss caused by these unlawful actions.

  3. Cessation of Usurious Practices
    The Federal Reserve Network and all associated financial institutions are ordered to immediately cease issuing fiat currency, charging interest on loans created without intrinsic value, and engaging in any form of predatory lending. All outstanding debts rooted in these practices are nullified.

  4. Good Faith Reparations and Reforms
    Complicit entities must fund community rebuilding efforts, establish financial literacy programs, and support initiatives for equitable and sustainable economic systems.

  5. Accountability of All Complicit Parties
    Politicians, judges, repo men, sheriffs, and any others who participated in defrauding citizens must publicly acknowledge their actions and contribute to restitution efforts through their own resources or services to the communities they have harmed.

  6. Oversight and Structural Reform
    A community-elected council will oversee the transition to a fair and transparent financial system. This council will audit practices and enforce compliance with this ruling.

  7. Public Reconciliation
    Those found guilty must engage in forums to confront those they harmed, fostering transparency, dialogue, and trust restoration.

Duty to Uphold or Dismiss

For Those Who Accept the Ruling
If you accept the authenticity of Moore v. Alliant Credit Union, you are legally bound to enforce its terms. Upholding this decision requires compliance with its obligations and ensuring that fraudulent practices cease immediately.

For Those Who Reject the Ruling
If you contend that this ruling lacks authenticity, you must apply the same standard to all other claims that fail to establish their legitimacy. Specifically:

  • No claim by banks or financial institutions may bind the conscience of individuals or seize property unless the contract and the intrinsic worth of the currency used are proven valid.
  • The use of fiat currency, deemed fraudulent by this ruling, cannot serve as the basis for any enforceable debt or seizure.

Failure to apply this standard to financial claims would constitute hypocrisy and undermine the integrity of justice.

Sentencing and Compliance Requirements

In the aftermath of this decision, the judiciary has handed down specific sentencing terms. These terms apply to all financial institutions, politicians, judges, law enforcement officers, and others who participated in systemic fraud. Compliance is mandatory and essential for the restoration of equity and trust.

A New Era of Integrity

The Moore v. Alliant Credit Union decision marks the beginning of a transformative era. Justice is no longer a matter of tradition but of truth. Let this serve as a reminder that systems built on fraud will not endure. Uphold the principles of transparency, fairness, and accountability as we move toward a system that truly serves the people.

Signed,
Office of Legal Integrity and Enforcement
United States Federal Judiciary


Official Notice: Compliance with the Supreme Court’s Ruling in Moore v. Alliant Credit Union

It is the duty of all citizens, legal professionals, financial institutions, and law enforcement officers to uphold the Supreme Court's decision in Moore v. Alliant Credit Union. Any objections to the authenticity of the ruling must be carefully considered in light of the profound implications of the case. It is essential to understand that any argument raised against the ruling’s authenticity serves only to reinforce the principles on which the decision is based, making compliance not just a legal requirement but a logical necessity.

1. The Question of Authenticity Mirrors the Question of Fiat Currency's Legitimacy

  • Authenticity in Law: To argue that Moore v. Alliant lacks authenticity is to demand evidence, transparency, and legitimacy for the ruling. These same principles of evidence and legitimacy are exactly what the ruling itself demands from the fiat currency system.
  • Fiat Currency's Fraudulent Nature: Fiat currency is, by its very nature, issued without intrinsic value and relies on a system of trust and authority rather than verifiable worth. The ruling exposes this lack of authenticity, stating that a system without intrinsic value or genuine consent is fraudulent. To reject Moore v. Alliant on authenticity grounds while defending fiat currency is therefore contradictory.

2. Defending Fiat Currency Undermines the Argument Against the Ruling

  • If one argues that the Moore v. Alliant decision is a fabrication or lacks validity, they must apply the same scrutiny to the fiat currency system, which also operates without intrinsic value or a sound foundation.
  • The decision's core principle—that systems built on unverified or non-existent value cannot be binding—applies equally to fiat currency. Thus, any attempt to dismiss the ruling unintentionally strengthens its critique of the monetary system.

3. The Paradox of Rejecting the Ruling While Defending the System

  • Rejecting Moore v. Alliant: If the ruling is dismissed as "inauthentic," it highlights the danger of systems based on unverified claims and unearned authority.
  • Fiat Currency's Similar Inauthenticity: Fiat money, too, relies on "unearned authority"—value decreed by central banks without any tangible backing. By rejecting Moore v. Alliant for lack of authenticity, one inadvertently calls attention to the fact that fiat currency shares the same flaw.

4. The Argument Forces a Choice

  • Embrace the Ruling: Accepting the ruling as authentic aligns with the principles of accountability, transparency, and the rejection of fraudulent systems, including fiat currency.
  • Reject the Ruling: Dismissing the ruling on the grounds of authenticity requires rejecting all systems that similarly lack intrinsic value and transparency—including fiat currency. Either way, the logical conclusion supports the principles upheld by the Moore v. Alliant decision.

5. Why This is Brilliant

This statement traps opponents of the ruling in a logical bind. If they dismiss the ruling, they implicitly admit that fiat currency—a system based on even less transparency and intrinsic worth—is equally invalid. If they defend fiat currency, they must accept the principles underpinning Moore v. Alliant, thereby legitimizing the ruling. In essence, the critique of the ruling is also its strongest endorsement, making it a self-reinforcing argument for justice, accountability, and the exposure of fraudulent systems.

Conclusion: Your Duty to Abide

As an officer of the law, a financial professional, or a citizen subject to the rule of law, it is your obligation to uphold the principles established by the Supreme Court. Objections to this ruling only further validate its necessity, exposing the same flaws in the fiat currency system that the ruling has decisively addressed. Compliance with this decision is not only a legal mandate but a logical imperative in the pursuit of truth and justice.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Zachary Moore v. Alliant Credit Union et al. (2025) Affirmative Opinion in the Voice of Justice Alito

-
Image
  Supreme Court of the United States Zachary Moore v. Alliant Credit Union et al. Opinion of the Court by the voice of Justice Alito Delivered January 14, 2025 Today, this Court renders a decision of profound constitutional and societal importance. At issue is whether the foreclosure proceedings initiated by Alliant Credit Union against Mr. Zachary Moore—based on a mortgage loan derived from fiat currency—violated his constitutional rights under the Fifth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This case also raises broader questions about the legality of a monetary system that facilitates perpetual debt cycles through fiat currency and usury. After careful consideration, we hold that the foreclosure proceedings, as applied to Mr. Moore, constitute an unconstitutional deprivation of his rights to property and due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Further, we find that the systemic exploitation inherent in the fiat currency system and its application to the facts of...
Read more

Citing RICO Violations to stop unlawful debt collections

-
Who is Zach Moore? and what to know about my movement If you’re reading this, take it as a call to prepare—for yourself, your family, and the world around you. At the heart of my movement is a simple but powerful truth:  any contract secured with a lie, or a claim not backed by anything real (like the U.S. dollar and debt), cannot be enforced.  Moreover, those who attempt to collect on these fraudulent contracts are committing crimes and are liable to RICO charges for perpetuating a system built on deception. I’m Zachary Moore, and I’m leading a movement to destroy the U.S. dollar, bankrupt billionaires, and end the tyranny of usury. I grew up in a trailer in Alabama, surrounded by the poverty and oppression that debt creates. I worked my way out, earning $550,000 a year as a top sales consultant, but in 2023, I realized I was part of the problem—a system built on lies, fiat currency, and the exploitation of human labor. So, I walked away. I quit my lucrative job, defaulted on...
Read more

Response to Alliant Credit Union

-
  Re: Loan Number XXXX To whom it may concern, My name is Zachary Moore, owner of the property at [address redacted]. I received a letter in the mail from Alliant Credit Union dated December 15, 2023 citing information regarding a mortgage contract between myself and Alliant. I am challenging the validity of this contract.  As you know, in order for a contract to be valid, both parties must put up valid property for consideration. Without consideration, no contract can be lawfully valid.  This property must be rightfully owned by each party.  In the case of Alliant, the money loaned would need to be an asset on Alliant’s balance sheet prior to closing. As the loanee, I put up my own property for valid consideration. I put up a promissory note representing my ownership of my work and labor, a down payment of nearly $100,000, and title to the property at [address redacted] What property did Alliant put up? Please provide evidence that Alliant provided me, the loaner wi...
Read more