Legislative Council Governing Body

July 11, 2018


Ed Heimlich, a Human Person, a Citizen of the US, a Citizen of Texas


 TO: The following parties who should be interested and concerned

 My Senator, Judith Zaffirini; C / O Andrew Hendrickson, JD – Legislative Aid; andrew.hendrickson@senate.texas.gov Ph: 463-0121 

My Representative, Eddie Rodriguez; C / O Alison Morrison, alisonm.ross@house.texas.gov  Ph: 463-0674 

My Legislature, C / O Governing body of the Legislative Council


Dan Patrick, Lt Governor & Co-Chair

Darrell Davila, COS 463-0100

Joe Straus, Speaker & Co-Chair 463-1000

Patricia Shipton, COS John Schnautz, JD

Senator Royce West  463-0123

Graham.Keever, Leg Dir.

Rep. Charlie Geren, 463-0610


Senator Sylvia Garcia  463-0106

John.gorczynski, COS

Senator Charles Perry  463-0128

Matthew.dowling COS

Senator Konni Burton  463-0110


Senator Bryan Hughes   463-0101


Senator Dawn Buckingham  463-0124


Kimberly Shields, Asst. Executive Director

Texas Legislative Council


THE STATE OF TEXAS, C / O Office of Attorney General  Ken Paxton,

C / O Steve Pier, Director of Governmental Relations Division

steve.pier@texasattorneygeneral.gov  PH: 463-2057


CC: Former Justices of the Third Court of Appeals, Kenneth Law, ken.law@whitehawkart.net Jan Patterson, Jan_Patterson@baylor.edu (names appear on memorandum opinion but I do not believe they ever read or even know about it.)

 For You and the Attorneys for the Legislative Division

 MY DEAR GOVERNMENT for my Land of Texas

 It is obvious to any with sufficient command of the language common to our land in which our Law is written that I, Edmund Heimlich, a Citizen of Texas and of our United States, have a Right to Remedy. This remedy is due from the State of Texas in the amount of $1,593,000 for in the upcoming session of our Legislature. This is pursuant to the attached Final Judgment.

 As a member of the Governing Body of the Texas Legislative Council I request that you review the following. If you feel confirmation is needed from an Attorney I suggest you forward to the Attorneys employed in the Office known as the Texas Legislative Council.

 A Right “excepted from the powers of government; forever to remain inviolate”

 The Right I am petitioning to you to honor is a Right our Texas Constitution secures with these words: “excepted from the powers of government; forever to remain inviolate”. Thus no division of our government, nor all three acting in collusion, can deny or lawfully deprive me of this Right.

 The Final Judgment for my Remedy is grounded in Law established by you, our Legislators. That Law, in effect from 2001 until the time of the entry of the Final Judgment, and continuing until a radical unconstitutional change in the session of 2009 is easily interpreted (understood) to any who with sufficient command of the language common to our land. It unquestionably provided “subject matter jurisdiction” to the State District Court of Texas that entered the Final Judgment into the public record. It established the legal obligation of the State of Texas for which this demand for payment is made. You have the first right to ‘interpret’ the Law you wrote and you have a duty to defend it as written and passed by those serving in our Legislature at the time. See attached mandate.

 Furthermore; our Texas Constitution, your statutory law, and the Rules of Court prohibited the Attorney General from requesting a review of what had already been reviewed by the Court of Appeals and made final by a mandate after time for a petition for review to our Texas Supreme Court had passed. You are not bound any unlawful act of the Attorney General or Judicial actors who joined in violating our constitutions and laws to issue an unlawful memorandum opinion. Nor can you lawfully utilize their illegal action as an excuse to refuse your duty.

 Obligatory Duty of Legislative Division

 Upon seeking and accepting your Office of Public Trust in the division of our government the duty to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and Laws of the United States and of this State” became obligatory. This obligatory duty falls as well on all who draw an income from our public treasury to assist you in the performance of the duties and other functions of the Legislative Division of our government. The purpose for the imposition of this duty, along with the division of government into three divisions, is clear to any student of history that formed our government. The sovereign people of Texas feared those to whom they had entrusted the high powers of government might destroy the Law of our Constitution, and the additional protection of the statutory law, with a disregard or intentional incorrect interpretation of the Law.

 You have a duty to preserve, protect, and defend YOUR Law from those in the other divisions of government, executive and judiciary, who would destroy it and reduce it to nothing more than a suggestion they can disregard with impunity. You, as the direct representatives of the people of Texas, must confront and counter violation of the Constitution and your laws created to bind them. You are not bound by an obvious mis representation of your law under the pretense of an ‘interpretation’ of your intent. To the contrary. You must hold them accountable and protect the right of the Citizen to have the full protection of the Law.


Obstruction of Justice

 I have been the victim of obstruction of justice by some who are opposed to our Constitutions and are opposed to your Laws. They have been successful in their obstruction by hiding a Divisionvin the Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”) in  that goes by the title of ‘law enforcement defense’. Unfortunately they do not defend the enforcement of the law. They do the opposite of what the name of their division implies. They defend those who are employed to enforce the law but choose to utilize their position of public trust to do the opposite. Those in this division of the OAG use their positions of public trust to shield enemies of our Constitutions and your laws from any possible accountability for their unlawful and treasonous actions committed under the cover of their position of public trust. On their behalf they join with them to wage a war against our Constitutions and against your Laws.

 In prior sessions my efforts to preserve, protect, and defend our Constitutions and your Laws have been thwarted by Senators and Representatives who do not know, or whose staff did not know, or pretends they do not know:  (1) our system of government; and (2) that the Legislative Division has its own Legal Counsel / Attorneys they can turn to for help in understanding our system of government, including the structure of the Judicial Division and its functions. Or to research and brief them on the Law. Instead they have chosen to turn to an Agency in the Executive Division of government known as the Office of the Attorney General. They were misled and misinformed by the enemies of our Constitutions and Laws hiding therein.

 You should know; The interest of the Executive Division is not always the same as the interest of your Division. So, too, should those who are employed to assist our elected Legislators in the performance of their duty to preserve, protect, and defend our Constitutions and your Laws.

 As you should know and do know if you have read our Texas Constitution; The People of Texas established three divisions of government. Yours is the only division of government with the power to make law. You, and you alone, have the power to ‘interpret’ the Law you make. The power of the Judiciary is limited to either ordering the administration of your law or declaring your law as overstepping the boundaries of our Constitutions and the supreme Law of the Land. If the Judiciary violates our Constitution and your Laws then you have a duty to disregard the incorrect interpretation. That is the essence of what is commonly known, typically taught in grade school, as ‘a system of checks and balances’.

 I trust you all enjoyed our recent celebration of the 4th of July in recognition of the Declaration of 1776. A time to reaffirm our commitment to LIBERTY. Obviously there is no Liberty on our Land if our Government is free to violate our Constitutional protections with the taking of our property and the imprisoning of our person with impunity. Liberty demands remedy.

 Our Texas Constitution imposes only one duty upon the Office in which you serve. To preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and of this State. All other function of the office you have been entrusted with are discretionary rather than obligatory. Therefore I trust you will give this matter priority.

 The State of Texas has a debt to me. Payment of this debt requires an appropriation of $1,593,000 for payment to Edmund Heimlich in the upcoming session of our Legislature.

 In honor of our Declaration of 1776 – I need to know if this debt is going to be paid; or, do I need to proceed to inform the people of Texas, our Nation, and the world, that Texas is not a land where property or person is safe from unlawful actions of government?

 Additional Background Facts

 Every competent attorney in our Texas knows that – when a Court of Appeals for the State of Texas certified by a MANDATE my innocence with an acquittal finding that I had been unlawfully imprisoned – the Liability of the State of Texas for Remedy was established and no longer subject to question.

 Every competent attorney in our Texas knows that – when a Court of Appeals for the State of Texas certified by a MANDATE – permission to sue the State in a Texas Court has been granted by the Legislature. The only remaining question is the amount of compensation required for the Remedy.

 Every competent attorney in Texas knows that only the finding of damages was then subject to appellate review. No Court had subject-matter jurisdiction to review or reverse any prior finding of the Courts. Review of the finding of the amount of damages was waived by the Attorney General. The FINAL JUDGMENT is FINAL and remains a legal obligation of The State of Texas.

 Every competent attorney in Texas knows the memorandum opinion that has been utilized to obstruct justice is invalid, void, and a legal nullity. The US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Nelson v. Colorado is an additional nullification of the pretense that has been utilized to obstruct justice.

 Unfortunately there are Attorneys, some of whom have secured employment at taxpayer expense, who are incompetent. They believe their job is not to “know” the Law but to “practice” the Law. And that the “practice” of law is a license to misrepresent the facts and misrepresent the law. It is not. To do so is unethical and illegal. If done by an Attorney who is employed as a public servant it is a criminal act under Texas Law as well as an act of treason.

 As someone who was a licensed professional in the State of Texas I know that a license eliminates any excuse of incompetence or, in other words, ignorance of the law. To the contrary it imposes strict liability. Ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse nor is the pretense of arguing about ‘interpretation’ about a Right to Remedy that has been in existence in anglo and anglo-american law for over 800 years !!!.




Those who established Law on our Land of Texas in 1836 wisely included these words in their Declaration of Human Rights that later were incorporated in our Texas Constitution as Article 1, our Bill of Rights. What was “shall never be violated under any pretence whatsoever” became “To guard against transgression of the high powers herein delegated”, these Right are “Excepted from the powers of government; forever to remain inviolate”.


Among these is what is now found in Sec. 13 of Art. 1;All courts shall be open, and every person for an injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law.” It is also established in International Law (a Treaty) as a Human Right. Titled The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is now a part of the supreme Law of our Land. Section 6 of Article 14 provides: When a person has by final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed, ….. The person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated.


Article VI of our United States Constitution provides: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.


The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution



Our US & Texas Constitutions


The 4th of July makes for a good time to remind all of our rights the US Constitution intended to secure to each of us. Often overlooked are those Rights deemed so essential by the authors of our Constitution, Hamilton and Madison, that they were placed in Article 1. They came before the Bill of Rights was added.


Among these is the protection against Ex Post Facto laws.


Here are Hamilton’s exact words from Federalist Paper #84:


The creation of crimes after the commission of the fact, or, in other words, the subjecting of men to punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.


Both our longest serving Governor, Rick Perry, and myself were victims of a disregard for this protection by those who have a sworn duty to know better. The State cannot (legally) make it a crime to use your legal right to veto after you’ve used it. Likewise the State cannot (legally) make it a crime to use your legal right to ask your bank to withhold payment on a check.  But those who act in the name of the State did so and, to date, with absolute impunity.


Another is the prohibition against impairing the obligation of contracts. Contracts are absolutely essential for commerce to flourish. As noted by the Court that reversed the conviction I suffered – I was acting within the boundaries of a legal contract. The person the State assisted in breaching the contract was not. I was the victim but the State chose to aid and abet the perpetrator in the theft of my money and the destruction of my business along with irreparable harm to my reputation. These violations cannot be left unaddressed.

 See The Constitution of the United States of America; Article 1

Section. 10.

No State shall … pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

By allowing those who prosecute Laws in the name of The State of Texas to impose ex post facto laws the Texas Legislature has ‘passed’ their exclusive power to make law to those in the Executive Division who act as the hands of the State.



 Through the publication of my story the WORLD, and the rest of our Nation, will learn how lawless the State of Texas has become. Once they do the flow of investments into Texas will be reversed as will the immigration of those with skills essential for our economy. The economic impact could easily be 100 times the amount due me.

 I can hire an Attorney to say we already know is true and is the Law. I can hire a public relations firm to make my story as well known as the separation of families at the border. But I’d prefer to not go public with my story. I have first hand knowledge of how many people presume guilt whenever someone is charged the State with the commission of a crime. The documentary film will require a lot of work.

 Some even presume guilt after you have been found innocent! Look it up. An ‘acquittal’ is a declaration of innocence. If you did not violate any law how can your innocence be anything other than actual? If the State cannot prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt then what is left? Unreasonable doubt? Only the ignorant, those willing to lie, or those suffering from a bias that blinds them to reason can say my innocence is anything other than actual. Are you going to tell the world that in Texas unreasonable doubt about actual innocence is how individuals are judged?

 I’m now 63. The damage to the reputation of the State of Texas, and it’s public officials, will be substantial. What I might suffer from the publicity will be insignificant and pale in comparison to the damage to YOUR reputation, the reputation of the institution of which you are a part, our Legislature, and the reputation of our State of Texas. Rather that suffer from any refusal by you to honor your oath and perform your duty I will profit from the movie.

 I trust that all of you will get together and do the right thing. I expect to hear from you within a week to 10 days.

 Best Regards, Ed Heimlich 512-779-0234




The  following information is mandated by the Law that is binding on the Attorney General, and all of his assistants, as lawyers, and those of the Legislative Counsel or employed elsewhere in our government.


Rule 3.03 Candor Toward the Tribunal


(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:


(1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal;


(2) fail to disclose a fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act;


(4) fail to disclose to the tribunal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or


(5) offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false.


(b) If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall [no discretion] make a good faith effort to persuade the client to authorize the lawyer to correct or withdraw the false evidence. If such efforts are unsuccessful, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including disclosure of the true facts.

  1. The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) continue until remedial legal measures are no longer reasonably possible.


Ken Paxton, as supervising lawyer, has a duty to inform the tribunal, known as the Texas Legislature, of the misrepresentations of law and misrepresentations of fact made by those in the office of the AG prior to his assumption of the position.


Ken Paxton, as supervising lawyer, also has a duty to inform our Legislators of the assistance of the lawyers in the Office of the Attorney General in the criminal and fraudulent act of Robert Pemberton as a Judge in the Third Court of Appeals.


Texas Penal Code:


(a) A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly:

(1) violates a law relating to the public servant’s office or employment;

(b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor.


Texas Government Code:


(d) Each attorney is subject to the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure and the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.


See also Federal Law:


Title 42 USC § 1986. Action for neglect to prevent;


Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of this title, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action;


Title 42 USC Sec. 1985. Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights


(2) Obstructing justice;

or if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;


In Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000), the Supreme Court recognized an equal protection claim based on a “class of one.” [Taken from Opinion released by the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 5, 2007, No. 06-50305, Dr. Stotter v. UTSA, Bailey & Johnson]


(3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges

If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire ….on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or

Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws;


or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators.


The Supreme Court later clarified that if the deprivation was authorized by the state and the state had an opportunity to provide some type of pre-deprivation remedy, failure to do so implicates the due process clause. Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 127-30 (1990). [Taken from Opinion released by the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 5, 2007, No. 06-50305, Dr. Stotter v. UTSA, Bailey & Johnson]