A constitution and a charter are two different things, regardless of someone's opinion piece. The constitution is a constitution, it is not a public or corporate charter. Your premise then that a judge (or other judicial officer) is a trustee of a public civil trust is untenable.
A post is a post and is not a pillar and a spoon is a spoon and a fork is a fork. A constitution is a constitution and a charter is a charter, even though the charter for a corporation is in function the same as a "law of the land", and it's no law of the land when it's for a Corporation. Virgina Corporation? The commonwealth? The Mayflower Company? Do you even commerce Bro?
We know who the Sovereign is, and we know the numerous Trusts set up.
http://annavonreitz.com/roleofthetrustee.pdf
The Country you talk about is either a Federation or Confederation of States, and in reality, not in what you believe, they are all corporations and even if they weren't they wouldn't have the authority of a sovereigns pinky finger because without consent there is No Law, only Tyranny.
A Pilar vs A post.