Nevertheless, the profession of lawyers aka attorneys, must be repressed with prejudice. This author’s suggested course of action involves removing the source of revenue that the ever growing attorney hoard relies upon for sustenance.
At the founding of this country, there was a great need for the profession of lawyers. Simply, the literacy rate and average learnedness of the population was such that rank and file Americans were ill equipped to represent themselves in court in either civil or criminal matters.
But in the Age of the internet, and the attainment of a high literacy rate, the only reason most people with a high school degrees need a lawyer to represent them is because of the deliberately obtuse, complicated manner with which the rules of law is recorded.
Anybody who has represented themselves in court, or who has been deliberately betrayed by their attorney, is familiar with the unnecessarily complex manner the law, and its rules, are set down in writing. (On top of that, our Courts have signed off on forcing WE THE PEOPLE to pay for electronic and written access to the Rules of Law via such companies as LexisNexis and WestLaw. Shouldn’t our tax dollars at least afford WE THE PEOPLE with free and easy access to our Rules of Law?)
[Article Continues below almost universal translator]
Vertaal na Afrikaans |Translate në shqip | ترجمةإلىالعربية | Թարգմանելհայերեն| Azərbaycan Tərcümə | Euskal Translate| Перавесці на беларускай| বাংলাঅনুবাদ | Превод на български| Traduir al català | 转换为中文（简体)|翻譯到中國（傳統） | Prevedi na hrvatskom | Translate to Czech | Oversæt til dansk | Te vertalen naar het Nederlands | Tõlgi eesti | Isalin sa Filipino sa| Käännä Suomen | Traduire en français | Traducir a Galego | თარგმნეთსაქართველოს| Übersetzen auf Deutsch | Μετάφραση στα ελληνικά| ગુજરાતીઅનુવાદ | Tradui kreyòl ayisyen | תרגוםעברית | सेहिन्दीअनुवाद| Fordítás magyar | Þýða til Íslenska | Terjemahkan ke bahasa Indonesia| Aistrigh go Gaeilge| Traduci in italiano | 日本語に翻訳| ಕನ್ನಡಗೆಭಾಷಾಂತರಿಸಿ | 한국어번역| Translate to Latine | Tulkot uz latviešu | Latvian Tulkot uz latviešu| Versti į lietuvių| Преведете на македонски| Terjemah ke Bahasa Malaysia| Ittraduċi għall-Malti| Oversette til norsk |ترجمهبهفارسی| Przekłada się na polskim | Traduzir para Português | Traduceţi în română |Перевести на русскую|Преведи на Српском | Preložiť na slovenský |Prevedi v slovenski | Traducir al español | Tafsiri kwa Kiswahili | Översätt till svenska | தமிழ்மொழிபெயர்க்கவும்| తెలుగులోఅనువదించడానికి | แปลเป็นไทย| Çevir Türkçe>| Перекласти українською| اردومیںترجمہکریں | Dịch cho người Việt Nam| Cyfieithu i'r Gymraeg | איבערזעצןצוייִדיש |
Latin words, Court Rules, and Case Law create a gut wrenching “Simon Says” legal environment. The Law should be overwhelmingly common sense, yet no civil litigant, nor a defendant in the criminal manners, can be certain “Simon Says” gotcha mistake will not cost them their case.
And all the lawyers reading this will retort, “That is why you need a lawyer!”
To which this author responds with the pragmatic rejoinder, “Who can afford a lawyer?”
The Rule of Law must be reduced t concise, simple English writing in one place for the following reasons:
1) A person who cannot afford a lawyer should at least be able to easily understand the Rule of Law upon which his case depends;
2) WE THE PEOPLE should not have to WASTE money on attorneys just because they have deliberately written the law to be obtuse and confusing;
3) The Government uses the overly complex code of law to hide things that WE THE PEOPLE would otherwise object to;
4) WE THE PEOPLE cannot know if the pronounced judgments of any Court are just and Consistent with the Rule of Law and Natural Law, if rank and file Americans cannot understand the Code of Laws;
5) Lawyers and judges are not ethical. ( See Minnesota A10-1205 Fabian, May and Anderson PLLP v Volkommer – Lawyers Code of Professional Conduct (aka Code of ethics) not an implied covenant of a contract between an Minnesota Lawyer and their Client(s) In other words, Lawyers are not required to treat their clients ethically. Also See – Why you should never hire a Minnesota Lawyer! http://bit.ly/Avq9N7 )
Quite simply, 90% of the time both civil litigants and criminal defendants would not need a lawyer if the rules of law were written concisely in simple English in perhaps up to 5 documents:
1. Federal Civil Rules
2. Federal Criminal Rules
3. State Civil Rules
4. State Criminal Rules
5. State Family Law Rules
Currently Laws and Rules that apply to Court Proceedings (other than those found in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights) come from a wide and confusing variety of sources.
1) Case Law;
2) Court Rules of Procedure in many different varieties, Local rules, Civil Rules, Criminal rules, family law rules, state Appellate rules, Federal Appellate Rules;
1) CASE LAW
Case Law is that element of Judicial Rules that allows Judicial Activism. Bridle Case Law and you put massive constraint upon the activism of Federal and State Judges.
Case Law simply is the source of citations from previous court case which demonstrate that a previous court has ruled a certain way on a certain matter previously;
Here is an example of a Case Law Citation we will refer to as “Bong hits for Jesus”:
Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007) was a school speech case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from suppressing student speech, at a school-supervised event, that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use http://bit.ly/AbJl7H
Whole Law Libraries are filled with books on case law. Currently, Hundreds, if not thousands of secondary law books and paid websites are necessary, to try to make rhyme and reason out of this mishmash of Case Law. And what rank and file citizen even knows they exist, let alone how to make sense out of them? These whole libraries can be reduced to 3 documents for each State Judiciary and 2 documents for the Federal Judiciary via this authors plan.
Further, there is conflicting Case Law. Unscrupulous lawyers and judges, preying on the unknowing masses can use one case law citation to justify one way of ruling in one case, and another conflicting case law ruling to rule another way in a different case even though the matters are essentially the same. [Do you think whether the supporting or adverse citation is used by the judge depends on the size of the gift? (see Minnesota Court Rules aka bribe – A Rose by any other name would still smell as sweet)]
2) COURT RULES OF PROCEDURE
There are many different varieties of Court Rules of Procedure:
A) Local Rules;
B) Civil Rules;
C) Criminal Rules;
D) Family Law Rules;
E) State Appellate Rules;
F) Federal Appellate Rules;
Instead of being able pick up one set of rules, learn it once and then being able to have a general sense of what to expect every time you are in court, the Courts have decided to have many different sets of rules with thousands of “Simon Says” nuances.
Reducing the number of various Court Rules of Procedure and standardizing them would be much more conducive to rank and file Americans with a high school education representing themselves.
The most fundamental rules for litigation come from the Founding Documents and Legislation, Legislation being far more organic and evolutionary. Legislation regarding the Judiciary is approved by the respective Federal and State Legislators. WE THE PEOPLE would prefer Judicial Legislation was actually drafted by our elected legislators, but they are too lazy. They cast it off to their Bureaucrats and Apparatchiks who ultimately are constrained and controlled by the input and whims of judges and lawyers.
Nevertheless, this author would propose that all of the rules of the respective Federal and State Courts be passed as Legislation
Each respective Federal and State Legislature would be required to take all the Case Law and Court Rules and compile them as legislation. States would have Criminal, Civil and Family Legislation and the Federal Courts would have Civil and Criminal Legislation.
During the compiling of this legislation, various concepts and procedures would be standardized.
Conflicting Case Law Rulings would be resolved.
From the point of the passage of that legislation forward there would be only 2 places to research and cite for use in any litigation.
Those 2 sources being said Judicial Legislation and Case Law which has transpired since the last Legislative update.
Federal and State Legislatures would be required to meet every 5 or 10 years to incorporate new interim case law into the legislation.
Finally, the greatest reason for simplifying and consolidating the Rule of Law, the Rules of the Courts and Case Law is the first principle the Father’s invoked in creating our Founding Documents and Government:
“The fundamental understanding our US Founding Fathers had in drafting our constitution, is People under Natural Law have free will, and are not virtuous by nature. Therefore, governments must be constructed in anticipation of the nature of man. Acting on this knowledge, our Founding Fathers built into our Government and Constitution, various checks and balances.
Amongst these checks and balances were transparency and accountability.” http://bit.ly/nLIqPn
How can WE THE PEOPLE, the rank and file citizens of America, hold our Government and Judicial accountable if we cannot even understand our Country’s Code of Laws and Judicial Rules.
Those were my thoughts,
Thank you, my fellow citizens, for taking your valuable time to read and reflect upon what is written here.
Please join with me in mutually pledging to each other and our fellow citizens our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to our mutual endeavors of restoring liberty and economic opportunity to WE THE PEOPLE as our Founding Fathers envisioned and intended. [Last
This article is written with the same intentions as Thomas Paine http://ushistory.org/paine. I seek no leadership role. I seek only to help the American People find their own way using their own “Common Sense” http://amzn.to/kbRuar
Keep Fighting the Good Fight!
The Cynical Patriot
End the Fed(eral Reserve Bank System)
Justice in Minnesota #JIM
Bring Home the Politicians #BHTP
Get out of our House #GOOOH
Critical Thinking Notice - This author advises you as no politician would dare. Exercise Critical Thinking (http://bit.ly/ubI6ve) in determining the truthfulness of anything you read or hear. Do not passively accept nor believe anything anyone tells you, including this author... unless and until you verify it yourself with sources you trust and could actively defend your perspective to anyone who might debate you to the contrary of your perspective.