Two perspectives of law, the "textbook" paralegal and the "out of the box" constitutionalist
I have a friend that is a paralegal. She went to school , became certified and i did not, but one thing we have in common is our passion for law. For her, i believe it is because it was a professional choice, for me, it was passion that resulted from the realization that something went seriously wrong in this country. I admire her for her choice and she admires me for my passion. We often find ourselves hotly debating issues and must continue to remind each other not to take personal.
My friend desires to be an attorney some day and i do not, at least not whom they (not them personally) the association itself and the control they possess have become.
In one of our debates she stated attorneys are and control law. I told her that if this was so, that it was unlawful in that they were never given the authority.
One because the power of government is inherent in the people and governments were to be servants to the people.
Two, Judges were merely referees between two parties in conflict
Three, informed juries control and apply the written law and have the power to nullify any law against any attorney or judge.
I reminded her that the power is inherent in the people. The constitution was written by and for the people to limit government to enumerated powers, they were constrained by the constitution to preserve the rights of the people not to control anything but to prevent one, the government, from controlling the other, the people.
As I debate people, i realize how foreign the principles of freedom have become in this country and how easy we have been misled and have come to allow government to have powers it was never meant to have.
I did tell her she was right that today, attorneys, the judges and the BAR all ARE and control law, which proves one or two things to me, either they know the constitution and willingly subvert it or they have no clue what it is or how to apply it becaue they swore and oath they don’t understand to a document they don’t understand because they never understood the history behind why they were written.
Because she was curious about what i knew, I explained to her my understanding of the original intent of the principles of freedom enshrined in our freedom documents that she stated she had never heard explained this way..
The federal constitution applies to federal citizens
federal law applies to federal citizens through the 14th amendment ( the creation of this amendment with the 13 and 15 was specifically for slaves only)
State constitutions apply to state citizens
State laws apply to state citizens( as long as not repugnant to the constitution)
The federal government and the supreme court exceeds its jurisdiction when it applies it laws upon the states
The states improperly adhere to laws made by congress because these laws only apply to fed citizens and not those of the state.
The Bill of Rights is a declaration written with the express purpose of preventing the federal government to exceed its authority upon the states ( because it protects state sovereignty)
The Bill of Rights does not prevent the states from writing laws nor protect the citizens from the laws imposed by the states because each state had their own bill of rights called the Declaration of rights (this maintained their state sovereignty)
The thing about todays legal education that is detrimental is that we have forgotten a few things. We must remember:
The colonists came to America to seek freedom from an oppresive king so they were extremely worried about any government or tyrant telling them what they could and could not do, which is why our constitutional republic was built on an experiment of “self government” meaning that the more we could self govern, the less government would be needed.
It was understood that our Rights were unalieable from a Creator,God, that no man could take them away but today we are taught that government tells us what our rights are ( including the right to self representation in court) which as you can see if contrary to the principles of our form of govenrment because it puts the freedom of the people in the hands of a government entity, the BAR which no longer renders people the inherent authority to control it which is why the documents were created in the first place, to protect us from oppresive government!
I told her that the American people have been sold a pack of lies from the pit of hell and all Im trying to do is tell them.
With my life and every living breath I live to do my part to restore these lost principles because i know the future of this nation hangs in the balance between perpetual ignorance and that remote possibility of this restoration.
I stated that If my understanding of these principles is incorrect I could stand to be enlightened and if it isn't, perhaps i may suggest that these principles would be considered and possibly instituted as our present form of government and perhaps used to restore the principles of freedom back to the people!
As i become more and more concerned about the direction of this nation and my passion to restore freedom, i continue to challenge legal minds as a means to that end with the hope that if i am wrong i may be corrected and if i am right, that the enlightening of others brings this desired restoration for us and our posterity.
I am honored to have friends that can debate the issues one one hand but are still able to listen to the opposing argument on the other. I am still working on being a better listener than a talker but i guess thats all part of that passion.