The Marcellus Williams case is another example of lawyers being willing to let innocent people die, for politics. There are two things to focus on: 1) No lawyer is arguing in favor of jury trials. No lawyer is currently arguing …
EVIL LAWYERS DON’T CARE ABOUT THE INNOCENT – The Innocence Project Racket is a Scam Read more »
Law functions when people can do more harm to others by following law than by breaking it. The separation of powers amounts to channeling people’s natural impulses to harm one another, into checks and balances. So that the law is …
(first five chapters of new book) Courts and legal processes are sprawling, like the genetic code of an organism. They evolved like an organism whose genes were common law, where each participant carries out roles and rituals like a cell …
COURTS ARE A SCAM (You already knew that, this book explains why.) Read more »
CHAPTER 1 You probably expect I am going to say courts are a scam, because they don’t serve the people by doing what the people want. I am going to say the exact opposite. Courts are a scam because they …
COURTS ARE A SCAM – You already knew that, but the reason why is not what you think. Read more »
One could argue people have a natural right to healthcare, and no natural right to a jury trial, because in early American history every person who was sick in the street got attention from someone, and there were many innocent …
The recent Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Rahimi displayed a lack of real-world understanding of the purpose of rights. The Justices spent a lot of time arguing whether you could tell if shooting your girlfriend is a natural right …
The problem with government infringing guns or speech, is that it cannot be done but corruptly. Its legality depends on measuring that corruption. It is not against the outcome that rights are a shield, but against corruption in deciding the …
MARXIST SUPREME COURT MISUNDERSTANDS RIGHTS | WITHOUT DUE PROCESS THERE IS NO LAW Read more »
I saw an old Antonin Scalia interview in which he said that his court invented a new nonsense right to “substantive due process”, to create a right to abortion which did not exist in the Constitution. Far from “substantive due …
Abortion, the New Federalist Hustle, and What is “Substantive Due Process” Read more »
In Trump v. Anderson 23-719, the US Supreme Court had a choice when faced with an action by a state that was authorized by Article II and did not violate Fourteenth Amendment Section 1, but overlapped with a federal interest …
In Hudson v. Michigan, Antonin Scalia wrote of police violating rights without probable cause “it is not credible to assert that internal discipline, which can limit successful careers, will not have a deterrent effect”. Scalia also wrote “the social costs …
Federal Judges Like Scalia Think Imagination Is Evidence Read more »