If we had our laws written in common english, not legalese, why would we need judges to "explain" them for us? In the process we now have, they have granted themselves power they never should have been given. If we adhered to common law in our courts, spoken in common english, we would not need barristers to run the show. Common law has …
If we had our laws written in common english, not legalese, why would we need judges to "explain" them for us? In the process we now have, they have granted themselves power they never should have been given. If we adhered to common law in our courts, spoken in common english, we would not need barristers to run the show. Common law has the advantage of developing as the culture changes and would not require jury nullification, which I see as something we need a lot more of today to take our laws back from barristry which has stolen it from us
If we had our laws written in common english, not legalese, why would we need judges to "explain" them for us? In the process we now have, they have granted themselves power they never should have been given. If we adhered to common law in our courts, spoken in common english, we would not need barristers to run the show. Common law has the advantage of developing as the culture changes and would not require jury nullification, which I see as something we need a lot more of today to take our laws back from barristry which has stolen it from us
Well said, but unfortunately, it would be the Foxes (Judges), who would decide if we changed the formatting so the Hens could run the Hen House.
I do like the idea of eliminating at least these Federal Judge positions.