{"id":3296,"date":"2016-01-17T19:00:54","date_gmt":"2016-01-17T19:00:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=3296"},"modified":"2018-06-06T17:06:20","modified_gmt":"2018-06-06T17:06:20","slug":"we-are-a-democratic-republic","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=3296","title":{"rendered":"Legal Precepts Adopted into U.S. Law from Europe:"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To begin to comprehend how <\/em>the legal system is wired together, a effective term to begin<\/em> by defining<\/span> is:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

jurisprudence<\/span>:<\/span>
\n<\/strong><\/span>n<\/em>. (17c)<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Originally<\/strong> (in the 18th century)<\/span>, the study of the first principles of<\/span> the natural law<\/a>,<\/span> the civil law<\/a>, or<\/span> the law of nations<\/a>. <\/span><\/strong>\u2014 aka<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>jurisprudentia naturalis<\/span><\/em><\/strong>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

2. More modernly, the study of the general or fundamental elements of a particular legal\u00a0system, as opposed to its practical and concrete details.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

3. The study of legal systems in general.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

4. Judicial precedents considered collectively.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

5. In German literature, the\u00a0whole of legal knowledge.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

6. A system, body, or division of law.<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0[1]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 Through the Constitution, the government granted itself judicial power over all cases in<\/span> law<\/a> and<\/em> <\/span>equity<\/a><\/strong>, while also extending its jurisdiction over several\u00a0types\u00a0<\/em>of cases:<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Article III Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u201cThe judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court<\/a>, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish<\/a>. The Judges, both of the supreme<\/a> and inferior Courts<\/a>, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law<\/a> and Equity<\/a>, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties<\/a> made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;\u2014to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;\u2014to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction<\/a>;\u2014to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;\u2014to Controversies between two or more States;\u2014between a State and Citizens of another State;\u2014between Citizens of different States;\u2014between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong> [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

An Amalgamation of Legal Systems:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The structure of the U.S. legal system is, historically, an amalgamation of various legal systems<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0[3]<\/span><\/span>\u00a0such as<\/span> Roman (civil law)<\/a>, Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) common law<\/a>,<\/span> international law<\/a>, Haudenosauneean (Iroquoian) Law<\/a>, and others, which became enhanced and unified via the <\/span><\/span>adoption<\/span>\u00a0of the Bill of Rights which was embedded into the design construct of the Constitutional Republic in order to eventually<\/em> secure the “inalienable rights” of all people.\u00a0 At a time when separately developed legal systems were each competing for a foothold in the new government, Thomas Jefferson, for instance, wrote at length about the precepts within the<\/span>\u00a0Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) common law<\/a>\u00a0so that people in the future would have access to legal tools they would otherwise not have access to.\u00a0 For instance,\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/strong>in a<\/span>\u00a0letter to political reformer John Cartwright, 5 June 1824<\/a>\u00a0he stated:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u201c<\/span>I was glad to find in your book\u2026 of the Judiciary usurpation of legislative powers; for such the judges have usurped in their repeated decisions that Christianity is a part of the Common law. the proof of the contrary which you have adduced is incontrovertible, to wit, that\u2026<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>(continued in the below graphic)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u2026<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>(continued)<\/em>\u2026 but it may amuse you to show when, and by what means they stole this law in upon us. in a case ofQuare impedit<\/em><\/a>\u00a0in the year-book 24. H. 6. folio. 38. [anno 1458.]\u2026<\/span>\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>[4]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

********************************************<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This brings us to the first <\/em>legal structure we shall analyze here:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

common-law<\/span><\/a> – body of royal decrees, customs, and judicial decisions based on moral reason instead of statutes or constitutions developed especially between 5th century following the conquest of Rome by the<\/span> Germanic Barbarian tribes<\/a> through <\/em>the conquest of England by French Norsemen (“Normans”) in 1066 A.D.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

********************************************<\/span><\/p>\n

Next Law System:<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The Democratic Republic
\nand The Right to Vote<\/em>:<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Although\u00a0the term \u201cdemocracy\u201d is not written within The Constitution of The United\u00a0States,\u00a0the “right to vote” appears\u00a0five<\/em>\u00a0times.\u00a0 In fact, four\u00a0<\/em>separate Amendments \u2013 the 15th<\/sup>, 19th<\/sup>, 24th<\/sup>, and 26th<\/sup>\u00a0\u2013 use the same powerful language to protect it: \u201c<\/span>The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged….<\/span>\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>[5]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Spawned from a Conflict of Interests:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The states faced serious and complicated questions about how to make their rules once they declared themselves to be\u00a0no longer colonies.<\/em> \u00a0What did it mean to replace royal authority with institutions based on popular rule?\u00a0 How was “POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY<\/span>” (the idea that the people were the highest authority) to be institutionalized in the new state governments?\u00a0 For that matter, who were “the people”?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Every state chose to answer these questions in different ways based on distinctive local experiences, but in most cases colonial traditions were continued, but modified, so that the\u00a0GOVERNOR<\/span>\u00a0(the executive) lost significant power, while the\u00a0ASSEMBLIES<\/span>\u00a0(the legislative branch, which represented the people most directly) became much more important.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Pennsylvania formed a “Pure Democracy”:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Pennsylvania created the most radical state constitution of the period.\u00a0 Following the idea of popular rule to its logical conclusion, Pennsylvania created a state government with several distinctive features.\u00a0 First, the\u00a0PENNSYLVANIA CONSTITUTION OF 1776\u00a0<\/span>abolished\u00a0PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS<\/span>\u00a0for voting as well as for holding office.\u00a0 If you were an adult man who paid taxes, then you were allowed to vote or even to run for office.\u00a0 This was a dramatic expansion of who was considered a political person, but other aspects of the new state government were even more radical. Pennsylvania also became a “UNICAMERAL<\/span>” government where the legislature only had one body. Furthermore, the office of the governor was entirely eliminated.\u00a0 Radicals in Pennsylvania observed that the governor was really just like a small-scale king and that an upper legislative body <\/strong>(like the House of Lords in Parliament)<\/em> was supposed to represent wealthy men and aristocrats.\u00a0 Rather than continue those forms of government, the Pennsylvania constitution decided that “the people” could rule most effectively through a single body with complete legislative power.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Many conservative Patriots met Pennsylvania’s new design with horror.\u00a0 When John Adams described the Pennsylvania constitution, he only had bad things to say. To him it was “<\/span>so democratical that it must produce confusion and every evil work.<\/span>”\u00a0 Clearly, popular rule did not mean sweeping democratic changes to all Patriots.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

South Carolina formed an Oligarchical Government:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0SOUTH CAROLINA’S STATE CONSTITUTION<\/span>\u00a0of 1778 created new rules at the opposite end of the political spectrum from Pennsylvania.\u00a0 In South Carolina, white men had to possess a significant amount of property to vote, and they had to own even more property to be allowed to run for political office.\u00a0 In fact, these property requirements were so high that 90 percent of all white adults were prevented from running for political office!<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0This dramatic limitation of who could be an elected political leader reflected a central tradition of 18th-century Anglo-American political thought.\u00a0 Only individuals who were financially independent were believed to have the self-control to make responsible and reasonable judgments about public matters.\u00a0 As a result poor white men, all women, children, and African Americans <\/strong>(whether free or slave)<\/em> were considered too dependent on others to exercise reliable political judgment.\u00a0 While most of these traditional exclusions from political participation have been ended in America today, age limitations remain, largely unchallenged.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Massachusetts formed a Republic:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The creation of the\u00a0MASSACHUSETTS STATE CONSTITUTION<\/span>\u00a0of 1780 offered yet another way to answer some of the questions about the role of “the people” in creating a<\/span> republican government<\/a>.\u00a0 When the state legislature presented the voters with a proposed constitution in 1778, it was rejected because the people thought that this was too important an issue for the government to present to the people.\u00a0 If the government could make its own rules, then it could change them whenever it wanted and easily take away peoples’ liberties.\u00a0 Following through on this logic, Massachusetts held a special convention in 1780 where specially elected representatives met to decide on the best framework for the new state government.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0This idea of a special convention of the people to decide important constitutional issues was part of a new way of thinking about popular rule that would play a central role in the ratification of the national Constitution in 1787-1788. <\/strong>[6]<\/span><\/p>\n

The Design Structure of A Republic:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Article IV Section 4:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c<\/span>The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/span>Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them\u00a0<\/span>against Invasion…<\/span>\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

********************************************<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This brings us to the most developed and intricate of the systems which became embedded and seeded the framework of modern U.S. law:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Roman “Civil Republic” State Law<\/em><\/a> <\/span>– a “fixed body of statutes” designed to eliminate crime & secure private property rights.\u00a0 State law consists of two parts:
\n<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n