The Judicial System: Closed Union Shops violating your rights

Dees Illustration

Marti Oakley, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

There are few people these day still having any illusions about the corruption in our judicial system.  As we have seen and heard, our courts are the last place to find justice or to see the rule of law applied.

Our courts, once the last line of defense in legal matters, have become nothing more than government sanctioned racketeering.  Reports of judicial misconduct in virtually every court system in the nation, is not only on the rise, it is being condoned by the silence of the Department of Justice, Congress and state governments.  Even SCOTUS decided that the corruption of the lower courts was not worthy of their superior and divine attention due in part to the high level of corruption in its own court.

They are running closed union shops 

The term “closed shop” is used to signify an establishment, trade or skill which employs only members of the union.  Our courts are closed union shops which are now actively writing new rules (lawmaking) to prevent anyone other than Bar union members from accessing the courts. We are now being told that it is accepted practice for judges to create their own laws, in total disregard for the Constitution or individual rights and protections and with total disregard for established and accepted law.  If this is in fact the case . . . why can’t we create our own common courts that bypass these union shop courts?

After all, the current judicial system no longer adheres to the law and instead operates as independent corporate contractors relying on code and statute or newly created laws they themselves create.  I see no reason why we should have to continue to pay private contractors to violate our rights.

The underlying cause of the blatant judicial misconduct of all kinds is the Bar Association.  This association represents the legal union of law practitioners and works actively to prevent anyone not belonging to their “union” from not only accessing the courts but from assembling a legal defense without paying one of their members’ massive sums of money.  This payment rarely produces a defense worthy of the fees demanded.

The Bar Association in any state cannot issue licenses or permits to conduct business. It cannot issue licenses to practice law. It has however, quite successfully managed to make it virtually impossible to access the courts as judges in court after court refuse to allow anyone not belonging to their closed union shop to defend themselves without first paying one of their union members huge sums of money.  It is  extortion at the very least and racketeering.  These associations are not however, associated with the British Accreditation Registry as some think.

In the United States, some state bar associations are operated by their respective state governments which make membership in their state’s bar association a requirement to practice before that state’s courts; such states are said to have a ‘mandatory’ or ‘integrated bar.’ Membership in such associations is synonymous with being admitted to the bar or being licensed to practice law in that state or being admitted to practice before the courts of that state. The first U.S. state to integrate its bar was North Dakota in 1921. (Read more here)

Passing the “bar” is a requirement in every state before a license to practice law will be issued by the state to ensure that the closed union shop continues unimpeded. Those passing their respective “bar” examines do not take an oath to the Crown or to England, but declare and oath to defend the Constitution of the United States and their states respectively. Of course it is seldom we see an honoring of that oath.

The war against pro se litigants

New laws issued by the Wisconsin Supreme Court effective January, 2011 making pro se litigation virtually impossible:

Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 23.01(1). The rules also list specific activities encompassed by the definition which include but are not limited to:

(1) Giving advice or counsel to others as to their legal rights or the legal rights or responsibilities of others for fees or other consideration.

(2) Selection, drafting, or completion for another entity or person of legal documents or agreements which affect the legal rights of the other entity or person(s).

(3) Representation of another entity or person(s) in a court, or in a formal administrative adjudicative proceeding or other formal dispute resolution process or in an administrative adjudicative proceeding in which legal pleadings are filed or a record is established as the basis for judicial review.

(4) Negotiation of legal rights or responsibilities on behalf of another entity or person(s).

(5) Any other activity determined to be the practice of law by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. SCR 23.01(1).

Number (5) is one of those vaguely written, broadly interpreted to mean what ever they need it to mean whenever they need it to mean something.

Wisconsin isn’t alone:

Several state supreme courts have quietly issued new “rules” that make it illegal (not unlawful) for anyone to help a pro se litigant assemble research or contribute in any way to presenting their case.

These courts however, made no such ruling regarding the use of law clerks and paralegals who routinely are used by bar members to do the actual work required to put a case together.  The object of these unlawful rules is of course, to prevent anyone not belonging to the closed union shop from mounting a suit or defense thereby bypassing back room deal making, pre-determined out comes and most likely out performing bar union members not only in the presentation of their cases, but in actually constructing a law based case that their union opponents weren’t anticipating.  The problem with pro se litigants is not that they are not prepared or up to the task, it is that most times they are far better prepared and knowledgeable about the issue at hand.  Can’t have that!

The job of the courts and judges is only to interpret the law yet we see even SCOTUS creating law from the bench.  We also see wide-spread protectionism as one court protects and upholds the corruption of another.  Across the nation, reports come in regarding the violation of rights and the antics of corrupt judges as they prevent evidence that might refute the states case or the case of another closed union member from being presented or entering into the court record.  Many times, this evidence can and does prove the corruption and/or illegal activity of state agencies and actors, or as is the case in Chemung county, New York, of current and former union members still tied to high profile law firms who have a vested interest in preventing their activities from being exposed.

Jail for judges

As the corruption in our courts mounts we must ask ourselves why we continue to tolerate this system that has clearly outlived any usefulness.  Between the militarization of police departments and the wide-spread corruption of these departments and the corruption in the courts, which is blatant and growing, we have a system in place which has become a menace and a threat to our communities and citizens.

The Department of Justice is a joke and has been for decades.  Our courts systems all the way up to SCOTUS present a clear and present danger to the nation at large.  While our prisons fill with “criminals” who may or may not have committed a crime worthy of incarceration, these black robed criminals walk freely; never held accountable for the abrogation of rights, the rigging of the system, or in many cases, the acceptance of bribery.  We see rights violated, laws broken, new laws made by the judge, denial of presentation of evidence, threats of being jailed for demanding your rights, theft of property, intimidation, harassment, and a total disregard for the law.  All of it emanating from the bench.  So who are the real criminals here?

We need to start jailing judges.  We need to put them in the position of trying to mount a defense and not being allowed to.  We need to subject them to newly created laws that we our selves devised and we need to let them spend several years of their lives in the same prisons they condemned so many others to while we divvy up their assets between a few of our good close friends.

We need to do something.  Personally . . . jail for corrupt judges would just be the beginning.

William Windsor/11 Georgia judges to be investigated
Chemung county corruption
nationwide effort to jail corrupt judges
Definition of bar association in theUS
Closed Union Shops defined
New practice of rule of Law…but only if they say so

Marti Oakley is a political activist and former op-ed columnist for the St Cloud Times in Minnesota. She was a member of the Times Writer’s Group until she resigned in September of 07. She is neither Democrat nor Republican, since neither party is representative of the American people. She says what she thinks, means what she says, and is known for being outspoken. She is hopeful that the American public will wake up to what is happening to our beloved country . . . little of it is left.  Her website is The PPJ Gazette        

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

Be the first to comment on "The Judicial System: Closed Union Shops violating your rights"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.