Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Separation Of Powers – Part 1

"Difficult times such as these have always tested our fidelity to the core democratic values of openness, government accountability, and the rule of law.
The Court fully understands and appreciates that the first priority of the executive branch in a time of crisis is to ensure the physical security of its citizens. By the same token, the first priority of the judicial branch must be to ensure that our Government always operates within the statutory and constitutional constraints which distinguish a democracy from a dictatorship."
-- recent opinion in Center For Nat. Security Studies v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 2002 WL 1773067 D.D.C.,2002. Aug. 2, 2002

-----------------------------------

Lawyers are lifetime members of the Judiciary. They retain that position unless they are disbarred. When a lawyer becomes a member of the legislative or executive branch, the individual is either still related to some law firm or can become part of some law firm.

As lawyers in the legislatures they belong to and also constitute the Legislative Branch of the Government. In seeking to be in a second branch of Government such as the Judiciary or Executive branch they have a conflict of interest. In doing so, they violate the principal of the separation of powers of the different branches. Legislatures are comprised to a large degree of lawyers. They in turn confirm the judges who are appointed to the Judiciary who rule on the law. The lawyers can then practice law before the very judges they confirmed. So now, lawyers, confirm judges, who then as judges, confirm the laws constitutionality that the confirming lawyers pass in the legislature. And around we go again.

Lawyers and the law firms all benefit from laws that are passed by the Legislatures. The more laws passed, the more income they make by representing parties who are affected by these laws. And since the justices are elected in partisan races, their campaigns largely funded by law firms that practice before the court. In essence, they are buying favoritism with judges.

Historically, lawyers publicly show support for all judges. It's not a good employment move to challenge the person who is going to make that ruling you live and breathe for.

The following series of articles will present a comprehensive argument of why the present alimony laws violate the separation of powers.

INTERESTING READING
* Female Murderers Seen in a Different Light: Society Prefers to View Violent Women as Victims By Glenn Sacks
* Here’s a slick tactic you might want to consider using when asked questions in a court hearing or trial.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* Barrister Books. Legal textbooks for the more legal minded.

CASE LAW USED IN SUPPORT OF ABOLISHING ALIMONY
* Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321, (Fla. 2004) - A law permitting the governor to stay the court-ordered removal of a feeding tube enacted after the order had been rendered was an unconstitutional invasion of the separation of powers.

EXAMPLES OF A JUDICIAL SYSTEM GONE AWRY:
* Bad Judges And What To Do About Them

HOW THINGS ARE HANDLED IN OTHER COUNTRIES:
* India: Wife to pay alimony
* Israel: Same gender bias as the U.S.

RELATED WEBSITES OF INTEREST:
* Divorce Source: Divorce Research Center - Alimony

ASSET PROTECTION FROM ALIMONY PROCEEDINGS:
* Offshore Trust Accounts

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

>