Judicial cult is not ordained
“Wow!” is the word. On July 15, I read the Geauga Times Courier that came in my mailbox, and there were a number of letters to the editor which seemed to be about the same thing: the silencing of comments from the common man, the regular citizen, by the Geauga Park Board, due process and how it all relates to the U.S. Constitution.
I immediately thought of one of my pet-peeve topics, when I ponder the current state of things in the United States: the philosophical flaws and ideologically obsolete influences on our third branch of government, the judicial, at all levels, from federal to local.
My response to the numerous complaints about constitutional principles should be taken as general, because I usually write in to the editor about our nation’s child-welfare system, also directly influenced by the judicial branch.
I am asking you who read these letters to the editor to consider the fact that our third branch of government was not created by our nation’s founders. It was a transferred model from the English Common Law, which came from the King’s Court, way back in the Middle Ages. So, what can we expect from a tradition stemming from a belief that certain people were ordained by God to lord over others as royalty?
As my mom has said over the years about a number of situations, “What do you expect from a pig but a grunt?”
Why the “Your Honor,” the flowing robes, the oftentimes undeserved deference to the will of tyrannical judges? I challenge all who are wondering to research the roots of our judicial system.
We created a nation based on a truly revolutionary principle for that time, one where we asserted that “all men are created equal.” I think we forget just how radical a statement that was. Our new nation wasn’t perfect, and freedom has been expanded over our 240 years, because, let us be honest, we left many people out in the beginning.
As we contemplate making America better, making our states, our counties, our cities better, we should not be defensive about challenging certain traditions and institutions. Correctly identifying problems is one step to effectively solving them. Examining fundamentally flawed thinking can be a step in solving certain problems.
In America, we do not believe God ordained a certain class of people to rule over us and be given deference. In America, we are all supposed to have First Amendment rights to free speech. However, one of the rights lawyers give up when they swear their oaths as officers of the courts is their precious First Amendment right to speak freely about real problems they see. They are forced, under threat of penalty, which could mean jail, not to speak the truth they often see right before their eyes.
I believe our judicial branch of government is actually a cult carried over from merry old England. If one does not want to go that far, examining some of the traditions and beliefs as cult like is a step toward realizing how un-American some of the underlying principles are.
I have spoken to lawyers who admit that there are judges who regularly behave like monarchs, and they can do little or nothing to change the system they have to work in every day. So it will be up to regular citizens to question, to write letters, to ask for changes.
Robin Neff, Chardon