A government of, for and by the people threw off the nobility of the England, but the yoke has again been put on us by a mere union – the lawyers bar. And it is crystal clear when one considers that to be an appointed judge; one must first be a member of the bar for some years; the only importance of which is to learn the procedure that prevails today in place of sustenance. It even reaches to the U. S. Supreme Court. If you doubt it, consider the “commerce clause” that is the alleged source of authority for many statutes we detest. The commerce clause came about and was a driving force for the constitutional convention, because the states were trying to tax one another as was seen in the NY & NJ battles over ferrying rights.

Article III, section 2 of the constitution reads, “The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority…” Nothing in the constitution gives the courts the right to make law. That has not deterred the court from expanding on the commerce clause far beyond its original intent. For example, the Roosevelt administration enacted a law requiring an allocation from the Agricultural department for producing certain crops. In Wickard v. Filburn, the court not only did not hold the law unconstitutional, but instead ruled that the farmer, who was growing wheat on his own land for his own use had violated the law, because he was disturbing the “stream of commerce’’. The court has grown the commerce clause into the monster that has eaten our economy, spawning numerous laws that have no legitimacy under constitutional scrutiny. The Clean Air Act, The Clean Water Act, and even the Obamacare foray into single payer socialized medicine are but a few of the examples of statutes lacking constitutional authority, but claiming cover under the Supreme Court expansion of the commerce clause.

None of this could happen without the tacit approval of the bar. Despite their oath to protect and defend the constitution, lawyers have doggedly pursued court rulings as if they were law. Why? It makes their job a mystery to the laity because the laity does not have ready access to the court rulings. When one looks at the plain language of the constitution and when in doubt refers to the original intent that is easily obtained by asking for it at the library of congress, one realizes that the bar has hoodwinked the people. This is somewhat surprising because the law schools teach that “case law” is not law, but may be persuasive. To be persuasive it must be vey nearly congruent and one must accept the notion of “stare decisis”; the legal doctrine that says once decided a matter should not be upset. Is it any wonder that Shakespeare said, “First kill all the lawyers?” He was more prescient than more modern playwrights. He must turn in his grave reading legal briefs today that are larded with citations to case law, with rarely reference to the constitution that is in fact the supreme law of the land as stated in Article VI, clause 2 of the constitution.

Can we reverse this terrible state of affairs? While we still have the ballot, we can elect members of congress who will pass legislation requiring the courts to adhere only to the plain language of the constitution and the original intent of the founders. Congress can also specifically overturn the commerce clause beyond the original purpose of preventing the states from taxing each other. Indeed, if the commerce clause is restored to its original purpose, we could buy health insurance in any state, increase competition, enhance the free market and save people countless dollars. But the bottom line is the voters need to wake up and put the fifth column in its place by voting for people who will support the constitution.