AGE

Hospitals & Asylums



Attorney General Ethics



To amend Chapter 2 Soldier‟s and Airmen‟s Home, the American Legal System has

failed, lawyers are either behind bars or drunk on power, a civil law system must be

instituted by lowering law school entrance to high school graduates and the bar exam to

BA and terminate the licenses of all lawyers who are elected or appointed to public,

commercial or social office, a Civil-law Amendment III to the Annotated United States

Constitution will establish 4 year terms for federal judges, with a two term limit for

justices, and one year term for chief justice, to repeal the constitutional right to bear arms

and quartering of troops in people‟s homes, to change the name of prosecutor to district

attorney, elect licensed social workers to adjudicate traffic, divorce, mental illness,

substance abuse, tenant-landlord and small claims, and funeral directors to avoid Probate,

to abolish the death penalty, to change the name of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)

to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and transfer to the Food and Drug Administration

(FDA), to change the name of the Court of International Trade of the United States

(CoITUS) to Customs Court (CC), to change the name of the Office of Violence Against

Women to Office of Women‟s Rights and transfer to Social Work Administration (SWA)

when established, to ratify Optional Human Rights Protocols, to transfer the Justice

Assistance Grant (JAG) and other extra-jurisdictional finance entirely to halfway house

programs, primarily financed by up to 7.7% of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

program for poor people on probation and parole, to safely reduce the jail and prison

population to less than 250 per 100,000 residents legal limit within a decade.



Be the Democratic and Republican (DR) prosecution party Dissolved



Ninth Annual Independence Day Draft of 13 August 2011



Art. 1 Judicial Philosophy



§41 The American Legal System

§41a Balance of Prisoners

§41b Civil Law Amendment to the Constitution

§41c Customs Court Amendments

§41d Drugs or Poison?

§41e Independence of the Judiciary

§41f Judiciary Committees

§41g Term Limits



Art. 2 Legal Defenses



§42 Civil Rights

§42a Habeas Corpus

§42b Immunity

§42c Compensation for False Arrest and Torture



219

§42d Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure

§42fe Right to an Attorney

§42f Right to a Fair Trial

§42g Bankruptcy and Insolvency Trials



Art. 3 Questions of International Justice



§43 International Trade Deficit

§43a Undocumented Migration

§43b Accession to the International Criminal Court



Art. 4 Human Rights



§44 Council on Human Rights

§44a High Commissioner of Human Rights

§44b Human Rights Committee

§44c Committee on Migrant Workers

§44d Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

§44e Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women

§44f Committee on the Rights of the Child

§44g Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

§44h Committee against Torture



Art. 5 International Courts



§45 International Bar Association

§45a International Court of Arbitration

§45b International Court of Justice

§45c International Criminal Court



Art. 6 Regional Courts



§46 European Court of Justice

§46a Inter-American Court of Human Rights

§46b African Court of Human and People’s Rights

§46c Islamic Court of Justice



Art. 7 US Courts



§47 Supreme Court of the United States

§48 American Bar Association

§49 Federal Judiciary

§49a Circuit Court of Appeal

§49b District Court

§49c Bankruptcy Court

§49d US Sentencing Commission



220

§50 Tax Court

§51 Customs Court

§52 Court of Federal Claims



Art. 8 Ministry of Justice



§53 Department of Justice

§53a Office of the Attorney General

§53b Office of the Deputy Attorney General

§53c Office of the Associate Attorney General

§53d Office of the Solicitor General



Art. 9 Offices



§54 Office of Legal Counsel

§54a Office of Legislative Affairs

§54b Office of Professional Responsibility

§54c Office of Legal Policy

§54d Office of Public Affairs

§54e Office of the Pardon Attorney

§54f Office of Intelligence Policy Review



Art. 10 Executives



§55 Executive Office for Immigration Review

§55a Community Relations Service

§55b Executive Office for US Attorneys

§55c Executive Office for US Trustees

§55d INTERPOL

§55e Community Oriented Policing Services

§55f Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

§55g United States Parole Commission



Art. 11 Programs



§56 Office of Justice Programs

§56a National Institute of Justice

§56b Bureau of Justice Statistics

§56c Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

§58d Bureau of Justice Assistance



Art. 12 Divisions



§57 Justice Divisions

§57a Anti-Trust Division

§57b Civil Division



221

§57c Civil Rights Division

§57d Criminal Division

§57e Environment and Natural Resources Division

§57f Tax Division

§57g Justice Management Division



Art. 13 Armed Forces



§58 Federal Bureau of Investigation

§58a Bureau of Prisons

§58b United States Marshall Service



Art. 14 State Courts



§59 State Supreme Courts

§59a County Courts

§59b Criminal Division

§59c Civil Division

§59d Traffic Division

§59e Municipal Court

§59f Juvenile Court

§59g Appellate Court



Art. 15 Social Division



§60 Probate Court

§60a Family Court

§60b Mental Health Court

§60c Drug Court



Art. 16 Employees



§61 Clerk

§62 Police

§63 Pre-Trial

§64 District Attorney

§65 Public Defender

§66 Prisoners

§67 Judges

§68 Probation and Parole

§69 Witnesses

§70 Jurists









222

Fig. 2.1: Adult Correctional Population 1980-2006

Fig. 2.2: Direct Expenditures of Criminal Justice by Function 1982-2004

Fig. 2.3: Direct Expenditure by Level of Government 1982-2004

Fig. 2.4: State by State Detention and Community Corrections Estimates 2005

Fig. 2.5: Cost of Bankruptcy Proceedings in Selected Economies

Fig. 2.6: International Trade in millions of $ and number of Detainees 1980-2005



Bibliography



Art. 1 Judicial Philosophy



§41 The American Legal System



A.This Chapter replaces Title 24 US Code Chapter 2 §41-70 Soldier‟s and Airmen‟s

Home that has been completely repealed by Pub. L. 101-510, Div. A, Title Xv, Sec. 1532

of Nov. 5, 1990 104 Stat. 1733; Pub. L. 101-189, Div. A, Title Iii, Sec. 347, Nov. 29,

1989, 103 Stat. 1422; Pub. L. 94-454, Sec. 2, Oct. 2, 1976, 90 Stat. 1518 and Aug. 10,

1956, Ch. 1041, Sec. 53, 70a Stat. 641. This Act may be cited as the Socializing Civil

Law Act.



1.The primary objective of this Chapter is to bring the U.S. incarceration rate below the

legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 pursuant to Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632

of 24 June 2004 as applied in Brown, Governor of California, et al v. Marciana & Plata

et al USSC No. 09–1233 of May 23, 2011 when the Court ordered 40,000 prisoners to be

released and qualified the mentally and physically disabled parolees for Eligibility for

SSI Benefits in Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1382

(E)(1)(A). Released prisoners who meet guidelines pertaining to an income of less than

$674 a month income and resource guidelines of less than $2,000 must be helped to file

for SSI to pay room and board at a halfway house under 18USC(227)§3563 (b)(11).



2. The first and foremost consideration of the judiciary must be the protection and

compensation of the victims of crime and abuses of power. The Declaration of Basic

Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power of 29 November 1985 and

the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims

of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of

International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005 are fundamental to the judiciary.



3. The American Legal System would no longer be construed as having failed to provide

for the equal protection of the laws if they merely adopted a civil law system. The

methods are twofold. First, convert the American Legal System from a quasi-common

law system to a civil law system. This will lower law school entrance to admit high

school graduates and the bar exam to BAs, furthermore civil law relies not upon the

precedent of the Supreme Court but the portrayal of the actions of real life people under

the civil code. Second, not to forfeit judicial independence to international civil law

systems this Act goes beyond natural law philosophy for the foolproof implementation of

socialist ideals in the legal system by electing licensed social workers to all civil and



223

administrative law judgeships, traffic, divorce, family, small claims, substance abuse and

mental health and licensed funeral director to avoid Probate. To successfully convert

from a common law system to a civil law system and to sustain their independence in the

face of adversity the judicial officers of the American Legal System must never lose sight

of the fundamental principles of Common Law enumerated in human rights statute

below.



a. Common Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23

March 1976 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3

January 1976 provides (1) All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of

that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic,

social and cultural development. (2) All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose

of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of

international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and

international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.



b. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions provides Persons taking no active part

in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and

those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in

all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race,

color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.



c. And, as a matter of common cents, material proof of legal responsibility, on the part of

the judiciary:



i.Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976,

states at paragraph 6, “when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal

offence and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned

on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been

a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such

conviction shall be compensated according to law”.



ii. Article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment of 26 June 1987 “the State shall ensure in its legal system that

the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and

adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.”



4. Whereas there are high rates of divorce and absolute corruption in the state civil courts

and affiliated practices of law – primarily probate, domestic relations, mental health and

substance abuse and also small-claims, labor and commercial law – this Chapter arranges

for the election of licensed social workers to serve as the judges and practitioners of

traffic, domestic relations, mental health, substance abuse and on an equal basis with

lawyers, and funeral directors as judges of Probate avoidance. For effective judicial

reform the new, 20th century, social work profession, sworn to help the poor against

oppression, needs to fully assume their duties to civil law. Legislatures must facilitate

this transfer of civil judgeships to licensed social workers and funeral directors by



224

creating statutory provisions for a social division from the judiciary, with right of appeal

to courts of general jurisdiction, and facilitating the popular election of social workers,

ostensibly with the support of the Socialist Party. The undisputed dominance of social

workers in civil judgeships will dramatically decrease the incompetence and corruption

evident in U.S. domestic policy and by lightening the burden on the judiciary; improve

the efficiency of the criminal justice system. Social workers will prove their literacy,

society will be less adversarial and relate their disputes, the needy will benefit and

everyone will be happier.



B. The American Legal System is only a part of American Society and judicial officers

must not allow their enthusiasm for the law to malevolently intrude into or dominate

society. Lawyers dispute the years in prison the law is so liberal with. $1 trillion is a

good estimate of the economic clout of the US legal system in any given year. The

majority of the 93 million judicial cases filed in 2001 were processed by 15,555 state trial

courts operating operated by 29,266 judges. 14.1 million criminal cases were filed. 15.8

million cases were filed with the civil division. Tort filings regarding medical

malpractice, defamation, insurance premiums and claims against the state have hovered

around 250,000 yearly. 57% of automobile insurance premium cases resulted in a +/-

$18,000 settlement whereas on 27% of medical malpractice cases resulted in +/-287,000

compensation. There are roughly 250,000 contract cases in any given year that deal with

breach of contract. In 2001 the highest settlement was a $28 billion tobacco product

liability tort. In the United States there are an estimated 1 million police officers,

450,000 corrections officers, 450,000 lawyers and 75,000 probation officers.



C. The American Legal System is a unique balance of the civil and common law systems.

Civil law is the dominant legal tradition today in most of Europe, all of Central and South

America, parts of Asia and Africa, and even some discrete areas of the common-law

world (e.g., Louisiana, Quebec, and Puerto Rico). The common law follows an

“adversarial” model which gives most responsibility to the lawyers while civil law is

more “inquisitorial,” civil law that is “code-based,” and civil-law judges do not interpret

the law but instead follow predetermined legal rules. Whereas the American Legal

System has become hopelessly corrupt, with the balance of prisoners exceeding the legal

of 250 per 100,000, by three times, around 750 per 100,000 since 2007, it behooves the

American Legal System to officially convert from a quasi-common law system, to a civil

law system, dedicated to the democratic ideals of freedom and human rights, in order to

eliminate the corruption that is preventing the safe reduction of the penal population to

within the reasonable limit of 250 prisoners per 100,000 residents.



1.Codification of the law dates to the Hammurabi Code (1790 BC) the civil-law system,

jus civile, had its origins in the Roman Republic, before the beginning of the Empire, in

the second century B.C. By the end of the Republic, in 27 B.C., a body of legal experts,

or jurists, had gained prominence within the legal system, separate and apart from the

courts of law. Jurists were the prototype of the lawyer, not referring to judges, but upper

class legal experts interested in and volunteering their time to the interpretation of

questions of law. In the Roman legal system there were two types of civil judges: the

democratically elected magistrate, or praetor, and the judge selected for the trial, or



225

judex. Emperor Justinian ended reliance upon judicial precedent in the encyclopedic

work commissioned by him, the Corpus Juris Civilis, with the dictum “non exemplis sed

legibus judicandum est” (decisions should be rendered in accordance, not with examples,

but with the law). The law underwent further evolution in later periods of the Empire,

culminating in a comprehensive statement of private law prepared by the jurist Gaius in

the latter half of the second century A.D. Gaius‟s Institutes were an extensive collection

of legal principles and rules covering matters ranging from the rights of citizenship and

the manumission of slaves to the preservation of estates and the rules of intestate

succession.



2. The Corpus Juris Civilis was the primary guide for civil law throughout the middle

ages and the basis for the formulation of contemporary codices of civil law at the

beginning of the modern era in the 18th century. From the eleventh to the fifteenth

centuries, northern Italy witnessed the rise of a jurist class almost as prominent and

significant as its Roman predecessor. In medieval Italy the jurists, known as glossators,

were primarily teachers, members of the law faculties of the universities, drawn not from

the nobility but from the general public. They generally carried the title of doctor. Their

basic technique was the “gloss,” an interpretation or addition to the text of the Corpus

Juris Civilis, first made between the lines and later in the margins. They also used some

of the substance and argumentative techniques of medieval theology. The “Great Gloss”

of the leading glossator of the period, the Accursian Gloss (1220-1260) totaled over

96,000 commentaries to the entire text of the Corpus Juris Civilis. The lay judges were

generally not highly educated or specially trained.



3. Two distinct forms of civil law, independent of the judiciary, evolved during the

medieval period, canon law and customs. Canon law had been developing since the

eleventh century, when the Bishop of Worms (Germany) collected scattered rules and

regulations of the church into a series of twenty books known as his Decretum. From

1130 to 1150, an Italian ecclesiastical jurist, Gratian, along with others produced the

Concordia Discordantium Canonum, a monumental work that became the basis for

almost all canon law. Capitulare navium (Shipping Rules) were first published in Venice

in 1205 and republished in expanded form as the Statuta et Ordinamenta super Navibus

(Statutes and Regulations on Shipping) in 1255. Compiled in Barcelona, Spain, and

containing over 330 articles, the Consolato Del Mare covered such maritime matters as

construction of vessels, circumstances requiring assistance to other vessels in distress,

general average (a maritime principle for allocating damages), employment of pilots, and

privateering. The independence of social and commercial law from the judiciary must be

re-asserted.



4. The reception of Roman law into Spain, resulted in the preparation of a comprehensive

Spanish digest, the Codigo de Las Siete Partidas (The Code of the Seven Parts of the

Law). The digest was prepared by the monarch Alfonso the Learned in the latter part of

the thirteenth century. This monumental work was the foundation of Spanish private law

until 1889, when it was replaced by a code that is still in force, the Codigo Civil (Civil

Code). Modern codification processes in Latin American countries did not really begin

until the middle part of the nineteenth century. The process in Chile was started, in the

civil-law tradition, by an inspiring jurist, Andres Bello who eventually completed, with

226

but modest assistance from his legislative colleagues, an entire new civil code that was

given legislative approval in 1856 and went into force in 1857. Even today the Chilean

code and the legal system on which it is based are viewed as the most advanced and

influential among the Spanish-speaking countries of Central and South America. The

modern codification process began in Brazil in the mid-nineteenth century with the

adoption of a penal code in 1830, a code of criminal procedure in 1833, a commercial

code in 1850, and the new civil code in 1916.



5. The Enlightenment was based on a belief in the fundamental importance of reason as a

liberating force in intellectual life and in how society was organized, a belief that grew

out of the precepts of the natural law school. In Europe the effects and influence of the

Enlightenment provided the final stimulation for the creation of the modern

comprehensive codes of the different European states. Codification in the sixteenth

century differed from the codification process during the Enlightenment and post-

Enlightenment periods of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The former was

“codification as a restatement of the law” while the latter involved “a rationally organized

statement of the whole field of law.”



6. Humanism was an intellectual movement that had its origins in sixteenth century

France, a time and place of great upheaval. It encouraged scholarly examination of law,

particularly the nature and function of law, and in the process the science of

jurisprudence was founded. The school of natural law was an outgrowth of humanism.

The origins of natural law are several, but the writings of Hugo de Groot (better known as

Grotius) stand out as the real starting point in the development of the natural law school.

Although Grotius (1583–1645), a Dutchman, is better known as the father of public

international law, attempted, through several seminal writings, especially De Jure Belli

ac Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), to develop universal concepts of law that

transcended national boundaries and were not dependent on any one legal system. He

advocated ideas such as law being based on human experiences and desires, particularly

the desire for an orderly and peaceful society and the maintenance of that society based

on reason. He argued for a rational approach to the structure of law and the resolution of

disputes. He supported the systematic arrangement of legal materials, such as the

treatment of property and obligations, and of specific rules within those systematic

arrangements. In sum, “Grotius was . . . a starting point for the codifying lawyers of the

Enlightenment and a support for an increasingly mercantile society, in which good order

and a clearly defined system of rules of property and obligation were seen as highly

desirable.” Samuel Pufendorf and Christopher Wolff in Germany attempted to build a

legal system using the scientific methods of Galileo and Descartes. This approach was

characterized by the assertion of axioms from which particular rules were logically

deduced and then tested by experience and observation.



7. Napoleon regarded the creation of the Code Civil as his greatest achievement,

overshadowing even his great military victories. During his exile on St. Helena he

remarked, “My true glory is not that I have won forty battles. Waterloo will blow away

the memory of these victories. What nothing can blow away and will live eternally is my

Civil Code.” In 1800, Napoleon appointed four senior practitioners of law to develop a



227

comprehensive legal code. These four practitioners were experienced jurists who had

studied Grotius, Pufendorf, and the other great writers of the natural law school. The

commission held 102 sessions, all in the relatively short period of four years, devoted to

drafting the code. The final product was presented to and promptly passed by the French

legislative body. This code, officially designated the Code Civil des Français, was issued

in 1804 in the form of three books with 2,281 articles. Later it came to be known as the

Code Napoléon, but in its present form is called simply the Code Civil. The modern code

in Germany, still in effect, resulted from the creation of a commission by statute in 1873

to codify German civil law. The result was a comprehensive code, known as the

Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, or BGB, approved in 1896.



8. Civil law entered the United States rather late and was never fully accepted. The

acceptance of a civil law system remains a breaking point in the Senate. When a law is

enacted in the United States, it is passed by the House and the Senate and signed by the

President, it is then given a public law number reflecting when it was passed, which

“Congress”, and the order it came within that Congress. For example, Pub. L. No. 108-1

was the first law of the 108th Congress. Laws are published in chronological order in

United States Statutes at Large (Stat.). The first official codification of federal laws was

the Revised Statutes of the United States that was enacted in 1873. 69 errors were caught

during publication and another 183 over the next few years. Then in 1919, a team began

work on new code that would encompass all the laws currently in force. In 1920 and

1921 the Code was passed unanimously in the House but rejected by the Senate. Then, in

1924 after the Senate Committee found 600 alleged errors a compromise was reached on

a “twilight zone” whereby the United States Code self-referentially provided that it is

“prima facie” evidence of the general and permanent laws in force at a given date, except

that the titles that have been enacted as positive law are “legal evidence of the laws

therein contained”, while the Statutes at Large are “legal evidence of laws”. Thus, U.S.

statute was first codified in the Revised Statutes of the United States in 1873, and again

into the 50 titles of the United States Code, which serves as the basis of civil law in the

United States.



D. Empirical proof that the American Common Law legal system has failed is evident in

the census of the U.S. prison population. A review of the World Prison Brief maintained

by the International Centre for Prison Statistics reveals the United States – 2,299,116 -

has both the most prisoners, more than China - 1,565,771 (2007), and highest

concentration of prisoners, at 748 per 100,000 residents (2009), more than runner up, the

Russian Federation - 628 (2007), in the world. Although previously not unusual, the

prison population has exploded since the 1980s mandatory minimum sentencing

legislation, including steep penalties for drugs instead of the secret laboratory poisons

populating the hospitals and cemeteries with torture victims. As the result of mandatory

minimum sentencing legislation, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that the prison

population has quadrupled from 503,586 prisoners (220 per 100,000) in 1980 to

2,085,620 (707 per 100,000) in 2004. In 2005, 7 million people, one in every 32

American adults, were behind bars, on probation or on parole. 2.2 million were in prison

or jail, more than 4.1 million people were on probation and 784,208 were on parole.

During the 12 months that ended June 2007, the nation‟s prison and jail custody



228

populations increased by 46,887 inmates (up 2.1 percent) to reach 2,299,116 inmates. In

2009, in response to the economic recession state prison populations declined slightly,

however federal prison population continued to increase.



1. The ABA Kennedy Commission Recommendations of 2003-2004 made great progress

admitting to the prison overpopulation problem. The recommendations led directly to the

US Supreme Court to redress the prison overpopulation problem in the decision Blakely

v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24, 2004 that “eliminated sentencing guidelines

schemes and, 20 years of sentencing reform. Sentences imposed under such guidelines in

cases currently pending on direct appeal, or in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy. In

both legislative and litigate practice Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward

rather than upward, mandatory minimum schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for

most crimes where there are significant mitigating factors”. Chief Justice Rehnquist died

shortly thereafter and since United States v. Booker No. 04-104 (2005) that provided a

temporary injunction against drug sentencing the United States has made no further

progress on the critical issue of prison overpopulation.



2. The prison over-population problem cuts to the core of the integrity of the judiciary

and the legal system whose singular purpose is to prosecute and punish crime without

being as cruel and unusual as to be a crime of its own right. As it stands, with both the

largest and most concentrated prison population in the world, the U.S. judiciary must be

condemned, avoided and most importantly reformed. The American Legal System has

failed. To achieve the equal protection of the law with nations with respectable legal

systems, of humble petitioners, there must be construed a legal limit of 250 prisoners per

100,000 residents. The United States is three times over this limit with 748 detainees per

100,000 residents in 2009. Immediate and sustained action must be taken to redress

prison overpopulation, mostly by ceasing to prosecute harmless drug offenders, reducing

sentences to meet international norms and commuting the sentences of non-dangerous

prisoners to halfway houses; dramatically expanding the halfway house system.



4. The concept of a legal limit for the number of detainees holds true to the principles of

the bar association whose jus cogens is that “a lawyer is either behind bars or drunk on

power”. To effectively reform the judiciary to achieve the primary goal of being under

the legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 prisoners the American Legal System is

going to have to give criminal justice their 100% and cease to spread their contagion to

society through the adjudication of social, commercial and political matters that must be

referred to literate and responsible executive agencies without interference. The role of

the lawyer, the prosecutor and the judiciary must be limited to criminal matters. The

integrity of this role must be enforced by “honorably” disbarring those lawyers whose

clientele are civil, commercial, social or political in nature to dissociate them from the

Bar Association whose members must be fully dedicated to redressing the injustice in the

criminal justice system, mostly by establishing halfway houses for Probation and Parole.



5. The decadence that precipitated and made the degradation of the American Legal

System unstoppable began in 1973 with the creation of the Drug Enforcement Agency

(DEA) ultra vires the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that seized all the



229

practitioners of the medical establishment without regard for the disease pathogens they

are armed with, and the judicial burglars deliver, totally destroyed the reputation of the

legal system with the establishment of the Court of International Trade of the United

States (CoITUS) in the Customs Court Act of 1980. To redress these fatal flaws the DEA

must change their name to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and be transferred to the FDA

and COITUS must change their name to Customs Court (CC). Normalizing the

American Judiciary under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted

by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment

of an International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 17, 1998 can be done by repealing

Chapter 81 of Title 22 with reservations regarding the criminal trademark infringement of

the ICC on the International Chamber of Commerce is due process for similarly

sabotaging the civil law system and socio-economy.



6. To fully extend the protection of human rights to individual US citizens and safeguard

the integrity of public programs performing these functions the United States the

President must furthermore ratify the following Optional Protocols.



a. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23

March 1976 relating to the Human Rights Committee.



b. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989. The death penalty is

the most flagrant human rights abuse of the judiciary whereby justice kills a combatant

who has laid down their arms and surrendered. The death penalty is obviously a fatal

flaw in the legal system, that all civilized countries have abolished. The major problem

with the death penalty is that unabashed killers, who do so in full view of the public, and

speak in such a censurable manner as to willfully kill, are freely elected to positions of

public trust.



c. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against

Women of 22 December 2000. The failure to ratify this Optional Protocol can be

attributed to the sexist and poisonous pig immortalized in COITUS. Later the Violence

Against Women Act of 1994 created the Office of Violence Against Women in the

Department of Justice although this language is bold facedly threatening women with

organized violence and covertly organizing women as toxic militants against their family

and cohabitants. The Centers for Medicare Medicaid and SCHIP (CMS) of 2001 creating

raised the hysteria of the sexual discrimination against women to point where the 9-11

suicide attack could occur. To ratify this Optional Protocol in good faith the Department

of Justice should change the name of Office of Violence Against Women to Office of

Women‟s Rights but may do so unobligated.



d. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003. The tort of negligence in this

regard has been the undoing of the government that engages in nothing but torture, hires

the most flagrant torturers ever witnessed and has repealed all criminal and civil penalties







230

for acts of torture committed in the United States essentially nullifying the entire legal

system that operates mostly on the theory of the tort claim.



7. The underlying judicial philosophy conveyed in the official text of Title 24 of the

United States Code, pertains to the original sin of the legal system - Probate Court, as

indicated by its name, is on probation for the horrible crimes of murder, torture and

slavery, and it has not officially stopped slaving the alleged mentally ill (ami) in cahoots

with psychiatrists from the medical establishment. Under this Chapter graduation from

the National College of Probate Judges (NCPJ) would occur on the condition that

Probate Court be adjudicated by a licensed social worker and cease to slave the mentally

ill and leave the adjudication of the State Mental Institution Library Education (SMILE)

buildings, and mental illness in general, to a social worker employed by the Community

Mental Health Board as recommended by the United Kingdom Parliament Joint

Committee on Human Rights Fourth Report of 4 February 2007 on the Mental Health

Bill 2006-07 that advocates the Bournewood safeguards "appropriate treatment" test

whereby it will not be possible for patients to be compulsorily detained if they are

rational enough to voice their objection. At 57 & 58, in pursuit of greater independence

for the court, the report reveals “a need for some external safeguard of liberty that is more

accessible than judicial review…We consider that the principal legitimate aim for which

psychiatric treatment may be imposed is mental health wherefore a patient should be

entitled to seek review of the conditions before a Mental Health Review Tribunal”. This

Tribunal should be staffed by licensed and specially trained mental health professionals

under the supervision of the State and County Boards of Mental Health and at least one

bar certified lawyer, not employed by the judiciary, to separate the criminals. This

tribunal should be overseen by a Social Work Administration, to ensure that the only sane

professional in all of the judiciary and health is dominant. The same concept of social

worker judges holds true to Drug Courts. Funeral directors have provided a dignified

alternative to Probate since the Civil War.



8. Divorce Court, Domestic Relations Court and Family Court and Tenant Landlord

Trials would also greatly benefit from being judged and advocated, if needed, exclusively

by licensed social workers. The adversarial system and criminal associations of the

judges and lawyers, unnecessarily complicate and corrupt these Courts. The family or

household, particularly one considering divorce, or comprised of unrelated individuals, is

very vulnerable to the corrupting influence of the Bar, as many thrice married lawyers

(and social workers) will tell you. As the nucleus of society the family is a major source

of power to everyone, of greater importance to the well-being of individuals than the

government, State or law. To give family troubles due process it behooves the State to

employ professionals licensed and trained in family affairs and the special needs of the

poor in a manner that is sensitive to their emotions – the 20th century social worker. Why

treat all domestic cases to the criminal justice system of the legal profession as if un-

remedial domestic violence cannot be stopped on demand? Does the automatic

appointment of lawyers only serve to escalate domestic conflict and violence to the

felonious levels the Bar serves? Whereas divorce rates have soared while the legal

profession‟s reputation has been soiled, and the alternative, the social worker, is

available, it is logical that the nearly the entire civil division would be replaced with



231

social workers. To study this problem it was written, Family Opinions on the AMA Code

of Medical Ethics Patient Physician Relationship HA-14-4-11



E. A shift to a civil law system would make dramatic changes to law school. Were the

licenses of lawyers terminated to relieve the burdens of civil society from the judiciary,

the number of bar certified lawyers would decrease dramatically from an estimated

650,000 to probably around 150,000 criminal defense attorneys, prosecutors and judges.

This shortfall explains the hard times the judiciary has fallen to. There are few lawyers

practicing law in the legal system. They have chosen nice, high paying jobs corrupting

civil society, commerce and politics with their bi-annual bribe to the Supreme Court,

incessant search warrants and organized criminal conspiracies to blind the judges with

commercial litigation every time there is a real person who must be recognized before the

law and/or case that must be settled. To make up for this shortfall, now obvious, the pre-

requisites for entrance to law school must be lowered to high school and the law school

combined with the so called criminal justice degree to produce bachelors capable of

passing the bar exam and representing the criminally accused in Court and on the force.



1.The number of law schools and law school graduates should increase dramatically, as

should the number of disillusioned lawyers being “honorably disbarred” because they

have found paying work in a more pleasant field. In most, maybe all other countries, a

person may enter law school after completing high school and may take the Bar exam

after earning a baccalaureate degree (BA) and passing the Bar exam may earn an honest

living representing clients before the court and be appointed and paid by the State to

represent people free of charge who would not otherwise be able to afford legal counsel.

Lawyers may of course pursue more advanced degrees to be senior partner, judge,

prosecutor or attorney general. The rationale for this radical raising of the bar to young

adults is that most of the offenders tried in the courts are typically young, poor and

uneducated and the purpose of the law degree is to be better than crime, not better than

other people, with whom we enjoy equal rights, compromised by class struggle.



F. Finally, the life sentence to the federal bench is offensive as a symbol of the excessive

sentences US citizens must serve and die for. The judiciary and legal system desperately

needs to evolve to one that better promotes the rights and freedoms essential to a

democratic society. The election of federal judges must be accelerated by limiting their

terms to five years and allowing for a competitive process whereby other qualified

lawyers may challenge them, without fear of armed combat or retaliation. A two term

limit would be set for the desirable office of justice of the Supreme Court. To better

serve the public due consideration must be given to electing federal judges and justices in

general elections in their respective jurisdictions. The Bar and Congress would

coordinate to keep the slates competitive and vet the candidates to ensure they are

striving for the American dream of a prison population less than 250 per 100,000.



1.The filing fees upon which the Court is entirely reliant for their judgment, are bribes,

and must be eliminated to create a system that is based on merit, and therefore biased

towards the poor. To eliminate the big bribe in the sky, enforce the doctrine of separation

of powers and the First Amendment freedoms of expression and right to sue the



232

government for a redress of grievances, the economy is reliant upon, one law stands out

as being obstructive to judicial independence and Congressional power, and in need of

amendment, to provide direct payment to the authors/editors of the US Code without

interception, monopolization, bribery and most of all assassination by the “powerful”

Judiciary Committee under Art. 2(4) of the Berne Convention. (Strike $6,500) and insert,

More than $10,000, annual appropriations for the preparation and editing of the Code and

Supplemental of the United States and District of Columbia are made available to the

(strike Judiciary Committee) and insert, author/editor, under 1USC(3)§213. Courts

likewise need to pay and consult with the authors in question, instead of random lawyers

and contemporary glossators professing in law school.



2. To regulate the State Courts a Constitutional Amendment is proposed to replace the

Second Amendment with a Balanced Budget Amendment and the Third Amendment

with a Civil Law Amendment that would, set forth term limits for federal judges, ensure

that wills, divorces, mental illness and substance abuse are adjudicated by social workers,

change the name of prosecutor to district attorneys in all jurisdictions in the USA,

achieve international norms in prison population, abolish the death penalty and punish

human right violation by federal officials.



§41a Balance of Prisoners



A.To properly respect judicial power it is imperative to thoroughly study the balance of

prisoners at the federal, state and county levels. The balance of prisoners properly

reflects the balance of the power of the judiciary which serves to properly prejudice the

jurists as to whether the jurisdiction they judge is over the arbitrary legal limit, of 250

detainees per 100,000 residents, and by how much, so as to anticipate the extent of false

arrest, repression of dissidents, use of people under legal supervision as soldiers, seizure

of political power and need for halfway houses.



1. To determine the total number of detainees in a county, one must contact the county

judiciary to discover how many people are detained in local jails, the state department of

corrections to determine how many state prisoners hail from the county in question, and

the federal court to determine how many federal prisoners are from that county and add

for the total number of detainees from that county. Multiply the total number of prisoners

by 100,000 and divide by the total population of the county to determine how many

prisoners there are per 100,000. Using this ratio one can determine how overpopulated

the penal system is and how many halfway house beds are needed to safely release these

offenders to the community.



B. In 2005, 7 million people, one in every 32 American adults, were behind bars, on

probation or on parole. 2.2 million were in prison or jail, more than 4.1 million people

were on probation and 784,208 were on parole. Prison population has quadrupled from

503,586 prisoners (220 per 100,000) in 1980 to 2,085,620 (707 per 100,000) in 2004.

During the 12 months that ended June 2007, the nation‟s prison and jail custody

populations increased by 46,887 inmates (up 2.1 percent) to reach 2,299,116 inmates.

Prison releases are increasing, but admissions are increasing more.



233

1.In 2005 the female population in state or federal prison increased 2.6 percent while the

number of male inmates rose 1.9 percent. By year's end, 7% of all inmates were women.

Racial disparities among prisoners persist. In the 25-29 age group, 8.1% of black men -

about one in 13 – were behind bars, compared with 2.6% of Hispanic men and 1.1% of

white men. It's not much different among women. A considerable amount of the increase

is the result of the sentencing for drug crimes. From 1995 to 2003, inmates in federal

prison for drug offenses have accounted for 49% of total prison population growth.



2.Two-thirds of the nation‟s custody population was in a state or federal prison

(1,518,535), and the other one-third was held in local jails (780,581). At midyear 2007,

there were an estimated 762 persons per 100,000 U.S. residents in prison or jail, up from

684 at year end 2000. The US has both the densest and largest prison population in the

world, the next most populous were Russia with 808,500 prisoners (566 per 100,000) and

China with 1.5 million prisoners (118 per 100,000). To set an international norm for

prison population one can estimate that 250 prisoners per 100,000 citizens and no death

penalty is the legal limit.



3. The Second Chance Act of 2005 HR1704 reported nearly 650,000 people are released

from incarceration to communities each year. There are over 3,200 jails throughout the

United States, the vast majority of which are operated by county governments. Each

year, these jails will release in excess of 10,000,000, 3.3% of the population, back into

the community.



4. According to the 2001 national data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 3,500,0000

parents were supervised by the correctional system. Prior to incarceration, 64 percent of

females prisons and 44 percent of male prisoners in State facilities lived with their

children. Between 1991 and 1999, the number of children with a parent in a Federal or

State correctional facility increased by more than 100 percent, from approximately

900,000 to approximately 2,000,000.







234

5. Nearly two thirds of released State prisoners are rearrested for a felony or serious

misdemeanor within three years after release. Supervised living provided by qualified

social workers, probation and parole officers is the safest method for eliminating

recidivism; halfway houses are less corrupting than incarceration, particularly when

accompanied with equal employment opportunity counseling to ensure offenders become

productive citizens.



6. In 2005 Certain states saw more significant changes in prison population. In South

Dakota, the number of inmates increased 11% over the past year, more than any other

state. Montana and Kentucky were next in line with increases of 10.4% and 7.9%,

respectively. Georgia had the biggest decrease, losing 4.6%, followed by Maryland with a

2.4% decrease and Louisiana with a 2.3% drop.



C. In fiscal 2004 Federal, State, and local governments spent an estimated $193 billion

for police protection, corrections and judicial and legal activities, a 4% increase over the

previous year. Per capita expenditure across the three government types and criminal

justice functions was approximately $660.









Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics



1. The Federal government spent more than $34 billion on direct expenditures for

criminal and civil justice in fiscal year 2004. State governments spent over $61 billion

and local governments spent over $97 billion.









235

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics



D. To achieve the objective of meeting international minimum standards for the treatment

of prisoners the United States must cut their prison population in half in pursuit of

achieving a normal concentration of prisoners, less than 250 per 100,000 residents.



1. The key federal reform is the $3.3 billion Justice Assistance Grant (JAG), the largest

grant provided by the Office of Justice Programs, must be commuted, in its entirety, from

the police and prosecutors to probation and parole services for the establishment of

halfway houses and community based corrections boards amongst authorized judges and

supervised living providers for the convicted populace. It is wrong to finance the local

police from afar. The right thing for the federal government to do is to finance only

halfway house programs with the JAG Block Grant and other federal judicial financial

programs… Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez v. Director of Justice Programs

Domingo S. Herraiz HA-8-4-05



2. Community shelter supervision costs an average of $6,000 a year whereas

incarceration costs $24,000. By commuting people convicted of felonies and

misdemeanors, who do not pose a serious threat to society, to serve their sentence under

community supervision, departments of corrections could save 75% on individual cases.

If fully implemented for all drug, misdemeanor and felony offenders who do not present

a threat to the community departments of corrections could save as much as 25% on their

operating costs. The pay in community correctional shelters must be competitive with, or

superior to, correctional officers. It is expected that greater respect for dignity offered by

halfway houses will dramatically reduce rates of recidivism.



3. To supervise the forfeiture of jails and prisons federally it is highly recommended to.



a. Act expeditiously to accelerated to facilitate the transfer of real property for

community reuse.

b. Fully utilize all appropriate means to transfer property. Including public benefit

transfers, economic development conveyances at cost and no cost, negotiated sale to state

236

or local government, conservation conveyances, and public sale, by which to transfer on

closed or realigned installations.

c. Rely on and leverage market forces. Community redevelopment plans and conveyance

plans should be integrated to the extent practical and should take account of any

anticipated demand for surplus judicial land and facilities.

d. Collaborate effectively. Only by collaborating with the local community and local

researchers can the Department of Justice close and transfer property in a timely manner

and provide a foundation for solid economic redevelopment. Judicial-community

partnerships need to be flexible enough to adapt to the specific market forces and other

circumstances at each location.

e. Speak with one voice. Timely information regarding facility and environmental

conditions and closure and realignment schedules are critically important. In the past,

when communities spoke with one voice about their reuse goals and activities, the

Department was better positioned to consider local redevelopment plans.



E. Community Based Corrections Boards comprised of authorized judges, supervised

living providers, probation, parole officers, social workers, reformed convicts advocating

the rights of prisoners and members of the Bar should be established in every jurisdiction

with a population greater than 250,000. The community corrections board will commute

sentences to terms of probation, parole or conditional release and invest in halfway

houses and employment programs.



1. "Halfway house organization" means a private, nonprofit organization or a

governmental agency that provides programs or activities in areas directly concerned

with housing and monitoring offenders who are under the community supervision of the

department of rehabilitation and correction or whom a court places in a halfway house.

Social workers are an important component of the halfway house staff that also includes

corrections officers, clergy, social workers, probation and parole officers.



2. To remedy the national penal problem we will need to reduce the prison population to

not more than 250 per 100,000- 725,000 nationally in order to meet international norms.

For the US to achieve the international norm (250 per 100,000) the total number of local

jail, state and federal prison beds must be limited to less than 740,000. This means that

we must release more than half of those people detained.



3. It would be reasonable to expect the national government to purchase more than

25,000 halfway houses a year towards a ten year goal of 250,000 halfway houses with 2.5

million beds, and 24 hour staff with a staff to resident ratio of 3-8 per resident, 500,000

new criminal justice and human services jobs.



4. 1 million jail beds is a good national goal at both ends of the stick – (1) the number of

new beds needed by the community correctional houses and (2) the number of prison

beds considered to be the legal limit for the USA. This means the forfeiture of an

estimated 1,000 detention facilities nationally and commutation to community programs.









237

Fig. 2.4: State by State Detention and Demand for Community Corrections

30.6.2005



Rank Correction Total State Local Jail per Executions Estimated

Agency Prison Prison Population 00,000 since 1976 Need for

Pop. in Pop. Community

1999 Beds/Houses

US Military 25,000 0 yes

Federal 179,220 N/a N/a 58 3

1 Maine 3,608 2,063 1,545 273 0 303/12

2 Minnesota 15,422 8,399 7,023 300 0 2,570/102

3 Rhode Island 3,364 N/a N/a 313 0 yes 677/27

4 Vermont 1,975 N/a N/a 317 0 417/17

5 New 4,184 2,456 1,728 319 0 905/36

Hampshire

6 Massachusetts 22,778 10,159 12,619 356 0 6,782/271

7 North Dakota 2,288 1,344 944 359 0 695/28

8 Iowa 12,215 8,578 3,637 412 0 4,803/192

9 Nebraska 7,406 4,308 3,098 421 3 3,008/120

10 West Virginia 8,043 3,966 4,077 443 0 3,504/140

11 Hawaii 5,705 N/a N/a 447 0 2,614/101

12 Washington 29,225 16,532 12,693 465 4 13,512/541

13 Utah 11,514 4,775 6,739 466 6 5,337/214

14 New York 92,769 63,234 29,535 482 0 yes 44,652/1,786

15 Illinois 64,735 44,669 20,066 507 12 32,814/1,313

16 Montana 4,923 2,658 2,265 526 2 2,583/103

17 Oregon 19,318 12,769 6,549 531 2 10,223/409

18 New Jersey 46,411 28,790 17,621 532 0 yes 24,601/984

19 Connecticut 19,087 N/a N/a 544 1 10,315/413

20 Ohio 65,123 44,270 19,853 559 19 35,998/1,440

21 Kansas 15,972 9,068 6,904 582 0 yes 9,111/365

22 Pennsylvania 75,507 41,052 34,455 607 3 44,409/1,776

23 North 53,854 36,683 17,171 620 39 32,139/1,286

Carolina

24 South Dakota 4,827 3,395 1,432 622 0 yes 2,887/115

25 Maryland 35,601 23,215 12,386 636 5 21,606/864

26 Indiana 39,959 22,392 17,567 637 16 24,277/971

27 District of 3,552 N/a N/a 645 0 2,175/87

Columbia

28 Wisconsin 36,154 21,850 14,304 653 0 22,313/893

29 Michigan 67,132 49,014 18,118 663 0 41,818/1,673

30 Arkansas 18,693 12,568 6,125 673 27 11,749/470

31 California 246,317 164,179 82,138 682 11 156,025/6,241

32 Wyoming 3,515 1,964 1,551 690 1 2,242/90

33 Alaska 4,678 4,613 65 705 0 3,019/120



238

34 Missouri 41,461 31,000 10,461 715 66 26,964/1,079

35 Kentucky 30,034 13,273 16,761 720 2 19,605/784

36 Colorado 33,955 20,317 13,638 728 1 22,295/892

37 Tennessee 43,678 19,445 24,233 732 1 28,761/1,150

38 Nevada 18,265 11,155 7,110 756 11 12,225/489

39 Virginia 57,444 31,020 26,424 759 94 38,523/1,541

40 New Mexico 15,081 6,567 8,514 782 1 10,260/410

41 Idaho 11,206 7,419 3,787 784 1 7,633/305

42 Arizona 47,974 32,495 15,479 808 22 33,131/1,325

43 Delaware 6,916 N/a N/a 820 14 4,808/192

44 South 35,298 23,072 12,226 830 35 24,666/987

Carolina

45 Florida 148,521 84,901 63,620 835 60 104,054/4,162

46 Alabama 40,561 25,418 15,143 890 34 29,168/1,167

47 Oklahoma 32,593 23,008 9,585 919 79 23,727/949

48 Mississippi 27,902 16,480 11,422 955 6 20,597/824

49 Texas 223,195 156,661 66,534 976 355 166,024/6,641

50 Georgia 92,647 47,682 44,965 1,021 39 69,962/2,799

51 Louisiana 51,458 19,591 31,867 1,138 27 40,154/1,606

US Totals 2,193,798 1,259,905 747,529 737 1002 as of 1,449,633/

6 Dec. 57,985

2005



Source: International Centre for Prison Studies, World Prison Brief, USA State by State



5. Brown v. Marciana & Plata (2011) is the largest liberation in history. Of the 46,000

prisoners ordered to be released under only 9,000 had been released before the U.S.

Supreme Court heard the case. California is a demonstration project for establishing an

SSI financed halfway house system around the nation and to keep the nation posted on

the experience the Commissioner should send a report to the Ways and Means

Committee under Sec. 234 of Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§432.

California‟s medical marijuana laws may help to ease the transition and many released

offenders will be able to enjoy life, without hard drugs, or breaking the law. State

Sherriff's auctions should be able to provide real estate at no or little cost for use as non-

profit halfway houses. Staff, utilities and taxes could be afforded with the deduction of

$500 a month from mentally or physically disabled Social Security beneficiaries making

no less than $700, or more if they made significant contributions. Released prisoners

would also be eligible for $170 or so in food stamps. Making $400-$500 a month per

resident a supervised halfway house/group home could earn $2,000-$2,500 a month

caring for 5 residents. As apartment buildings are in demand and small and medium size

homes are foreclosed left and right it would probably be easier to get smaller homes of

two to four bedrooms, for free from Sheriff's auctions, or purchased with back pay and

pay for professional supervision corporations in lieu of rent, in an ad hoc $400-$500

fashion. An S corporation of three to five could provide 24-hour supervision to halfway

houses with 10-25 residents, and command taxable incomes of $2,500 a month, work

reasonable hours and afford their own home, with profits from $12,500 a month. If this



239

program were implemented nationwide in one year it would cost SSI an estimated $12.6-

$13 billion at the $700 a month rate. However if done slowly, over the course of a

decade, would cost only $1.3 billion in extra SSI costs annually. The cost of settling

40,000 detainees released from California is estimated to be $28 million a month or $336

million a year. With 1.1 million applications approved out of 2.4 million applications

and 7.7 million SSI beneficiaries in 2010 expedited benefits for released detainees would

only increase costs about 7% if done gradually or 26% if all drug offenders and non-

dangerous offenders were released all at once. With administrative costs for draconian

repressive measures skyrocketing to 7.7% of SSI program $50 billion costs in FY2011

this money would be better appropriated by Probation Offices.



6. Martinez et al v. Astrue No. Cal. No 08-CV-48735-CW of August 11, 2009, led to the

passage of No Social Security Benefits for Prisoners Act of 2009, Public Law 111-115

which reinforced the prohibition of retroactive payments to individuals during periods for

which such individuals are prisoners, probation or parole violators, or fugitive felons

written in Eligibility for SSI Benefits in Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act

42USC(7)XVI§1382(E)(1)(A) and OASDI in Sec. 202 of Title II of the Social Security

Act 42USC(7)II§402(x)(1)(a). Eligibility for SSI Benefits may however continue while a

person is detained in public institution if such person needs to continue to maintain and

provide for the expenses of the home or living arrangement to which he or she may return

upon leaving the institution or facility, usually for a period not to exceed 3 months under

Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1382 (E)(1)(G). The

Commissioner has proven himself a remorseless prosecutor. When an individual is

released from a public institution they are due the reinstatement of their benefits and if

their conviction is ultimately overturned back payments to the date their social security

benefits were terminated under Bloom v. Social Security Administration (10th Cir.) No.

02-3362 (2003). The Commissioner of Social Security has been ordered to develop a

Pre-release procedure for institutionalized persons under which an individual can apply

for supplemental security income benefits prior to the discharge or release of the

individual from a public institution under Sec. 1631 of Title XVI of the Social Security

Act 42USC(7)XVI§1383(m).



7. Released prisoners who meet guidelines pertaining to income of less than $674 a

month income and resource guidelines of less than $2,000 must be either given the

paperwork to file for SSI or be automatically filed. Because of the medical negligence

evident in California prisons the burden of proving disability shall be lightened to show

that they have been unable to earn a substantial gainful income outside of prison for a

period of 12 months. It is hoped that the release will be conducted in an orderly fashion

and corrections officers will expedite applications for SSI in their monthly reports to the

Social Security Administration under Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act

42USC(7)XVI§1382 (E)(1)(H)(I)(i)(I) when the date of release has been finally

determined. The majority of prisoners should receive SSI the first month they are

released. This time the US will be fair, the US will pay benefits, in return persons

receiving benefits will be expected to uphold the law and abide by any terms of probation

imposed upon their release under 18USC(227)§3563. In the case of any individual

whose benefits are paid to a representative payee because of a drug and alcohol problem

rendering them incapable of managing their benefits makes it in their best interest, the

240

Commissioner shall refer such individual to the appropriate State agency administering

the State plan for substance abuse treatment services approved under Sec. 1636 of Title

XVI of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)(XVI)(B)§1383e. Probation has enough

authority to collect rent from people staying in halfway houses under 18USC(227)§3563

(b)(11). Probation must be indemnified against Penalties for Fraud under Sec. 208 of

Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§408 and Sec. 1632 of Title XVI of the

Social Security Act 42USC(7)XVI§1383a.



§41b Civil Law Amendment to the Third Amendment to the Constitution



Section 1 The American legal system is a civil-law system based upon written briefs that

cite the civil code and human rights.



Section 2 Federal Judges shall be elected to terms of four years in general elections in

their respective districts.



Section 3 Justices of the Supreme Court shall be limited to two terms.



Section 4 Associate Justices shall choose a new Chief, from amongst themselves, every

year.



Section 5 Government officials convicted of crimes against humanity shall be removed

from office.



Section 6 States shall elect district attorneys.



Section 7 States shall elect licensed social workers to judge divorce, mental illness,

substance abuse courts and ethic committees and licensed funeral directors to avoid

probate.



Section 8 States shall probate and parole criminal offenders to halfway houses to safely

meet international minimum standards of detention below the legal limit of 250 detainees

per 100,000 residents.



Section 9 the death penalty is abolished.



Section 10 Disputes of an international character shall be adjudicated by the Customs

Court in New York City.



§41c Customs Court Amendments



1. Title 22 US Code Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) to Foreign Relations

(FR-ee)

2. Chapter 11 of Title 28 on the Judiciary on the Organization of the Court of

International Trade (COIT) to Customs Court (CC)

a. reference to the COIT in 28USCI(11)§251(a&b), §252, §253(a), §254, §255(a), §257,

and §258(a)(1) to Customs Court (CC).

241

b. Chapter 55 on Court Officers of COIT in §871 and §872 to CC.

c. Chapter 95 on the Jurisdiction and Venue of the COIT in §1581(a-j), §1582, §1583,

§1584, and §1585 to CC.

d. Chapter 169 on COIT Procedure in §2631(a-j), §2632(a-d), §2633(a-c), §2634,

§2635(a-d), §2636(a-i), §2637(a-d), §2638, §2639(a&c), §2640(a,b,c&e), §2641(a&b),

§2642, §2643(a-d), §2644, §2645(a-c), and §2646 to CC.

e. Any other reference to COIT that might be discovered at a later date, such as

18USCV(601)§6001(4) to CC.



§41d Drugs or Poison?



A.The federal judiciary is fatally flawed in regards to their drug jurisdiction, eg. Rhymes

with drug addiction. It was a fatal mistake to make the Drug Enforcement

Administration (DEA) an agency of the Department of Justice (DoJ) in 1970, completely

undermining any independence from the international conspiracy to conceal poison and

poison weapons won by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The Strasbourg

Agreement Concerning International Patent Classification of March 24, 1971was ratified

in the same town where the Strasbourg Agreement of 1675 between France and the Holy

Roman Empire was the first treaty to ban the use of chemical weapons, the Strasbourg

Agreement of 1971, and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) done at Washington on

June 19, 1970, open for business in 1978 amended on September 28, 1979, modified on

February 3, 1984, and October 3, 2001 (as in force from April 1, 2002) for that matter,

totally omits mention of the special category of toxic substances, disease pathogens, that

are possibly the only inventions in need of patenting and government control. By seizing

a commercial and medical issue politically, the Department of Justice became overtly

corrupt defending a medical interest. Society was undermined to the detriment of the

system of medical torts resulting in a grossly over-financed and corrupt medical system,

rising income inequalities between rich and poor, concealment of the issue of medical

justice – poison - a government by torturers and sado-masochists against harmless

hedonists. The fundamental error of judgment is that drugs and pharmacy are an issue of

medical judgment and any such specialized pharmaceutical regulatory agency should be

in the Department of Health to serve as the consumer protection arm of the Food and

Drug Administration capable of inspecting and arresting unethical bio-medical

researchers.



1.That drug companies and abusers frequently come before the courts is not surprising

because drugs are of such concern to hundreds of millions of consumers and the Courts

are forum conveniun for many non-licensed medical professionals otherwise excluded by

conflict of interest from peer review. The issue of merit to the Courts is however not so

much one of drugs but whether the drugs or their abuse constitute poison, or if a

controlled substance (laboratory supply) without therapeutic value is abused as poison, is

detrimental to the health and life, and whether its abuse is motivated by medical lucre or

legal will. Noting the judicial weakness of will, to go to war on illicit psychotropic

drugs, at a time the Probate Judge began enforcing dangerous psychiatric drugs as no

self-respecting street drug pusher would, against a person‟s will, without informed

consent, seriously perverted the justice system as it intersects with the health system, so



242

as to undermine social discipline even more than the socio-pathic international treaties of

the time or underlying ill will. After a decade this corruption caused the Department of

Health and Human Services (DHHS) to drop out of the Department of Health Education

and Welfare (DHEW) without earning their degree of Public Health Department (PHD).

To do the freedom of expression justice the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) needs to

change its name to Drug Evaluation Agency (DEA) and be transferred to the Health

Department to serve as a pharmaceutical regulator, disease pathogen laboratory inspector

and consumer protection arm of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).



2. The creation of DHHS occurred as a double whammy with the perverse Court of

International Trade of the United States (CoITUS) in 1980. As the probable cause of the

HIV/AIDS epidemic CoITUS must change their name to Customs Court. This is to be

done on dishonorable terms whereas an injunction against the obscenity proved

insufficient to elicit any State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts pursuant

to Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), et

al, plaintiffs v. US Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and John McCain whose

foreign policies fail Asia and the Near East (ANE), US Congress in defense of Title 22

Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) and the Court of International Trade

(CoITUS), defendants HA-28-7-08. A Customs Court is a legitimate judicial institution

but a Court of International Trade is an infringement upon the free market. US Customs

Agents are for the most part armed and take people and goods into custody, giving rise to

legal issues. In the absence of crime, international trade and trade disputes are not legal

issues, but commercial and economic issues. Customs, on the other hand, is an elegant

and professional term for protecting the border, documenting migration and regulating

international trade, mostly against poison as a means of international warfare.



B. The law in general is particularly weak on the issue of poisons, toxins and disease

pathogens and for every step forward in scientific legislation the law, at least in the last

quarter of the 20th century, takes two steps backward. Disregarding the greedy, medically

prejudiced will, the judiciary is particularly prone to the abuse of poison for three

reasons.



1.The judiciary acts as a floodgate for poison, like crime in general, as the primary

decider of what is right and wrong. If the greedy rich peer reviewed medical poisoners

and inheritors make certain poisons out to be undetectable fair game and the judiciary

closes their eyes to the truth by asking victims for bribes and taking them from the

wealthy perpetrators then self-interested humans, including judicial officers, will avail of

the poison to be relatively rich at the expense of the overall economy because they have

no fear of the law.



2. The judiciary is a skilled burglar by reason of trying such offenders and is furthermore

legally entitled to issue warrants for search and seizure and flexes its superiority to

abusively hire family, friends, neighbors, landladies and co-workers to conduct secret

investigations. The frivolous use of search warrants and prosecutorial powers is a

gateway “drug” that must be reprimanded before poison renders felonious invasions a

matter of life and death. Judicial officers abusing search warrants and investigative



243

powers to hire insiders to deliver poisons must be publicly tried and removed from office,

jail considered and the victims compensated. First Amendment Privacy Protection at

42USC(21A) IA §2000aa(b)(2) protects people from unreasonable search and seizure

unless, there is reason to believe that the immediate seizure of such materials is necessary

to prevent the death of, or serious bodily injury to, a human being.



3. The unauthorized practice of law, ultra vires in Latin, that means “without statutory

authority” is a term abused by State Bar Associations to monopolize the practice of law

for paying members of the Bar with dire threats against cooperating with unlicensed legal

researchers, namely authors, without requiring them to hire authors, completely

undermining equity and authorship in the legal system. To be scholarly professionals,

rather than illiterate hit men, State Bar Associations need incorporate reference to the

author in their rule pertaining to the unauthorized practice of law. The international

meaning of the term ultra vires involves acting without statutory authorization. In

practice, the term ultra vires aptly describes the illiterate civilian soldier/whores hired

and/or defended by lawyers to assassinate the imagined adversaries of their clients,

usually by poison, the preferred drink of the Bar. Lawyers must not take money to abet

people they know to be poisoning. The lawyer must seek to arrest such behavior by

counsel against and by informing the criminally persecuted victim who is the real person

entitled to attorney client privilege, confidentiality. The lawyer may represent clients

accused of poisoning but must not take unfair advantage of the absolute corruption of the

law of toxic substances and are criminally liable for any conspiracies to torture or murder

they engage in. The term ultra vires best expresses the epidemiological danger of

pathogen delivery posed by the legal system.



C. The problem with poison is that it is, in many diseases, a concealed weapon.

Essentially there are disease pathogens that have been identified and can be treated by

general practitioners and there are unidentified disease pathogens whose victims are

referred to specialists for expensive and dangerous medical treatment. In the modern age,

since the discovery of penicillin and various immunizations, there has been a dramatic

increase in the number of deaths from heart disease, cancer and other diseases of the

internal organs caused by the censured pathogens used to cause diseases in university

animal laboratory research of the American Journal of Physiology. Cancer (can-sir), a

very deadly disease, so often attributed to cigarette smoking and other household

carcinogens, is more accurately attributed to specific carcinogens used to cause cancer in

laboratory animals and is epidemiologically linked to domestic abuse by bar certified

lawyers. There are also corporate, profit motivated, bio-security leaks by vaccine nd

pharmaceutical manufactureres. Modern day epidemiology is however mostly an issue of

university and corporate bio-security to regulate all toxic substances and of bio-safety to

prevent accidental spills and protect against government corruption more succinctly than

Protection of Human Test Subjects. National Research Act. July 12, 1974. Title II, Public

Law 93-348 45 CFR 46 that closes its IRB to massive federal research financing.



1.The beneficiary and usual perpetrator of bio-security leaks is of course the medical

establishment. This is nothing new. The very English language cautions against putting

one‟s trust in health theology. For the last half a century, since the Nuremburg Code



244

Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council

Law No. 10, medical science has not progressed as fast as the deadly and expensive

diseases upon younger populations and more and more people are chronically sick, obese

and disabled usually as the result of the malevolent distribution of laboratory supply. A

medical rebellion was codified in Protocol (III) Additional to the Geneva Conventions

relating the Adoption of a New Distinctive Emblem of 8 December 2005 that is

unnecessary and unjustified without reference to the Geneva Protocol (to the Hague

Conventions) for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other

Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare 17 June 1925 in Art. 6 pertaining to

Prevention and Repression of Misuse.



2. To create a bio-security regime that is safe there are two international and one national

issue.



a.WHO drafted a Working Paper on Patent Issues related to Influenza Viruses and their

Genes, revealing that in their attempts to patent Influenza HA and NA genes and gene

products that specifically claim or may encompass H5N1 sequences they were forced to

choose from 6 patent families, vectors or cells containing influenza genes and vaccines

containing influenza products 18 patent families and siRNA and antisense directed to

H5N1, also oligonucelotides having H5N1 sequence 12 patent families. These families

of medically useful knowledge and control of toxic substances are located in neither

Section A(61) Human Necessities: Medical or Veterinary Science; Hygiene nor Section

C(07-08) Chemistry; Metallurgy: Organic Compounds, but are left open and all influenza

virus patents are reported to have been denied. The Strasbourg Agreements to do not

agree. The PCT must adopt a special classification for disease pathogens in cooperation

with the Office for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) as their Search Office.



b. The Headquarters of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is

located in the Hague, Netherlands. The fundamental obligations of States Parties to the

Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997 are set out in its very first article. Each

State Party undertakes never under any circumstances: (a) To develop, produce,

otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, directly or

indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; (b) To use chemical weapons; (c) To engage in

any military preparations to use chemical weapons; (d) To assist, encourage or induce, in

any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this

Convention. (Article 1, paragraph 1). Each State Party undertakes to destroy all chemical

weapons and all chemical weapons production facilities that it owns or possesses or that

are located in any place under its jurisdiction and control, as well as to destroy all

chemical weapons that it abandoned on the territory of another State Party. As it is

written the Convention is fatally flawed at Art. II(2) in the definition of Toxic Chemical -

any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death,

temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. To be completely

effective the word “disease” needs to be included in the definition so that Toxic Chemical

means - any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause

disease, death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.

Organization is striving to include pharmaceutical interests in their next conference. In



245

the absence of scientific vindication of the unnaturalness of the leading causes of death

Courts should rely more on the Convention on the Prohibition of Development,

Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriologic (Biologic) and Toxin Weapons and Their

Destruction (BTWC) of 1972 that entered into force on 26 March 1975 when choosing

between torture victims, forensic scientists and epidemiologists.



c. The distinctly American phenomenon is that the Department of Health and Human

Services (HHS; half high school) cannot receive their degree of Public Health

Department (PHD) until they have amended the schedules of the Controlled Substances

Act (CSA) of 1971 to include pathologic agents of disease to the satisfaction of the

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) that must create an

Education Division (ED) to do the job without advocating propaganda.



§41e Independence of the Judiciary



A. Independence Day is celebrated in the United States with fireworks to commemorate

the signing of the Declaration of Independence that was ratified by the a Congress of the

15 states with 56 signatories on 4 July 1776 after the document was drafted by Thomas

Jefferson between 11 June and 28 June 1776 to declare the colonies independent of King

George III. To properly dedicate this Chapter on the judiciary to the spirit of

independence this document is revised annually for the 4th of July.



1. The core of the document states - When in the Course of human events, it becomes

necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands, which have connected them with

another, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the

causes which impel them to the separation.



a. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are

endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,

Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-



b. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just

powers from the consent of the governed.



c. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the

Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.



d. The document goes on to formally list the grievances of the American people against

the tyrant King George as legal briefs should.



B. The legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent

judiciary will interpret and apply the laws. Judges, individually and collectively, must

respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain

confidence that the legal system is representing liberty interests. The judge is an arbiter of

facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government







246

under the rule of law. Jurists are also vested with the authority to rule on the facts and the

law and to nullify unjust laws by returning a not guilty verdict.



1. The 2004 edition of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct is intended to establish

standards for ethical conduct of judges. It consists of broad statements called Canons. It

was adopted by the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association on August 16,

1972 and underwent three revisions. The Code replaced the Canons of Judicial Ethics,

which had been formulated almost 50 years earlier.



CANON 1 A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.



CANON 2 A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in

all of the judge‟s activities.



CANON 3 A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and

diligently.



CANON 4 A judge shall so conduct the judge‟s extra-judicial activities as to

minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.



CANON 5 A judge or judicial candidate shall refrain from inappropriate political

activity.



C. The purpose of the Basic Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary of 6

September 1985, is to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained to

achieve international co-operation in promoting and encourage respect for human rights

and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination. The Universal Declaration of

Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, of the

presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent,

independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The fundamental premise is that

the judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in

accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,

pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.



1. The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting

of Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002 explains, a judge shall

exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of the judge's assessment of the

facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any

extraneous influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect,

from any quarter or for any reason. A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate

connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government,

but must also appear to a reasonable observer to be free there from.



D. The independence of tribunals is rooted in the separation of powers in a democratic

society. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature.

Protection of the independence of the judiciary requires that people are selected as judges



247

on the basis of their legal training and experience. Judges should not be selected for

"improper motives" and should be properly qualified. Promotion of judges should be

based on objective factors, particularly ability, integrity and experience. States must

provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to perform its functions, and to ensure

adequate salaries and pensions for judges.



1. As a procedural safeguards to protect individuals against any "misjudgments and

professional lapses" Judges and lawyers may be subjected to disciplinary procedures and

sanctions for misconduct, including suspension and removal. The state may also be liable

to pay compensation for judicial misconduct. However, judges should enjoy personal

immunity from civil suits for damages for improper acts or omissions in the exercise of

their judicial functions. Judges shall be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons

of incapacity or behavior that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.



2. The right to an impartial tribunal requires that judges and jurors have no interest or

stake in a particular case and do not have pre-formed opinions about it. Judges must not

harbor preconceptions about the matter put before them, and that they must not act in

ways that promote the interests of one of the parties. Decisions about facts must be made

solely on the evidence, and the facts must be applied to the applicable laws. There must

be no interference, restriction, inducements, pressure, or threats from any quarter.



E. As Alexander Hamilton explained, “the independence of the judges once destroyed,

the constitution is gone, it is a dead letter; it is a vapor which the breath of faction in a

moment may dissipate”. More than any other branch of the government the judiciary

must deny the government, the use of force, intimidation and coercion. The judiciary

must frequently abolish unwarranted programs that unnecessarily infringe upon the

liberties of the people.



1. The judiciary applies the rule of law to the behavior of the armed forces in the

adjudication of crime. The judiciary is therefore an armed force in their own right and

must be careful not to dominate or subvert civil and political affairs. Justice is reserved

for the prevention and punishment of crime and is prone to be a dangerous and repressive

organ. The judiciary should not be integrated into society at large by incorporation with

other branches of government or corporate databases to prevent coups.



2. Settling torts, infractions of the law, on a daily basis, the judiciary is a fine venue for

giving due process to disputes, peaceful revolution and small changes within the

government and amongst private parties on a case-by-case basis, in writing. Litigants are

however referred to the unarmed power of parliamentary democracy in their pursuit of

social progress and secure in their equal access to justice should they be denied. As a

rule of thumb recourse to the judiciary should be limited to redressing the judiciary.



F. Independence is a double-edged sword. The Judiciary must not only prevent its

officers from infiltrating civil and political society but must prevent the legislature and

executive branches of the government from infringing upon the independence and

impartiality of the judiciary to enlist them to commit or abet slavery or other crimes



248

against humanity. While courts of law are reliant upon the legislature for the laws that

they interpret and apply to the facts of the case the judiciary is an independent branch of

government that must not be forced to apply sweeping and unwise legislative measures to

individual cases. To protect their independence, the independence of the nation, and the

freedom of the people, the judiciary has the power to rule laws unconstitutional.



1. Peace, justice and nonviolence are fundamental to the Rule of Law. The golden rule is

that one should do unto others as one would have done unto your self. An unjust law

however is no law at all. What is the difference between the two? How does one

determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with

the moral law. An unjust law is one that is out of harmony with God, the constitution or

human rights. An unjust law is a human law that is not routed in eternal law and natural

law. Any law that degrades human personality or is born in false witness is unjust. John

Locke wrote in the 17th century: "The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to

preserve and enlarge freedom."



2. The rule of law is a foundational principle of our constitutional structure that lies at the

root of our system of government. Constitutional rights and freedoms are subject only to

such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and

democratic society. According to British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie 2007

SCC 21 25 May: The rule of law embraces at least three principles.



The first principle is that the “law is supreme over officials of the government as well as

private individuals and thereby preclusive of the influence of arbitrary power”:



The second principle “requires the creation and maintenance of an actual order of

positive laws which preserves and embodies the more general principle of normative

order”:



The third principle requires that “the relationship between the state and the individual

shall be regulated by law”:



G. In light of the particular statutory provision on the principle of deference a broad

statement of the deference that courts owe to municipal governments. In large part, this

deference is founded upon the democratic character of municipal decisions. Deference to

municipal decisions “adheres to the fundamental axiom that courts must accord proper

respect to the democratic responsibilities of elected municipal officials and the rights of

those who elect them.” Municipal law requires that municipal governments hold

meetings that are open to the public, in order to imbue municipal governments with a

robust democratic legitimacy. The democratic legitimacy of municipal decisions does

not spring solely from periodic elections, but also from a decision-making process that is

transparent, accessible to the public, and mandated by law London (City) v. RSJ Holdings

Inc. 2007 SCC 29 June 21. In certain circumstances, however, the powers of one level of

government must be protected against intrusions, even incidental ones, by the other

level. For this purpose, the courts have developed the doctrines of inter jurisdictional







249

immunity and federal paramountcy in Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta 2007 SCC 22

May 21



1. The doctrine of inter-jurisdictional immunity recognizes that our Constitution is based

on an allocation of exclusive powers to both levels of government, not concurrent

powers, although these powers are bound to interact in the realities of the life of our

Constitution. It is a doctrine of limited application, which should be restricted to its

proper limit. Inter-jurisdictional immunity should in general be reserved for situations

already covered by precedent. This means, in practice, that it will be largely reserved for

those heads of power that deal with federal things, persons or undertakings, or where in

the past its application has been considered absolutely indispensable or necessary to

enable Parliament or a provincial legislature to achieve the purpose for which exclusive

legislative jurisdiction was conferred, as discerned from the constitutional division of

powers as a whole. While in theory a consideration of inter-jurisdictional immunity is

apt for consideration after the pith and substance analysis, in practice the absence of prior

case law favouring its application to the subject matter at hand will generally justify a

court proceeding directly to the consideration of federal paramountcy.



2. According to the doctrine of federal paramountcy, when the operational effects of

provincial legislation are incompatible with federal legislation, the federal legislation

must prevail and the provincial legislation is rendered inoperative to the extent of the

incompatibility. The doctrine applies not only to cases in which the provincial legislature

has legislated pursuant to its ancillary power to trench on an area of federal jurisdiction,

but also to situations in which the provincial legislature acts within its primary powers,

and Parliament pursuant to its ancillary powers. In order to trigger the application of the

doctrine, the onus is on the party relying on the doctrine of federal paramountcy to

demonstrate that the federal and provincial laws are in fact incompatible by establishing

either that it is impossible to comply with both laws or that to apply the provincial law

would frustrate the purpose of the federal law.



3. All constitutional legal challenges to legislation should follow the same approach.

First, the pith and substance of the state and the federal law should be examined to ensure

that they are both validly enacted laws and to determine the nature of the overlap, if any,

between them. Second, the applicability of the state law to the federal undertaking or

matter in question must be resolved with reference to the doctrine of inter-jurisdictional

immunity. Third, only if both the state law and the federal law have been found to be

valid pieces of legislation, and only if the state law is found to be applicable to the federal

matter in question, then both statutes must be compared to determine whether the overlap

between them constitutes a conflict sufficient to trigger the application of the doctrine of

federal paramountcy.



H. Even federal legislation can be ruled unconstitutional by the Court using the Oakes

test according to Canada Attorney General v. Hislop 2007 SCC 10 March 1. If the

legislation fails under any one of four tests it cannot be justified.



1. Is the objective of the legislation pressing and substantial?



250

2. Is there a rational connection between the government‟s legislation and its objective?



3. Does the government‟s legislation minimally impair the constitutional right or freedom

at stake?



4. Is the delirious effect of the Constitutional violation outweighed by the salutary effect

of the legislation?



I. The Constitution of a country is a statement of the will of the people to be governed in

accordance with certain principles held as fundamental and certain prescriptions

restrictive of the powers of the legislature and government. It is the “supreme law” of the

nation, unalterable by the normal legislative process, and un-suffering of laws

inconsistent with it. The duty of the judiciary is to interpret and apply the laws of the

nation to each of the states, and it is thus our duty to ensure that the constitutional law

prevails.



1. The text of the Constitution establishes the broad confines of the supreme law, but it is

up to the courts to interpret and apply the Constitution in any given context. The

inviolability of the Constitution ensures that our nation‟s most cherished values are

preserved, while the role of the courts in applying the Constitution ensures that the law is

sufficiently flexible to change over time to reflect advances in human understanding. But

it also means that the Constitution, at any snapshot in time, is only as robust as the court

interpreting it. If the judiciary errs or is slow to recognize that previous interpretations of

the Constitution no longer correspond to social realities, it must change the

unconstitutional law. We consider that restrictions on conduct be proportionate and that

conditions may not be imposed which collectively amount to a deprivation of liberty

should be enshrined in the statute.



2. National laws are not a defense against serious violations of internationally recognized

human rights. Under Art. 32 of the Draft Articles of State Responsibility for

Internationally Wrongful Acts of 2001 “the responsible State may not rely on the

provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to comply with its obligations”.

Under paragraph 2 of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and

Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and

Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005 if they have

not already done so, States shall, as required under international law, ensure that their

domestic law is consistent with their international legal obligations by:



(a) Incorporating norms of international human rights law and international humanitarian

law into their domestic law, or otherwise implementing them in their domestic legal

system;



(b) Adopting appropriate and effective legislative and administrative procedures and

other appropriate measures that provide fair, effective and prompt access to justice;







251

(c) Making available adequate, effective, prompt and appropriate remedies, including

reparation, as defined below;



(d) Ensuring that their domestic law provides at least the same level of protection for

victims as that required by their international obligations. International law is therefore

superior to national laws, using common sense, even outdated provisions of the national

constitution.



3. Judges can and should adapt the common law to reflect the changing social, moral and

economic fabric of the country. Judges should not be quick to perpetuate rules whose

social foundation has long since disappeared. Nonetheless, there are significant

constraints on the power of the judiciary to change the law. In a constitutional

democracy such as ours it is the legislature and not the courts, which has the major

responsibility for law reform; and for any changes to the law, which may have complex

ramifications, however necessary, or desirable such changes may be, they should be left

to the legislature. The judiciary should confine itself to the justness of the application of

the law and those incremental changes which are necessary to keep the common law in

step with the dynamic and evolving fabric of our society pursuant to Her Majesty the

Queen v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15



§41f Judiciary Committees



A. There is a Congressional and a Senate Judiciary Committee. Any substantive

legislation that carries a possibility for criminal or civil penalties can be referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary. In the Federalist Papers the founding fathers of the US

Constitution foresaw a Judiciary Committee that would try the indiscretions of the

criminal judges to protect the rights of the citizens from oppression.



1. On June 3, 1813, a standing Committee on the Judiciary was established by the House

of Representatives to consider legislation relating to judicial proceedings.



2. The Committee on the Judiciary was first authorized on December 10, 1816. The

Committee has one of the broadest jurisdictions. Senator Dudley Chase of Vermont,

became the first Chairman of the Committee on December 13, 1816.



3. The longest sitting chairman, before limits were established, was Senator James O.

Eastland of Mississippi who served 22 years from 1956 through 1978.



B. The Senate Judiciary Committee is responsible for the nomination and confirmation of

Federal Judges. The Committee holds meetings when called by the Chairman.

Witnesses are expected to report their intention to attend at least 48 hours in advance. At

least 10 members are required for a quorum. Non debatable issues may be brought to a

vote. The Committee Clerk keeps track of attendance.



C. The House Committee on the Judiciary has been called the lawyer for the House of

Representatives because of its jurisdiction over matters relating to the administration of



252

justice in Federal courts, administrative bodies, and law enforcement agencies. Its

infrequent but important role in impeachment proceedings has also brought it much

attention. The legislative jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committees encompasses:



(a) Civil liberties.

(b) Federal courts & judges.

(c) Local courts in the territories & possessions.

(d) National penitentiaries.

(e) Judicial proceedings generally.



D. Under current law the Judiciary Committee is entitled to $6,500 per year appropriation

for the preparation of the code and supplement for the United States and the District of

Columbia under 1USC(3)§213. There is a five year period for the drafting of new statute

under §202(c). This law unethically monopolizes the power to draft laws in the

Judiciary Committee, a committee singularly unfit for the job. This law subjects

petitioners to unnecessary danger, conflicts with the interests of the legislature and is in

fact a bribe. In a constitutional government it is the author/editor who is paid royalties by

the democratically elected Government, otherwise is to run a corrupt government that

does not reflect the interest of the people to sue the government for a redress of

grievances or in the worst case, as it is, a corrupt government that demands bribes and

assaults upstanding citizens. 1USC(3)§213 needs to be amended to (Strike $6,500) and

insert, More than $10,000, annual appropriations for the preparation and editing of the

Code and Supplemental of the United States and District of Columbia are made available

to the (strike Judiciary Committee) and insert, author/editor. The jurisdiction of the

Judiciary Committee needs to be limited to its intended purpose of judicial discipline.

People and commerce must not be arbitrarily subjected to jurisdiction.



§41g Term Limits



A. The United States is unique in giving their federal judges life tenure to the bench

although this royalty is not written in either the Constitution or Code. Most democracies,

including the states, usually limit their judges to terms of four to ten years. There are

350,000 members of the American Bar Association qualified to fill 875 authorized

federal judgeships, it should not be difficult to arrange for speedier election of federal

judges and justices with cooperation between the Judiciary Committee and Bar

Association.



1. Principle 11 of the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary states, “the

term of office of judges, their independence, security, adequate remuneration, conditions

of service, pensions and the age of retirement shall be adequately secured by law."



2. Even in the best of times the judiciary, primarily responsible for the conviction and

punishment of criminals, is a cruel job that conflicts with the fundamental freedoms of

constitutional governance, democratic and judicial principles. Judges therefore do need

to be secure in their office, otherwise they would be easily removed as expedient by

political criminals and they must be able to tolerate the discipline needed to reform. On



253

the other hand, as a power, slavery has always been correlated with absolute corruption,

and it would be foolish to allow judges to preside over their follies for their entire lives.



a.For instance, in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon 548 US __(2006) the majority opinion of

the US Supreme Court was to allow the execution of prisoners in violation of a direct

order of the International Court of Justice not to kill specific members of a group of

Mexican Nationals, an order not to kill is of such merit that it should be valid when

issued in behalf of anyone who has surrendered, by anyone, let alone the World Court,

who retaliated to corrupt the corruptible with a plague of swine flu H1N1.



3. To improve the democratic institution of the federal judiciary and relieve the burden of

proving judicial misconduct from the uncompensated, unprotected and easily intimidated

members of the public it behooves Congress to set term limits for judges similar to their

own two and six year terms. Five years is recommended. Supreme Court Justices would

be limited to two five-year terms so as to spread the wealth more equally amongst judges.



B. In the past two and half decades, as the result of the judiciary‟s inability to defend

their independence from the Congressional enforcement of mandatory minimum

sentencing and the general acceptance of harsh new sentences by judges and the US

Sentencing Commission, the prison population has quintupled to be the largest and most

concentrated of any nation in the world, severely damaging the reputation of the

American judiciary and government as being fair and rational to the public.



1. Displeasure with the judiciary has led to dissatisfaction with judge‟s salaries. Statistics

show that judges are not performing in their role of defending liberty wherefore their

salaries have not increased much, beyond the annual cost of living increase, in recent

years. On the flip side of the coin, judges are increasingly unhappy with their work and

demand higher salaries to cope with the stress of unjust laws and to compete with

attorneys in private practice.



2. The Chief Justice in the 2006 Year-End-Report of the Federal Judiciary of January 1,

2007 wrote, “Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure…

Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure, Federal judges

rarely left the bench in the past but are now leaving at an increasing rate, 38 in the past

six years, including 17 in the last two years”.



3. Let them quit, in fact help them to quit. America must win this battle of attrition

against the unpopular federal judges. There are a hundred thousand ABA lawyers who

would be happy to do a short stint in a federal judgeship. The federal judges have failed

their duty to pursue justice and defend liberty, let them all be fired by the trial of

democracy.



C. The credibility of the Presidential elections since 2000 have been dubious, if the

Democratic and Republican (DR) part monopoly on power could ever be trusted. In the

2000 elections Bush Jr. defeated Democratic candidate former Vice President Al Gore on

the strength of 31 electoral college states although the Republicans lost the popular



254

election with 50,456,062 votes for Bush and Cheney and 50.996,582 votes for Gore and

Lieberman. The US Supreme Court decided the 2000 election in the case of Bush v.

Gore on 12 December 2000 under the XII Amendment overturning Bush v. Palm Beach

County Canvassing Board on writ of certiorari to the Florida supreme court December 4,

2000 that calls for recounts under Fla. Stat. §102.141(4) (2000). The proper ruling in

such a close election should have been for a completely new vote. It is not genuinely

within the power of the judiciary to decide an election, but they might call for a new vote.



1. In the 2004 Presidential elections Bush Jr. defeated Democratic candidate John F.

Kerry on the strength of 286 electoral college votes to 251. The popular vote was

60,693,281 to 57,355,978. There were widespread instances of intimidation and

misinformation in violation of the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal

Protection, Due Process and the Ohio right to vote according to Ohio Elections: Status

Report of the House Judiciary Committee Staff HA-5-1-05. The popular vote was

however too decisive with a margin of more than 3 million votes, to justify a new

election or substantiate any allegations of fraud and intimidation on the basis of what

occurred to a hundred thousand people in Ohio and continues in Central Committee of the

Hamilton County Republican Party v. Dalton C-060269 Ohio 1st Circuit May 30, 2007.



2. Perhaps it is the federal judges, justices and US Attorneys who need to run for popular

election for Four Year Terms under the Annotated Constitution of the United States, the

Official Constitution of the Hospitals & Asylums Political Party 2011 (HAPPY) People.



Art. 2 Legal Defenses



§42 Civil Rights



A. A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege for an individual, which if interfered

with by another gives rise to an action for injury. Examples of civil rights are freedom of

speech, press, assembly, religion, political opinion, the right to vote, freedom from

slavery and involuntary servitude, and the right to equality in public places.



1. Discrimination occurs when the civil rights and freedoms of an individual are denied

or interfered with because of their membership in a particular group or class.

Discrimination is synonymous with inequality. Statutes have been enacted to prevent

discrimination based on a persons race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of

servitude, physical limitation, national origin, political belief and in some instances

sexual preference. Protection of discrimination needs to be extended to censurable and

unequal behavior between individuals and between the government and individual(s),

namely censorship.



B. A two-part analysis was established for determining whether a violation of a person‟s

freedom has occurred. The first step asks whether the activity is within the protected

sphere of free expression. If the activity conveys or attempts to convey a meaning, it has

expressive content and prima facie falls within the scope of the guarantee. Once it is







255

established that the activity is protected, the second step asks if the impugned legislation

infringes that protection, either in purpose or effect.



1. “Freedom” is defined as “the absence of coercion or constraint”. It is because of the

very nature of freedom that generally imposes a negative obligation on the government

and not a positive obligation of protection or assistance. Usually the government is

requested to cease and desist in an action or law that unfairly limits personal liberty. A

situation might arise in which, in order to make a fundamental freedom meaningful, a

posture of restraint would not be enough, and positive governmental action might be

required. This might, for example, take the form of legislative intervention aimed at

preventing certain conditions, which muzzle expression, or ensuring public access to

certain kinds of information.



2. The state must be accountable for the inability to exercise the fundamental freedom. A

court must proceed in the following way. First it must consider whether the activity for

which the claimant seeks protection is a form of expression. If so, then second, the court

must determine if the claimant claims a positive entitlement to government action, or

simply the right to be free from government interference. If it is a positive rights claim,

then three factors must be considered.



3. These three factors are (1) that the claim is grounded in a fundamental freedom; (2)

that the claimant has demonstrated that exclusion from a statutory regime has the effect

of a substantial interference with their freedom of expression, or has the purpose of

infringing on their freedom and (3) that the government is responsible for the inability to

exercise the fundamental freedom. If the claimant cannot satisfy these criteria then the

claim will fail. If the three factors are satisfied then their rights have been infringed and

they are entitled to relief.



C. Slavery is the most absolute restriction on a person‟s liberty. In the beginning of the

19th Century many Parliaments abolished the slave trade civilly. Great Britain drafted an

Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1807. The Abolition Bill passed British Parliament in

August 1833. The French decree was signed by the Provisional Government in April

1848. The American colonies had been frequently disrupted by slave revolts, or the

threat of revolt as the result of the estimated 10 million Africans who were brought to the

Americas as slaves beginning in the 15th century.



1. In 1854, the Republican Party included the abolition of slavery in its manifesto and the

southern states seceded from the union in rebellion against freedom. When Abraham

Lincoln, the Republican candidate was elected to the presidency in 1860, Lincoln initially

hoped to keep the peace with Confederacy by permitting the practice of slavery.



2. On 22 September 1862, exactly one hundred days before it went into effect, and a year

after the beginning of the Civil War, Lincoln unveiled his preliminary Emancipation

Proclamation to his entire Cabinet that on the first day of January 1863, “all persons held

as slaves within any of the rebel states shall be thenceforth and forever free.”







256

3. The United States is unique because our Civil War was fought not because the slaves

revolted but because the slavers did. All told the Civil War took the lives of 364,511

Union and 133,821 Confederate troops (1861-1865). The abolition of slavery – which at

the time concerned approximately 5 million people held in unlawful servitude - became

the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of 6 December 1865 that states,



Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime

whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States of

America, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.



Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



D. After the US Civil War blacks had to fight discrimination to enjoy their civil rights to

vote and enjoy public services including schools on an equal basis with whites as

reflected in the passage of the XIV and XV Amendments to the US Constitution.



1. Severer punishments for crimes were imposed on the slave than on free persons guilty

of the same offenses. Congress, by the civil rights bill of 1866, passed in view of the

thirteenth amendment, before the fourteenth was adopted, undertook to wipe out these

burdens and disabilities, the necessary incidents of slavery, constituting its substance and

visible from; and to secure to all citizens of every race and color, and without regard to

previous servitude, those fundamental rights which are the essence of civil freedom,

namely, the same right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence,

and to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens.

These laws and the Civil Rights Act of 1875 are codified in Chapter 13 of Title 18



2. In 1868 the 14th Amendment was passed to counter the "black codes" and “Jim

Crowe” laws and ensure that no state "shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge

the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States or deprive any person of

life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person within its

jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."



3. In 1870 the 15th Amendment was passed to permanently guarantee that, throughout the

nation, no person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color and

assigned federal observers to oversee the conduct of elections. The Amendment took

nearly a century to implement.



F. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 passed March 1, 1875, entitled 'An act to protect all

citizens in their civil and legal rights. The Act Provided: That all persons within the

jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the

accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on

land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the

conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every

race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude. The Act was tried in the

Civil Rights Cases 109 U.S. 3 (1883) that found that the equal protection of the law does

not extend to the individual or private society.



257

1. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was the first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction

and was the beginning of the famous nonviolent civil rights movement that fought for

equal rights in public accommodations, transportation and schools. The new act

established a Civil Rights Section of the Justice Department and empowered federal

prosecutors to obtain court injunctions against interference with the right to vote. It also

established a federal Civil Rights Commission with authority to investigate

discriminatory conditions and recommend corrective measures.



2. The Civil Rights Act of 2 July 1964 PL 88-352, is codified, as amended, at 42 USC

Chapter 21 §1981 - §2000h. The Civil Rights Acts were drafted to enforce the

constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United

States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to

authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public

facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent

discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal

Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.



3. The Voting Rights Act, adopted initially in 1965 and extended in 1970, 1975, and

1982, is generally considered the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever

adopted by the United States Congress. The Act codifies and effectuates the 15th

Amendment of 3 February 1870 permanent guarantee that, throughout the nation, no

person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color and assigns federal

observers to oversee the conduct of elections, that took nearly a century to implement.

The women‟s suffrage movement was successful in securing their voting rights in the 19th

Amendment of 18 August 1920. Literacy tests and other poll taxes were abolished in the

24th Amendment of 23 January 1964.



4. Civil Rights Act of 21 November 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166) amended the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 to strengthen and improve Federal civil rights laws, to provide for damages

in cases of intentional employment discrimination, to clarify provisions regarding

disparate impact actions, and for other purposes.



G. Civil rights must evolve to redress the prison population and accept international

standards of human rights. For this purpose two Civil Rights Amendments have been

proposed in Chapter Six of this Title at §270B-1 Human Rights Amendment for insertion

in the first section of Title 42 USC Chapter 21 Subchapter I General Principles §1980 and

§270B-2 10 Year Community Based Corrections Equality Plan Amendment for insertion

in 42 USC Chapter 21 Subchapter I-A Institutionalized Persons §1997k. Civil Rights

Amendment HA-27-8-07



§42a Habeas Corpus



A. Habeas corpus, Latin for, “you may have the body”, is the plea prisoners make to

challenge their detention in applications for a writ of habeas corpus. The Framers viewed

freedom from unlawful restraint as a fundamental precept of liberty, and they understood

the writ of habeas corpus as a vital instrument to secure that freedom. Writs of habeas



258

corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts and

any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions. The District Court may accept

applications from the state court after state remedies have been exhausted under

28USC(153)§2241.



1. Applications for a writ of habeas corpus shall be in writing, signed by the petitioner,

with reference to the person having custody and are amendable. A Court, justice or judge

entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or

issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted.

The writ, or order to show cause shall be directed to the person having custody of the

person detained. It shall be returned within three days unless for good cause additional

time, not exceeding twenty days, is allowed. The person to whom the writ or order is

directed shall make a return certifying the true cause of the detention. When the writ or

order is returned a day shall be set for hearing, not more than five days after the return

unless for good cause additional time is allowed.



2. Writs shall be granted if the factual predicate for the claim could not have been

discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and the facts underlying the

claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to

establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable

fact finder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense. Before a

second application can be heard by the District Court a certificate of appeal ability must

be granted by Circuit Court of Appeals. Decisions are final.



3. A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress

claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in

violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without

jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum

authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court which

imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.



4. A motion attacking a sentence shall be granted unless the files and records of the case

conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. The court shall cause notice to

be served upon the United States attorney, grant a prompt hearing thereon, determine the

issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law. If the court finds that the

judgment was rendered without jurisdiction, or that the sentence imposed was not

authorized by law or otherwise open to collateral attack, or that there has been such a

denial or infringement of the constitutional rights of the prisoner as to render the

judgment vulnerable to collateral attack, the court shall vacate and set the judgment aside

and shall discharge the prisoner or re-sentence him or grant a new trial or correct the

sentence as may appear appropriate. A court may entertain and determine such motion

without the production of the prisoner at the hearing under 28USC(153)§2255



B. The writ of habeas corpus began in England's Runnymede meadow on June 15, 1215,

when dissident English barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, at sword point,

limiting the power of the king in exchange for his right to rule. The writ of habeas corpus



259

was among the rights articulated that day, and it has since evolved into the principal

safeguard against arbitrary executive detention, torture and maltreatment of prisoners.

1679 Habeas Corpus Act stated that a writ of habeas corpus requires someone holding a

person in prison to produce the person to a court. Failure of a judge or jailer to comply

resulted in a hefty penalty of £500. Patterned after the habeas corpus clause of the US

Constitution the 1794 Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, suspended Habeas Corpus until

February 1795 after the arrest of leaders of the Constitutional and Corresponding

Societies. It was renewed repeatedly until 1801 - with a possible hiatus in the period

1795/1797. Otherwise the writ of habeas corpus has been respected in Great Britain.



1. Art. I Sec. 9 Clause 2 of the US Constitution states, “The privilege of the writ of

habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the

public safety may require it.” The Suspension Clause is designed to protect against these

cyclical abuses. The Clause protects the rights of the detained by a means consistent with

the essential design of the Constitution. It ensures that, except during periods of formal

suspension, the Judiciary will have a time-tested device, the writ, to maintain the

"delicate balance of governance" that is itself the surest safeguard of liberty. The Clause

protects the rights of the detained by affirming the duty and authority of the Judiciary to

call the jailer to account. The essence of habeas corpus is an attack by a person in

custody upon the legality of that custody".



2. Alexander Hamilton explained that by providing the detainee a judicial forum to

challenge detention, the writ preserves limited government. As he explained in The

Federalist No. 84: "The practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the

favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny. The observations of the judicious

Blackstone ... are well worthy of recital: 'To bereave a man of life ... or by violence to

confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act

of despotism as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation;

but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are

unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous

engine of arbitrary government.' And as a remedy for this fatal evil he emphatically

lauded the writ of habeas corpus.



3. There is emerging opinion in international law habeas corpus privilege is an

inalienable human right in all circumstances that may not be suspended because of a

declared state of emergency. Habeas corpus is not a get out of jail free card but a right

for individuals to petition the court to challenge the terms and treatment of their

detention. Habeas corpus is the most important safeguard of liberty, without this right

judicial decisions could not be contested nor would the accused even be given a trial.

Whereas it is these basic liberties that make our nation worth defending it defeats the

purpose to suspend habeas corpus rights in times of war and emergency. Relegating

suspects to torturous interrogations when they could be given due process in a court of

law, is not likely improve the security situation, while a fair and speedy trial will.









260

C. The ACLU Day of Action to Restore Law and Justice HA-26-6-07 bused 4,000 people

to lobby Capitol Hill for an agenda to,



1. Restore habeas corpus and due process.

2. Pass the Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.

3. End torture and abuse in secret prisons.

4. Stop extraordinary rendition: secretly kidnapping people and sending them to countries

that torture.

5. Close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay and other prisoner of war camps and

give those currently held access to justice.

6. Investigate wrongdoing and ensure those who broke the law are held accountable.

7. Return to the rule of law.



D. Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007 S. 576 and HR 1415 and the Habeas Corpus

Restoration Act of 2007 S.185, H.R.267, H.R.1189, H.R. 2543 and H.R.1416 make

amends to the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, S. 3930, of October 17, that is

unconstitutional from section 5 on, to uphold the right for these detainees to challenge

their detention in the federal court as ordered in Rasul v. Bush No. 03-334 (2004) that

liberated 200 from Guantánamo Bay. In Boumedine v. Bush No. 06-1195 (2008) the

Supreme Court ruled that MCA §7 was an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of

habeas corpus. The constitutional privilege of habeas corpus, a privilege not to be

withdrawn except in conformance with the Suspension Clause, Art. I, §9, cl. 2.

Questions regarding the legality of the detention are to be resolved in the first instance by

the District Court.



1. Special renditions, the extradition of people to foreign countries where they run the

risk of being tortured is prohibited under the Art. 3 of the International Convention

against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment A/39/51 (1984). The

EU has prohibited member states of accepting detainees for questioning in secret CIA

detention centers under penalty of sanction. It is forbidden to export suspects to foreign

countries for interrogation without just cause and a public trial by a competent tribunal in

both sending and receiving nation. Taking into consideration the condition of the

American judiciary it is also prohibited to import foreign detainees and suspects into the

United States whereas they would be more fairly tried in the nation of arrest.



2. It is customary international law for prisoners of war, who have not been adjudicated

of war crimes, to be released and repatriated to their native country upon the cessation of

hostilities. The United States has dozens of detention centers in Afghanistan and Iraq

that need to be repatriated to the domestic justice system upholding international fair trial

standards pursuant to the Application of Article 118 of the Third Geneva Convention

HA-2-11-04 and Hamdi v. Rumsfield No. 03-6696 (2004).





E. The privilege of the write of habeas corpus logically extends to protect the right of

prisoners to protest torture or the execution of the death penalty. The death penalty was

abolished by the Supreme Court of the United States in Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238



261

(1972) when it was ruled that the then existing laws governing the use of capital

punishment in the USA were unconstitutional. This decision however failed to sway the

legislature and the deviant practice was begun again in 1976 and must again be abolished.

As of 6 Dec. 2005 1002 prisoners had been publicly executed in the USA since 1976.



1. The US was one of the few countries to allow the execution of juveniles in violation to

Art. 6(5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2200A (XXI) 1966

until Roper v. Simmons No. 03-633 Argued October 13, 2004--Decided March 1, 2005

abolished the death penalty for juveniles.



F. The ABA Kennedy Commission Report of June 23, 2004 admitted that the US had the

most prisoners of any nation in the world and that measures would need to be taken to

redress this problem. The next day, in Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24,

2004 the Court eliminated sentencing guidelines schemes.



1. Sentences imposed under such guidelines in cases currently pending on direct appeal,

or in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy. In both legislative and litigate practice

Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward rather upward, mandatory minimum

schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for most crimes where there are significant

mitigating factors. USA v. Booker J. & Fanfan No. 04-104-105 (2005) provided for the

wholesale acquittal of drug convictions.



2. There is an enormous backlog of habeas petitions under the Blakely ruling seeking to

minimize their maximum minimum sentences. The maxim is that justice delayed is

justice denied. The federal judiciary must clearly prioritize granting writs of habeas

corpus for people proving their innocence and for time served.



3. As impartial arbitrators judges and judicial associations must take a de minimis interest

in the popular persecutions demanding harsh sentencing or be liable for disciplinary

action by the Bar. Sentencing must be something that judges limit their interest in.

Judges should issue sentences far less than the statutory maximum in most cases. They

should expect to see the vast majority of guideline sentences commuted to halfway

houses in nearly every case.



4. New rules regarding prisoners serving 85% of their sentence are unconstitutional

whereas the mandatory minimum sentencing regime has already been ruled to be cruel

and unusual punishment. Sentences are supposed to be going down, not up.



5. To make progress with the rule of law it is recommended to use the sentence of the

trial court as a guideline on how long a person must be in custody in both prison and

supervised release. If fully implemented the prison population could go down and

community corrections programs would flourish.



6. Until the US sentencing regime is equal to that imposed in Canada, Mexico and

Europe judges will need to depart dramatically downward in their sentencing. To release

prisoners earlier without jeopardizing the security of the community federal, state and



262

local parole boards will need to make more liberal use of the conservative supervisory

strategy of community corrections.



G. The guiding principles of sentencing under 18USC§3553(a) are to reduce legislative

sentencing through appellate case study, provide certainty and fairness in meeting the

purposes of sentencing, avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with

similar records who have been found guilty of similar criminal conduct, maintain

sufficient flexibility to permit individualized sentences when warranted by a

rehabilitative treatment not taken into account in the establishment of general sentencing

practices and to reflect, to the full extent practicable, the advancement of knowledge of

human behavior as it relates to the criminal justice process.



H. The executive is also an important venue for liberation. The President and Governors

are authorized to grant pardons and commutation of sentence. For instance President

Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison

term in the CIA leak case July 2, 2007. Libby was convicted in March, the highest-

ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair. Exodus 14

VS 14 says that "the lord will fight my case and I shall hold my peace".



§42b Immunity



A. Immunity is integral to the defense. Medical immunity is a state of having sufficient

biological defenses to avoid infection, disease, or other unwanted biological invasion, and

is related to the functions of the immune system. Legal immunity confers a status on a

person or body that makes that person or body free from otherwise legal obligations such

as, liability for damages, punishment for criminal acts or unlawful search and seizure.

Any action or proceeding brought against an individual who is entitled to immunity shall

be dismissed. Such immunity may be established upon motion or suggestion by or on

behalf of the individual under 22USC(6)§254d.



B. Article 105 of the Charter of the United Nations provides that the Organization shall

enjoy in the territory of each of its Member such privileges and immunities as are

necessary for the fulfillment of its purposes. Representatives of the Members of the

United Nations and officials of the Organization shall similarly enjoy such privileges and

immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection

with the Organization. With respect to a nonparty to the Vienna Convention, the mission,

the members of the mission, their families, and diplomatic couriers shall enjoy the

privileges and immunities specified in the Vienna Convention under 22USC(6)§254b.



C. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961 (T.I.A.S.

numbered 7502; 23 U.S.T. 3227), entered into force with respect to the United States on

December 13, 1972. Article 22 provides, the premises of the mission, their furnishings

and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune

from search, requisition, attachment or execution. Article 31 ensures at 1. A diplomatic

agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. He shall

also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction. Under Article



263

39(1&2) Every person entitled to privileges and immunities shall enjoy them from the

moment he enters the territory of the receiving State on proceeding to take up his post to

when the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end,

such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the

country. Under Art. 44 the receiving State must, even in case of armed conflict, grant

facilities in order to enable persons enjoying privileges and immunities, it must, in

particular, in case of need, place at their disposal the necessary means of transport for

themselves and their property. States may designate a representative of the mission a

persona non grata and have them prevented from entering or removed from the country.



D. The Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of February 13,

1946 elaborates at section 2 the United Nations, its property and assets wherever located

and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process except

insofar as in any particular case it has expressly waived its immunity. Under section 3

the premises of the United Nations shall be immune from, requisition, confiscation,

expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative,

judicial or legislative action. Under Section 4 the archives of the United Nations, and in

general all documents belonging to it or held by it, shall be inviolable wherever located.

Section 11(a) assures representatives of Members immunity from personal arrest or

detention and from seizure of their personal baggage, and, in respect of words spoken or

written and all acts done by them in their capacity as representatives, immunity from

legal process of every kind.



1. In order to secure, complete freedom of speech and independence in the discharge of

their duties, the immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and

all acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue to be accorded,

notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer the representatives of Members

under section 12. Privileges and immunities are accorded to the representatives of

Members not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves, but in order to

safeguard the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the United

Nations. Consequently a Member not only has the right but is under a duty to waive the

immunity of its representative in any case where in the opinion of the Member the

immunity would impede the course of justice under section 14. Under section 20 the

Secretary-General shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any official

in any case where, in his opinion, the immunity would impede the course of justice and

can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the United Nations. In the case of the

Secretary-General, the Security Council shall have the right to waive immunity.



2. United Nations laissez- passer may be issued to its officials under section 24. These

laissez-passer shall be recognized and accepted as valid travel documents by the

authorities of Members. Under section 29 the United Nations shall make provisions for

appropriate modes of settlement of (a) disputes arising out of contracts or other disputes

of a private law character to which the United Nations is a party; (b) Disputes involving

any official of the United Nations who by reason of his official position enjoys immunity,

if immunity has not been waived by the Secretary-General under section 29. Under

section 30 all differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the present



264

convention shall be referred to the international Court of Justice, unless in any case it is

agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement. If a difference arises

between the United Nations on the one hand and a Member on the other hand, a request

shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in accordance with

Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of the Court. The opinion given by

the Court shall be accepted as decisive by the parties.



E. Whenever a witness refuses, on the basis of his privilege against self-incrimination, to

testify or provide other information to a Court, Agency or Congress of the United States,

the witness may not refuse to comply with the order on the basis of his privilege against

self-incrimination; but no testimony or other information compelled under the order (or

any information directly or indirectly derived from such testimony or other information)

may be used against the witness in any criminal case, except a prosecution for perjury,

giving a false statement, or otherwise failing to comply with the order under

18USCV(601)§6002. A Court under §6003, Agency under §6004 or Congress under

§6005 may issue an order granting immunity when, (1) the testimony or other

information from such individual may be necessary to the public interest; and (2) such

individual has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the

basis of his privilege against self-incrimination.



F. The Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution is unique in guaranteeing a

constitutional right to confront the witnesses against you. The problem of witness

intimidation is real and prevalent. Witnesses will often not give evidence unless their

identity is withheld from the defense. If they will not give evidence, dangerous criminals

will walk free and both society and the administration of justice will suffer. The

intimidation of witnesses is an age-old and worldwide problem. Witness anonymity and

protection are an essential and fundamental requirement for the kind of fair trial which is

this country‟s constitutional goal (Pointer v Texas 380 US 400, 405 (1965)) and as one of

the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty (Kirby v United States 174 US 47, 55

(1899)). The practical significance of this right was explained in a majority opinion of the

Supreme Court in Smith v Illinois 390 US 129, 131 (1968) where the petitioner was

denied the right to ask the principal prosecution witness either his name or where he

lived, R. v. Davis [2008] UKHL 36 June 18.



1. Under 18USC§3521 the Attorney General may provide for the relocation and other

protection of a witness or a potential witness and/or their family for the Federal

Government or for a State government in an official proceeding concerning an organized

criminal activity or other serious offense, if the family or person may be endangered on

account of the participation of the witness in the judicial proceeding. The Attorney

General may provide, (A) suitable documents to enable the person to establish a new

identity or otherwise protect the person; (B) housing and moving costs; (D) payment to

meet basic living expenses.



G. US Attorney‟s Office upholds Crime Victims‟ Rights under 18USC§3771:

(1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused.







265

(2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or

any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused.

(3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court,

after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim

would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding.

(4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court

involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding.

(5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case.

(6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law.

(7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay.

(8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim‟s dignity and

privacy.



§42c Compensation for False Arrest and Torture



A. Victims of miscarriages of justice have the right to compensation from the State.

Courts must routinely pay reasonable compensation to victims of False Arrest and

Torture to effectively regulate the militia.



1.Art. 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March

1976, when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence and

when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the

ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a

miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such

conviction shall be compensated according to law.



a. If a person is convicted of a crime as the result of entrapment then that person is not

guilty. Government agents entrapped a person if three things occurred:



i. First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from

the person accused of the crime.



ii. Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing

the crime. Simply giving a person the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as

persuading the person to commit the crime.



iii. And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the

government agents spoke with that person.



2. Art. 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment of 26 June 1987 the State shall ensure in its legal system that

the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and

adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the

event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be

entitled to compensation.







266

3. Witnesses are entitled to the payment of $40 per diem when they attend trial under

28USC§1821(b). Writers are entitled to the equivalent for the time they spend doing

legal research. In 1970 the US Supreme Court remanded Hurtado v. United States 410

US 578 (1973) to the United States Congress requiring and raising the fee to pre-trial

detainees from $20 to $21 a day, irregardless of their guilt or innocence. It is fair to

afford victims of false arrest minimum wage 24 hours a day. Some states afford victims

of false arrest $50,000 a year.



4. Jurists are randomly selected from the people who respond to the solicitation and are

selected by the attorneys on the basis of the potential jurists desire to serve on the jury.

Jurists may serve longer, if they choose to remain in the jury pool, to serve judges on the

Grand Jury and in civil trials regarding multiple claims for money and/or jail time

exceeding the $20 limit set forth in the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution. A

typical jury consists of 12 people who earn $20 a day, $240 a day. People who want to

be sure to go to trial should volunteer for the Grand Jury.



5. As part of the pre-release procedures for institutionalized persons the Commissioner of

Social Security shall develop a system under which an individual can apply for

supplemental security income benefits prior to the discharge or release of the individual

from a public institution. The Commissioner shall provide notice written in simple and

clear language, that includes the address and telephone number of the local office of the

Social Security Administration which serves the under 42USC(7)XVI(B)§1393(m,n,o).



§42d Freedom from Unlawful Search and Seizure



A. The IV Amendment protects the rights of the people to property and privacy from

unwarranted police “search and seizure”. The “exclusionary” rule is the most effective

defense by preventing evidence gathered without a warrant issued with probable cause

from being used in court. Rule 41 (e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

disqualifies evidence when, (1) the property was illegally seized without warrant, (2) the

warrant is insufficient on its face, (3) the property seized is not that described in the

warrant, (4) there was not probable cause for believing the existence of the grounds on

which the warrant was issued, (5) the warrant was illegally executed.



1. Over and again the Court has emphasized that the mandate of the Fourth Amendment

requires adherence to judicial processes, and that searches conducted outside the judicial

process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate are unreasonable. The

requirement of a neutral, disinterested magistrate reflects the fundamental constitutional

premise that executive officers cannot be trusted to police themselves. The right of

privacy was deemed too precious to entrust to the discretion of those whose job is the

detection of crime and the arrest of criminals.



2. Power is a heady thing; and history shows that the police acting on their own cannot be

trusted, nor indeed can Courts and Politicians. Thus, the Constitution requires that the

deliberate, impartial judgment of a judicial officer be interposed between the citizen and

the police Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963). FISA judges have had no



267

difficulty understanding the “delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign

intelligence surveillance,” well enough to grant the executive nearly all the warrants it

claimed to need as in United States v. Truong, 629 F.2d 908, 913 (4th Cir. 1980).



B. First Amendment Privacy Protection at 42USC(21A) IA §2000aa protects people from

unreasonable search and seizure unless, there is reason to believe that the immediate

seizure of such materials is necessary to prevent the death of, or serious bodily injury to,

a human being. The mere possession of, even large quantities of, controlled substances

does not qualify as a reasonable justification for search and seizure.



1. To accurately gauge probable cause required by the Fourth Amendment against an

individuals right to privacy officers must not “violate a persons legitimate interest to

privacy”. The warrant requirement is no mere formality, it is a crucial safeguard against

abuses by executive officers.



2. Electronic eavesdropping was found by its very nature to involve an intrusion on

privacy that is broad in scope, thus bears a dangerous similarity to the general warrants

out of which our Revolution sprang. Any search conducted without a warrant is

presumptively unreasonable. Probable cause is the standard by which a particular

decision to search is tested against the constitutional mandate of reasonableness pursuant.



3. Individuals are found to have a constitutionally protected privacy interest in the content

of their telephone calls. The warrant requirement was found to be a constitutionally

mandated safeguard even for wiretaps intended to protect domestic national security.



4. Emergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or

remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The

Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the

federal government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the

light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. Even the war power does not

remove constitutional limitations safeguarding essential liberties.



C. Under federal law the interception of communication is regulated by two statutes. The

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, 50USC(36)I§1801 that permits the

President to conduct warrant less searches for 15 days following a formal declaration of

war whereupon the investigators must seek the approval of a 11 judge FISA court.



1. To deter unwarranted foreign surveillance 50USC(36)I§1809 provides that a person is

guilty of an offense if he intentionally engages in electronic surveillance under color of

law; or discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic

surveillance punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more

than five years, or both.



2. Any person who intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other

person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;

is a first offense for the entitled to appropriate injunctive relief; and a second or



268

subsequent offense shall be subject to a mandatory $500 civil fine for the Recovery of

Civil Damages under 18USC(119)§2520.



3. Hospitals and Asylums Battle Mountain Sanitarium Reserve statute likewise provides

for a $1,000 fine and up to 12 months in jail for unlawful intrusion and violation of the

rules and regulations pertaining to reservations under 24USC(3)V§154.



D. Evidence that has been unlawfully obtained is generally dismissed and may be used

against the perpetrators of the infringement or torture. Any search conducted without a

warrant is presumptively unreasonable. Probable cause is the standard by which a

particular decision to search is tested against the constitutional mandate of

reasonableness.



1. The fact that the out-of-court statement is adduced for its truth should be considered in

the context of the issues in the case so that the court may better assess the reliability of

evidence in its hearsay form.



2. The criterion of reliability is usually met either because of the way in which the

statement came about, that the person who made the statement is well treated, its contents

are trustworthy, or where circumstances permit the ultimate trier of fact to sufficiently

assess its worth Her Majesty the Queen v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15



§42e Right to an Attorney



A. The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990 obligates

lawyers exclusively to the role of defending the criminally accused and sets forth to

protect them from retaliation.



1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before

the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public hearing by an

independent and impartial tribunal, and all the guarantees necessary for the defense of

everyone charged with a penal offence.



2. The Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention

or Imprisonment provides that a detained person shall be entitled to have the assistance

of, and to communicate and consult with, legal counsel.



3. The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners recommend, in

particular, that legal assistance and confidential communication with counsel should be

ensured.



B. The purpose of lawyers is to establish conditions under which justice can be

maintained through due process. Courts are difficult and complicated for laymen to work

with. Although people are welcome to act prose, speaking for themselves, and generally

do in small cases, it is wise for parties to judicial proceedings, both plaintiffs and

defendants, to hire a lawyer to represent them. Lawyers work for their clients and may be



269

discharged or may resign if a conflict of interest manifests in which case a lawyer may be

sued to disgorge their profits Strother v. 3464920 Canada Inc. 2007 SCC 24 June 1



1. If a defendant is unable to afford a lawyer a public defender will be appointed.

Plaintiffs can often find lawyers willing to represent them, pro bono, in the public

interest, or on a contingency basis.



2. Many non-governmental organizations and non-lawyers also participate in legal

proceedings by means of the submission of briefs Amices Curie.

3. The defense of liberty is a team effort amongst judges, lawyers, friends, family,

victims and concerned citizens who are counseled to co-operate in pursuit of justice. The

Court must be prepared to pay reasonable legal fees for the preparation of legal briefs in

every case.



C. As a member of a learned profession, a lawyer should cultivate knowledge of the law

beyond its use for clients and employ that knowledge in reform of the law and work to

strengthen legal education in the public interest as best represented in the spirit of the

ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility.



1. Legal institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and

support to maintain their authority therefore lawyers should further the public's

understanding of and confidence in the rule of law and justice system.



2. A lawyer should be mindful of deficiencies in the administration of justice and

legislature and of the fact that the poor, and sometimes persons who are not poor, cannot

or have not afforded adequate legal assistance and are entitled to free, professionally

literate and friendly legal services nonetheless on a contingency or pro bono basis

whereas it is in the public interest to give all merit worthy claims due process.



D. In the US, where the legal system is in considerable disrepute, lawyers face

considerably more time in school and higher costs there from. In most countries law is a

degree program that people enter after the completion of high school. In the US law

school is only for people who have completed an undergraduate degree. Instead of

creating a higher standard for lawyers the problems of over qualification seem to

outweigh the benefits.



1. Faced with student loans often in excess of $100,000 new lawyers are forced to seek

employment with corporations or prosecuting for the state rather than in fulfilling their

obligation to defend the life and liberty of the often poor, criminally accused.



2. Excessive education leads to elitism that undermines attorney client relations with

class inequality, discrimination and collusion with other rich overeducated people whose

superiority is so often justified only in the peonage of those poorer and wiser.

Specifically, over education undermines the independence of the judiciary by capitalizing

upon the skills of degree holding political scientists, businessmen, psychologists and

other professions in proliferation of the judicial power where it should not extend.



270

Furthermore the 2006 Report of the Secretary of Education on Higher Education finds

that as the result of capitalist discrimination by universities successful college students

are increasingly “rich and dumb” and a dwindling percentage of graduates, 31% rather

than 45% of a decade ago, are even able to write prose documents, the mainstay of the

legal system.



3. For equality with other nations, whose legal systems are performing much better, the

Bar Exam should be extended to bachelor in the law programs so that students could be

Bar certified attorneys, welcome to practice for fees in courts of law, three to four years

after graduating from high school. It is true law is a scholarly profession. Although

respect for human and equal rights is taught in law school it is rarely, if ever, reflected in

the behavior of lawyers. Representing the abused and poor people alleged to be criminals

is not the domain of overeducated elite. A greater understanding would surely be

achieved if lawyers and their clients were not separated by more than one social stratum.



D. Prosecutors are government lawyers who represent the penal interests of the

government in felony cases in criminal courts. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of

27 August-7 September 1990 requires the office of prosecutors to be strictly separated

from judicial functions. The prosecutor investigates the facts of the case and proposes

the maximum sentence authorized by the legislature.



1. Prosecutors carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social,

religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination.



2. They protect the public interest, act with objectivity, take proper account of the

position of the suspect and the victim, and pay attention to all relevant circumstances,

irrespective of whether they are to the advantage or disadvantage of the suspect.



3. They keep matters in their possession confidential, unless the performance of duty or

the needs of justice require otherwise.



4. They consider the views and concerns of victims when their personal interests are

affected and ensure that victims are informed of their rights in accordance with the

Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.



5. Prosecutors shall not initiate or continue prosecution, or shall make every effort to stay

proceedings, when an impartial investigation shows the charge to be unfounded.



6. Prosecutors shall give due attention to the prosecution of crimes committed by public

officials, particularly corruption, abuse of power, grave violations of human rights and

other crimes recognized by international law and, where authorized by law or consistent

with local practice, the investigation of such offences.



7. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or

believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods,

which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving



271

torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human

rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used

such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to

ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.



8. The prosecutor‟s mission is not so much to secure a conviction as it is to achieve a just

result. The defendant is entitled to a full measure of fairness, and it is as much the

prosecutor‟s duty to see that the accused is not deprived of any statutory or constitutional

rights, as it is to prosecute Young v. United States 481 U.S. 787 (1987)



E. The Attorney General may be summoned to defend a state agency in a properly

constituted court. The role of the Attorney General is two fold, first to defend the

reputation of the state and second to discipline the government and pay victim

compensation.



1. It is generally not appropriate for an Attorney General to use their office to promote

the prosecution of civilians on either a case-by-case basis or en masse, for reason that, to

instill restraint the use of military force, justice is reserved for members of that army, a

state of prosecutors is not different in their need for self discipline of state employees.



2. The Attorney General should appear in behalf of the defendant agency in legal

proceedings when he or she has been asked to defend the state against allegations of

misconduct, abuse, neglect, malfeasance, insolvency or corruption in Court.



3. The Attorney General may institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public

facilities, fundamental freedoms and consumer safety.



§42f Right to a Fair Trial



A. The right to a fair trial is a basic human and constitutional right in all-criminal

prosecutions because it is jeopardized. The right to a fair trial is a fundamental safeguard

to assure that individuals are not unjustly punished. The basic principle in a fair trial is a

right to justice. Every government has the duty to bring to justice those responsible for

crimes. Justice is however based on respect for the rights of every individual. Justice

involves reciprocity between adversaries to satisfactorily settle legal disputes pursuant to

the written judgment of a third part neutral. Justice involves discovering laws or their

application to be unjust or unconstitutional for the pacific resolution of a case or to

request them amended or repealed. Justice requires that criminal defendants who are not

criminals against humanity be acquitted with a determination as to whether or not that

person has been convicted of an offense or directed to make reasonable restitution. The

two elements of a fair trial are truth and decent treatment.



1. The essential principle contained in the actual trial of an illegal act is that reparation

must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re-establish

the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been

committed



272

2. When people are tortured or ill treated by law enforcement officials, when innocent

individuals are convicted, or when trials are manifestly unfair the justice system is

equally liable for being prosecuted for crimes and procedural errors.



3. A judge must therefore be neutral and impartial to either the prosecutor or defendant to

ensure the case is given due process that includes a right to appeal the decision and

complain of trial errors. The decision of a judge can have a significant impact upon a

person‟s life; it is therefore of utmost importance that people enjoy a fair trial.



4. Unless human rights are upheld without discrimination in the police station, the

interrogation room, the detention centre, the court and the prison cell, the authorities have

failed in their duties and betrayed their responsibilities and in many cases the conviction

must be overturned and/or compensation paid to the falsely accused and tortured.



B. The V Amendment to the Constitution ensures that no one will be held to answer for a

capital or infamous crime unless indicted by the grand jury, nor shall anyone be twice put

in jeopardy for the same offense, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due

process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just

compensation.



1. The VI Amendment to Constitution ensures that the accused shall enjoy the right to a

speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. The arrested person must be informed of the

nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to

have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in their favor and to have the

assistance of a counsel for his defense. The jury is used far more in the United States

than in other countries.



2. States are obligated to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights

and freedoms of detainees. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the

principles of human dignity, equality before the law, the presumption of innocence, the

right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, and all the

guarantees necessary for the defense of everyone charged with a penal offence.



3. Governments shall ensure that all persons are immediately informed by the competent

authority of their right to be assisted by a lawyer of their own choice upon arrest or

detention or when charged with a criminal offence. Detained person shall be entitled to

have the assistance of, and to confidential communication and consultation with, legal

counsel.



C. Amnesty International publishes an exhaustive Fair Trials Manual that covers pre-trial

rights, rights at trial and during appeal and special cases. It is fundamental human rights

that everyone has a right to personal liberty. The essential corollary to the right to liberty

is protection against arbitrary or unlawful detention. An individual can only be deprived

of their liberty in on grounds and in accordance with the law and international standards.

Everyone is entitled to a fair hearing. The right to a fair hearing in criminal trials is



273

specified by a number of concrete rights, such as the right to be presumed innocent, the

right to be tried without undue delay, the right to prepare a defense, the right to defend

oneself in person or through counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses and the right

to protection from retroactive criminal laws.



1. A person must be informed of the reason for their arrest. As the result of the

presumption of innocence in most cases it is expected that they will be released on bond

before trial. An accused person is entitled to be notified of their rights including the right

to legal counsel and to silence, in writing and in a language they understand.



2. People held in custody are entitled have access to the outside world in the form of

prompt access to families, lawyers, doctors, a judicial official and, if the detainee is a

foreign national, to consular staff or competent international organization. The person‟s

family can be notified of their detention by the authorities.



3. Everyone deprived of their liberty has the right to challenge the lawfulness of their

detention before a court, and to have the detention reviewed on a regular basis, if the

detention is unlawful to order their release. The right to challenge the lawfulness of

detention, and to seek remedy, is invoked by applying for a writ of habeas corpus.



4. Every person who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention has an

enforceable right to reparation, including compensation. Damage incurred because of

acts or omissions by a public official contrary to the rights contained in these principles

shall be compensated according to the applicable rules or liability provided by domestic

law.



5. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for

the inherent dignity of the human person. Anyone detained or imprisoned has the right to

request improvements in their treatment or to complain about their treatment. The

authorities must reply promptly, and if the request or complaint is refused, it may be

brought to a judicial or other authority. All detained people have the right to be held only

in an officially recognized place of detention, located if possible near their place of

residence, under a valid order committing them to detention. Accused persons shall, save

in exceptional circumstances, be segregated from convicted persons and shall be subject

to separate treatment appropriate to their status as un-convicted persons.



6. No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or

to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. No circumstance whatever may

be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment. This right is absolute and non-derogable. It applies to all people. It may

never be suspended even during times of war, threat of war, internal political instability,

or states of emergency.



D. All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the

equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and

guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any



274

ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or

social origin, property, birth or other status. The right to equality before the law means

that laws must not be discriminatory, and that judges and officials must not act in a

discriminatory fashion in enforcing the law.



1. The primary institutional guarantee of a fair trial is that decisions will not be made by

political institutions but by competent, independent and impartial tribunals established by

law. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and

in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,

pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

The defence and the prosecution will be treated in a manner that ensures that both parties

have an equal opportunity to prepare and present their case during the course of the

proceedings Everyone has an equal right to access to the courts, without discrimination.



2. One essential criterion of a fair hearing is the principle of "equality of arms" between

the parties in a case. In criminal trials, where the prosecution has all the machinery of the

state behind it, the principle of equality of arms is an essential guarantee of the right to

defend oneself. The principle of equality of arms ensures that the defence has a

reasonable opportunity to prepare and present its case on a footing equal to that of the

prosecution. Its requirements include the right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a

defence, including disclosure by the prosecution of material information. Its

requirements also include the right to legal counsel, the right to call and examine

witnesses and the right to be present at the trial.



3. Except in narrowly defined circumstances, court hearings and judgments must be

public. The right to a public hearing means that not only the parties in the case, but also

the general public, have the right to be present. The public has a right to know how

justice is administered, and what decisions are reached by the judicial system. The press

and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public

order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of

the private lives of the parties so requires, or where publicity would prejudice the

interests of justice.



4. Everyone has the right to be presumed innocent, and treated as innocent, until and

unless they are convicted according to law in the course of proceedings which meet at

least the minimum prescribed requirements of fairness. The right to be presumed

innocent applies not only to treatment in court and the evaluation of evidence, but also to

treatment before trial. It applies to suspects, before criminal charges are filed prior to

trial, and carries through until a conviction is confirmed following a final appeal.



5. If a person is acquitted of a criminal offence by final judgment of a court, the judgment

is binding on all state authorities. Therefore, the public authorities, particularly

prosecutors and the police, should refrain from implying that the person may have been

guilty, so as not to undermine the presumption of innocence, respect for the judgments of

a court and the rule of law. No one charged with a criminal offence may be compelled to

testify against him or herself or to confess guilt.



275

6. No one may be convicted for an act or an omission which was not an offence at the

time it was committed. This prohibition prevents the retroactive application of criminal

law. It gives rise not only to a prohibition on retroactive prosecutions, but also imposes

an obligation on states to define precisely by law all criminal offences.



7. No one may be tried or punished again in the same jurisdiction for a criminal offence if

they have been finally convicted or acquitted of that offence. This prohibition against

double jeopardy, also known as the principle of ne bis in idem, prevents a person from

being tried or punished more than once for the same crime.



8. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to be tried without undue delay.

The length of time judged reasonable will depend on the circumstances of the case. The

guarantee of prompt trial in criminal proceedings is tied to the right to liberty, the

presumption of innocence and the right to defend oneself. It aims to ensure that an

accused person's fate is determined without undue delay. It is aimed at ensuring that a

person's defense is not undermined by the passage of inordinate amounts of time, during

which witnesses' memories may fade or become distorted, witnesses may become

unavailable, and other evidence may be destroyed or disappear. The right to be tried

promptly encapsulates the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied.



9. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to defend him or herself against

the charges, to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing

or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the

interests of justice so require. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to

defend him or herself in person. The accused may decide to be assisted by defense

counsel, and the court is required to inform the accused of the right to counsel. The right

to legal assistance applies to all stages of the criminal proceedings, including during the

preliminary investigation and before trial.



10. The review by a higher court must be a genuine review of the issues in the case. The

rights to a fair and public trial must be observed during appeal proceedings. The right to

be present during appeals proceedings depends on the nature of those proceedings. In

particular, it depends on whether the appeal court examines issues of fact as well as of

law, and on the manner in which the accused's interests are presented and protected. The

accused has the right to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand

or speak the language used in court.



11. Judgments must be made public, with limited exceptions, and everyone tried by a

court of law has the right to be given reasons for the judgment and to be judged only by

decision-makers who have attended the proceedings. A judgment is made public if it is

pronounced orally in a session of the court which is open to the public or if a written

judgment is published. The right to public judgment is violated if judgments are made

accessible only to a certain group of people or when only people having a specific

interest are allowed to inspect a judgment.









276

E. Punishments imposed upon conviction of a crime may only be inflicted on people who

have been convicted after a fair trial. Punishments must be proportionate and may not

violate international standards. Courts may not impose a heavier penalty than the one that

applied when the crime was committed. However, if legal reform reduces the penalty for

an offence, states are obliged to apply retroactively the lighter penalty. The conditions in

which a convicted prisoner is held must not violate international standards that limit time

in solitary, restraints and use of force by officers. Punishment for an offence may be

imposed only on the offender; international standards prohibit the imposition of

collective punishments.



1. The imposition of corporal punishment as a sanction for a criminal or disciplinary

offence violates the prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment

and the right to a fair trial by inflicting a penalty which is prohibited under international

law. Everyone convicted of a criminal offence has the right to have the conviction and

sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal.



2. Children are entitled to all the fair trial guarantees and rights which apply to adults, and

to some additional special protection. The juvenile's right to privacy shall be respected at

all stages in order to avoid harm being caused to her or him by undue publicity or by the

process of labelling. In most cases, the best interests of a child are protected by not

separating them from their parents. Children must be segregated from adults. No child

shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of

release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age.



3. The right to life is fundamental and absolute. In states that have abolished the death

penalty it should not be reinstated. All states are encouraged to ratify the Second

Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989. The

execution of juveniles, pregnant women, the mentally ill, mentally retarded and people

over 70 are prohibited. The death penalty shall be only for the most heinous crimes. In

view of the irreversible nature of the death penalty, trials in capital cases must

scrupulously observe the right to a fair trial. Anyone sentenced to death has the right to

appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction, and steps should be taken to ensure that such

appeals shall become mandatory. Anyone sentenced to death has the right to seek pardon

or commutation of their sentence. There is no guarantee that the executioners will not be

held responsible for crimes against humanity.



4. In times of national emergency some fair trial rights may be suspended. The following

rights may never be suspended: the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the prohibition

of slavery and servitude,; the prohibition of detention for debt; the prohibition of

retroactive criminal laws; the recognition of legal personality Any suspension of rights

must not involve discrimination on grounds of race, color, sex, language, religion or

social origin. There is growing consensus that habeas corpus must never be suspended. A

person may not be found guilty of a penal offence related to the armed conflict except by

a court "respecting the generally recognized principles of regular judicial procedure".







277

5. International humanitarian law, which provides minimum standards of conduct during

armed conflict, contains important fair trial safeguards. These apply to various categories

of people during international wars and internal conflict, including civil wars. The

safeguards set forth in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional

Protocols protect various categories of people, defined as protected persons, in specified

circumstances. The safeguards include guarantees of a fair trial for people charged with

criminal offences.



F. Victims of miscarriages of justice have the right to compensation from the state. In the

United States mandatory restitution is typically administrated as the result of a trial with a

probation officer under 18USC(77)§1593.



1. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment of 26 June 1987 states at Art. 14, “the State shall ensure in its legal system

that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and

adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.”



2. Art. 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March

1976, states, “when a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence

and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the

ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a

miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such

conviction shall be compensated according to law”.



42g Bankruptcy and Insolvency Trials



A.Bankruptcy is a legally declared inability or impairment of ability of an individual or

organizations to pay their creditors. Bankruptcy law provides for the development of a

plan that allows a debtor to resolve debts through the division of assets among creditors.

Certain bankruptcy proceedings allow a debtor to stay in business and use revenue

generated to resolve his or her debts. Additionally bankruptcy law allows certain debtors

to free themselves (to be discharged) of the financial obligations they have accumulated,

after their assets are distributed, even if their debts have not been paid in full.



1.In 2002 the number of bankruptcy proceedings was 1.5 million. The number of filings

in the United States bankruptcy courts fell from 1,782,643 cases in 2005 to 1,112,542

cases in 2006.Medical costs have become the leading cause of bankruptcy. In 1981 only

8% of families filing for bankruptcy did so in the aftermath of a serious medical problem.

By 2001 that percentage had increased to 46.2% and by 2007 to 69.1%. While hospital

costs loomed largest for all diagnostic groups, for about one third of patients with

pulmonary, cardiac, or psychiatric illnesses, prescription drugs were the largest expense.

In the United States the average time it takes to litigate a bankruptcy is 1.5 years, the cost

is 7% of the estate and the recovery rate 76.7%. The time, cost and recovery rate of

bankruptcy proceedings vary widely amongst nations.



Fig. 2.5: Cost of Bankruptcy Proceedings in Selected Economies



278

Country Time Cost % Estate Recovery Rate

Years Cents on the Dollar

Argentina 2.8 12.0 29.8

Austria 1.1 18.0 71.5

Brazil 4.0 12.0 17.1

Bulgaria 3.3 9.0 32.1

Estonia 3.0 9.0 37.5

France 1.9 9.0 44.7

Germany 1.2 8.0 52.2

Hungary 2.0 15.0 38.4

Iceland 1.0 4.0 76.6

Italy 1.8 22.0 56.6

Japan 0.6 4.0 92.5

Latvia 3.0 13.0 29.0

Lithuania 1.7 7.0 48.0

Romania 3.3 9.0 29.\5

Spain 1.0 15.0 73.2

Sweden 2.0 9.0 75.1

Thailand 2.7 36.0 42.4

Turkey 3.3 15.0 20.2

Ukraine 2.9 42.0 9.1

United Kingdom 1.0 6.0 84.2

United States 1.5 7.0 76.7



Source: Laeven, Luc; Laryea, Thomas. Principles of Household Debt Restructuring. IMF

Staff Papers. June 26, 2009



B. Bankruptcy law is federal statutory law contained in Title 11 of the United States

Code. States are not allowed to legislate their own bankruptcy laws although they do

frequently treat upon debtor creditor relations. Bankruptcy proceedings are supervised by

and litigated in the United States Bankruptcy Courts. These courts are a part of the

District Courts of The United States. The United States Trustees were established by

Congress to handle many of the supervisory and administrative duties of bankruptcy

proceedings. Proceedings in bankruptcy courts are governed by the Bankruptcy Rules

which were promulgated by the Supreme Court under the authority of Congress. There

are two basic types of Bankruptcy proceedings.



1.A filing under Chapter 7 is called liquidation. It is the most common type of bankruptcy

proceeding. Liquidation involves the appointment of a trustee who collects the non-

exempt property of the debtor, sells it and distributes the proceeds to the creditors.

Bankruptcy proceedings under Chapters 11, 12, and 13 involve the rehabilitation of the

debtor to allow him or her to use future earnings to pay off creditors.



2.Under Chapter 7, 12, 13, and some 11 proceedings, a trustee is appointed to supervise

the assets of the debtor. A bankruptcy proceeding can either be entered into voluntarily



279

by a debtor or initiated by creditors. After a bankruptcy proceeding is filed, creditors, for

the most part, may not seek to collect their debts outside of the proceeding. The debtor is

not allowed to transfer property that has been declared part of the estate subject to

proceedings.



C. Passage of the Bankruptcy Prevention and Consumer Protection Act P.L. 109-8 in

April 2005 resulted in major reforms in bankruptcy law, outlining revised guidelines

governing the dismissal or conversion of Chapter 7 liquidations to Chapter 11 or 13

proceedings. The law also expands the responsibilities of the United States Trustees

Program to include supervision of random and targeted audits, certification of entities to

provide credit counseling that individuals must receive before filing for bankruptcy,

certification of entities that provide financial education to individuals before being

discharged from debt, and greater oversight of small business Chapter 11 reorganization

cases. Bankruptcy is a fiscally responsible alternative to wasteful bailout subsidies.

Most corporations the go into bankruptcy insolvent come out renewed.



Art. 3 Questions of International Justice



§43 International Trade Deficit



A. Liberal economic theory dictates that international trade is reliant upon freedom. Just

like military abuse leads to a budget deficit, abuse of the judiciary leads to an

international trade deficit. For a nation‟s international trade to succeed the State must

respect the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable right of all members of the human

family to freedom from fear and want or people do not want to do business. The cost to

international trade caused by arbitrary detention can be estimated at exactly one million

dollars in decreased exports and increased imports per prisoner entitled to release a year.



1. In 2006 the international trade deficit exceeded $800 billion sounding alarms because

the US account deficit, combination of the budget deficit and international trade deficit,

exceeded $1 trillion for a third year in a row, and it could not be reasonably expected that

the government would have a budget deficit less than $200 billion needed to keep the

account deficit less than $1 trillion as is certainly in the best interest of the nation.



B. The judicial problem in international trade manifested with establishment of the Court

of International Trade of the United States (CoITUS) in 1980, around the time the first

mandatory minimum sentencing law began filling the prisons. CoITUS needs to be

renamed to Customs Court. International trade disputes are not the purvey of the Court,

but of the World Trade Organization and U.S. Trade Representative. Genuine legal

disputes in international trade manifest only in the context of Customs Enforcement and

then are usually dispatched by the Executive Branch.



C. The fact that the international trade deficit has increased and the liberal theory that that

the market is reliant upon freedom from fear and want indicate that there must be an

infringement upon the civil liberties obstructing the sale of American made goods. This

theory is vindicated in the timing of the first appearance of a trade deficit in 1971, the



280

same year that Nixon embarked on the “war on drugs” against the criticism of the United

Nations. This theory is further reinforced in the way that the deficit began increasing at

the time that mandatory minimum sentencing was first introduced. It was not however

until the Clinton administration reinforced mandatory minimum sentencing and embraced

neo-liberal investment policies soliciting foreign investment that America gave up hope

in American freedom and the trade deficit really began to be a problem. Whereas

freedom is generally accepted as the basis for economic success it is not difficult to

imagine that the slave trade would harm international trade.



Fig. 2.6: International Trade in millions $ compared with Detention 1980-2005





2,500,000



2,000,000

Exports

1,500,000

Imports

1,000,000 Defict

Detention

500,000



0

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005



Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Justice Statistics



1. To improve the American economic situation freedom takes on new importance. For

economic success the principles of free trade will clearly need to be applied domestically

to protect the market economy from judicial interference. Congress, the Executive,

States and mostly the people themselves, including bankers and corporate executives,

will need to take responsibility for the resolution of trade disputes and not refer them to

the judiciary that is overburdened with their slave trade. In practice this means that

federal trade regulatory agencies and corporations need to employ more economists and

fewer lawyers because business disputes should not be referred to Court but must be

resolved by the parties, themselves, Better Business Bureaus, Chambers of Commerce,

Congress and Executive Branch.



1. First time fraud and so called white collar offenders should be released in nearly every

case whereas no one shall be imprisoned merely on the ground of inability to fulfill a

contractual obligation under Art. 11 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights of 23 March 1976 as noted in the Free Insider Trader Settlement (FITS) HA-1-4-

04. Business law is civil in hopes of settling compliance and compensation without any

crimes of violence. Disputes with merchants are best regulated by the State rather than

tempting forgery at Court. In worst-case scenarios where prison time is contemplated the

government is competent to revoke the operating license of any merchant not in

compliance with the law.





281

§43a Undocumented Migration



A. The United States of America is a nation of immigrants. The US was populated by

waves of immigrants from Europe and Africa who rapidly outnumbered the natives,

higher pay for equal work has lured millions of Latin Americans in recent years. Legal

immigration increased after World War II to around 300,000 persons per year and

remained around that level until shortly after 1960.



1. With the Immigration Act of 1965 and other related changes, annual legal immigration

increased to about 400,000 and remained fairly stable until 1977. Between 1977 and

1990, legal immigration once again increased, averaging about 580,000 per year.



2. The Immigration Act of 1990, which took effect in fiscal year 1992, restructured the

immigration categories and increased significantly the number of immigrants who may

legally enter the United States. Legal immigration averaged about 837,000 persons per

year during the period 1992 through 2004.



3. The number of legal immigrants in 2004 is estimated to be 946,000 persons. For 2004,

net legal immigration (after considering emigration) is estimated to be about 710,000

persons. The total level of net immigration (legal and other, combined) under the

intermediate projection is assumed to be 1,075,000 persons in 2006, and 900,000 persons

in 2026 and for each year afterward.



4. The Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005

(Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House) HR 4437 and the

Border Security Act S. 2394 brought to light that there are an estimated 11 million

undocumented aliens living in the United States but otherwise failed to address the issue

of documenting these illegal aliens.



B. On March 1, 2003, service and benefit functions of the U.S. Immigration and

Naturalization Service (INS) transitioned into the Department of Homeland Security

(DHS) as the U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).



1. Fifteen thousand (15,000) federal employees and contractors working in approximately

250 Headquarters and field offices around the world comprise the USCIS.



2. USCIS processes more than six million immigration benefits applications annually,

only 51% of which are approved. It is policy that the processing of an immigration

benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of

the application, except that a petition for a nonimmigrant visa should be processed not

later than 30 days after the filing of the petition.



3. The USCIS is responsible for the administration of immigration and naturalization

adjudication functions of US Embassies and establishing immigration services policies

and priorities to fundamentally transform and improve the delivery of immigration and

citizenship services, while enhancing our nation's security.



282

4. These functions include: (1) Adjudication of immigrant visa petitions; (2)

Adjudication of naturalization petitions; (3) Adjudication of asylum and refugee

applications; (4) Adjudications performed at the service centers, and (5) All other

adjudications formerly performed by the INS.



5. To properly respect the status of the American citizen and immigration statute the

Director of USCIS should enjoy equal rights and equal pay as a Level I Executive in the

Pay Schedule set forth in 5USCIIID(53)II§5312, as argued in Emiliano Gonzalez,

Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Service v. Alberto Gonzalez, Attorney

General HA-11-4-06.



C. The number of illegal entrants into the United States through the Southwest border is

estimated to exceed one million people a year. There an estimated 12 million illegal

aliens residing in the USA. Hundreds of people die crossing our international border

with Mexico every year. Illegal narcotic smuggling along the Southwest border of the

United States is both dangerous and prolific. Globally there are estimated to be between

100 and 200 million people without proper documents, many were not given papers at

birth and others fail to document their international migration.



1. The legal obstacle that is obstructing legal migration into the United States is that

people cannot afford the $2,000 price of an immigration trial that is only 50% likely to

result in a positive determination. Because of the high price many people cross the

border illegally. Even taking into consideration the one in ten chance of being caught,

many people cross the border illegally, it is the most sure way to America.



2. It is unfair to charge people $2,000 for a trial, that takes a year and does not guarantee

an affirmative answer. The best solution seems to be to improve the worker visa system

so that people do not need to pay the filing fee until after they have come the United

States and have started working for the employer who got them their visa and paid the

$100 or $200 first installment when they arrived in the United States that would be paid

off in a year or two if the government did not just decide to collect taxes. Alternatively to

be competitive with Canada the filing fee can be reduced to $500.



3. The government should consider increasing the amount of funding for USCIS so that

the agency could reduce or abolish many of their fees and increase their capacity to

process applications for work and family visas as well as increasing the availability,

accessibility and affordability of English language for foreigner courses.



D. In 2005 DHS apprehended an estimated 1,241,089 foreign nationals. Ninety-two

percent were natives of Mexico.



1. There were 58,727 investigations initiated and 46,656 closed for immigration related

activities including crime, compliance enforcement, work site enforcement, identity and

benefit fraud, alien smuggling, and counter terrorism.







283

2. ICE detained approximately 235,247 foreign nationals for a minimum of 24 hours.



3. There were 202,842 foreign nationals formally removed from the United States. The

leading countries of origin of formal removals were Mexico (73 percent), Guatemala (4.1

percent) and Honduras (4.0 percent). More than 1,035,000 other foreign nationals

accepted an offer of voluntary departure.



E. All aliens subject to detention under 8USC(12)II-IV§1226(c) and §1231(a) whereby,

when an alien is ordered removed, the alien shall be removes from the United States

within a period of 90 days; All inadmissible or deportable aliens subject to proceedings

under §1228 or §1225(b)(2)(A) whereby any alien who at any time after admission is

convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single

scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefore and regardless

of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable. Any alien who is

convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable. An alien

may also voluntarily leave at their own expense.



1. Fernandez-Vargaz v. Gonzalez No. 04-1376 (2006) held that Immigration law has for

some time provided that an order for removing an alien present unlawfully may be

reinstated if he leaves and unlawfully reenters. The Illegal Immigration Reform and

Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) amended the Immigration and

Nationality Act (INA) to enlarge the class of illegal reentrants whose orders may be

reinstated and limit the possible relief from a removal order available to them.



2. Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon No. 04-10566 (2006) reports that Article 36(1)(b) of the

Vienna Convention on Consular Relations provides that if a person detained by a foreign

country "so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay,

inform the consular post of the sending State" of such detention, and "inform the

[detainee] of this right.



§43b Accession to the International Criminal Court



A.As of 1 January 2007, 104 countries are States Parties to the Rome Statute of the

International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998. Out of them 29 are African States, 12 are

Asian States, 16 are from Eastern Europe, 22 are from Latin America and the Caribbean,

and 25 are from Western Europe and other States. The United States of America is not

one of the states parties to the ICC pending the a treaty made under 22USC(81)§7401



1.The lame excuse given at §7421 is that in addition to exposing members of the Armed

Forces of the United States to the risk of international criminal prosecution, the Rome

Statute creates a risk that the President and other senior elected and appointed officials of

the United States Government may be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.



2. There are several good reasons, that are not elaborated upon, for not acceding to the

ICC. First, the United States is the most penal nation in the world and idolizing

prosecution is not trusted. Second, the office of prosecutor, pronounced Satan in



284

Hebrew, is offensive to a nation that did not kill all their Jews, and respects the statehood

of the Attorney General. Third, the ICC is neither competent nor independent because it

specializes in the prosecution of war crimes committed by heads of state and military

officers and totally lacks any judicial discipline or indeed fulfills any role not performed

by the Security Council. Fourth, the ICC has abetted the International Criminal Tribunal

for the Former Yugoslavia to violently overthrow the International Court of Justice, kill

prisoners Babic (innocent) and Milosevic, assassinate the Director-General of the World

Health Organization, seize the United Nations and wreck the global economy and public

health. Fifth, the ICC must be evicted from the H(Pl)ague, High Commission on Human

Rights, civil society and made inferior to the International Court of Justice not the

Secretary-General. Sixth, the devastation of the international economy was pre-ordained

by the infringement of the trademark International Criminal Court (ICC) on the

International Chamber of Commerce, that was benign until they launched their coup.



3. On the other hand, by not signing the Rome Statute, the United States appears like a

national government intent upon committing international crimes because they are at war

and their own judiciary is too corrupt punish their nation‟s war criminals. In the language

used to explain their failure to accede to the Rome Statute the United States completely

fails to discipline their armed forces, government agents and foreign policy that in this

light appear to be extremely criminal.



B. During its first resumed session held in New York from 3 to 7 February 2003, the

Assembly of States Parties elected the eighteen judges of the Court for a term of office of

three, six, and nine years. The judges constitute a forum of international experts that

represents the world's principal legal systems.



1. The Appeals Division is composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial

Division of the Second Vice President and five other judges, and the Pre-Trial Divisions

of the First Vice President and six other judges.



2. The primary questions for the ICC are, how do international tribunals operating during

war to secure justice affect the work of peacemakers? Do international tribunals help

bring parties to the peace table, or do they hinder the prospects for peace? Does the ICC

engage in subversive activity with local prosecutors and law enforcement? Is there any

liberty to be learned in the judgments of the ICC? Should the United States of America

accede to the Rome Statute?



3. Mr F S Nariman, President of the Bar Association of India, pointed out that: „.the spirit

of the Rome Statute is not so much in the actual establishment of the Court and the filling

of its dockets with cases to be tried before it; its spirit lies rather in the encouragement it

gives to national governments worldwide to put up for trial in their own national courts

persons accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Rome Statute

has established what can be described as a “culture of legality”: its true success will only

come when aversion to impunity gets internalized by the democratic legal systems of

each ratifying nation State.‟







285

C. The International Bar Association notes that the work of the International Criminal

Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was „frequently politicized and used for

propaganda purposes by its opponents‟, and seen as „remote and disconnected from the

population‟. The advent of the ICC has increased the politicization of the tribunals to the

point of willful killing, the murdering of prisoners without trial and assassination.



1. The first example of prosecutorial indiscretion resulting in the death of human beings,

is that of the Ugandan Government who referred the situation of northern Uganda to the

ICC on 16 December 2003. This referral was announced by the Prosecutor, Luis Moreno

Ocampo, in a joint press conference with President Museveni in London on 29 January

2004 and the Prosecutor began investigations in July 2004. On 8 July 2005, arrest

warrants were issued, under seal, against five LRA leaders: J Kony, V Otti, R Lukwiya,

O Odhiambo and D Ongwen. D Ongwen was reported to have been killed on 2 October

2005, and none of the others have yet been detained. Our biggest fear is that arrest

warrants will be an excuse for military forces to go in all guns blazing and these children

will be killed or injured in a hail of bullets.‟ ICC-02/04-01/05



2. At 18:30 hours on Sunday 5 March 2006 Mr. Milan Babic, a detained witness, was

found dead in his cell at the United Nations Detention Unit in Scheveningen. The

Detention Unit Medical Officer confirmed Milan Babic‟s death shortly after his body was

found, hanged. The Dutch authorities were called immediately who, confirmed that the

cause of death was suicide. Although Mr. Babic initially participated in the Tribunal as a

witness who needed protection he was betrayed and indicted on 17 November 2003. On

26 November 2003 Mr. Milan Babic surrendered to the Tribunal HA-5-3-06.



3. Six days later, on Saturday morning, 11 March 2006, a prison guard found the former

Yugoslav leader, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic, lifeless in bed. The cause of death was

cardiac arrest after years of heart complications exacerbated by the denial of medical care

by Judge Ronbinson. It was an abrupt end to his four-year U.N. war crimes tribunal for

orchestrating a decade of conflict that ended with 250,000 dead and the Yugoslav

federation torn asunder. In April 2001 Mr. Slobodan Milosevic was arrested. He was

extradited to the Hague that June. The trial began in February 2002. Strangely, both his

mother and father are reported to have died of suicide, at different times HA-11-3-06.



4. On Monday May 22, 2006 at 7:43 pm after Mr. Lee Jong-wook, Director-General of

the World Health Organization died in Geneva before the annual World Health Assembly

meeting 22-27 May while undergoing emergency surgery for a blood clot, subdural

hematoma, in his brain. Lee, a native of South Korea, was 61 and received a medical

doctor's degree from SNU and a master's degree in public health from the University of

Hawaii. He worked for 19 years at the agency before becoming elected as the head of the

U.N.'s health agency in May 2003. His term was to last five years HA-31-3-06.



Art. 4 Human Rights



§44 Human Rights Council







286

A. On 15 March 2006, the United Nations 60th General Assembly passed a historic

resolution approving the creation of the new UN Human Rights Council.



1. The Council will serve as the main United Nations forum for dialogue and cooperation

on human rights. Its focus will be to help Member States meet their human rights

obligations through dialogue, capacity building and technical assistance.



2. The Council will also make recommendations to the General Assembly for further

development of international law in the field of human rights.



3. The first election of members of the Human Rights Council by the General Assembly

is expected to take place on 9 May 2006, followed by the first meeting of the Council to

be convened on 19 June 2006.



4. The purpose of this Council is to sustain Human Rights in a permanent forum to hear

petitions all year rather than at special times of the year. UN Chronicle: Human Rights

Council HA-30-3-06.



B. The Human Rights Council, is led by the High Commissioner of Human Rights. The

overarching Council on Human Rights is composed of 53 States, meets each year in

regular session in March/April for six weeks in Geneva. Over 3,000 delegates from

member and observer States and from non-governmental organizations participate. There

are 7 Committees to the Human Rights Council (HRC).



1. The Council can also meet exceptionally between its regular sessions in special

session, provided that a majority of States members of the Commission so agree, mindful

of the need for the Commission on Human Rights to deal with urgent and acute human

rights situations in the most expeditious way.



2. During its regular annual session, the Council adopts about a hundred resolutions,

decisions and Chairperson's statements on matters of relevance to individuals in all

regions and circumstances. It is assisted in this work by the Sub-Commission on the

Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, a number of working groups and a network

of individual experts, representatives and rapporteurs mandated to report to it on specific

issues.



C. The International Bill of Rights is found in ratification of the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights of December 10, 1948, the International Covenant on Economic, Social

and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976 and the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights of 23 March 1976.



1. Council on Human Rights procedures and mechanisms are mandated to examine,

monitor and publicly report either on human rights situations in specific countries or

territories (known as country mechanisms or mandates) or on major phenomena of

human rights violations worldwide (known as thematic mechanisms or mandates).





287

2. These procedures and mechanisms are collectively referred to as the Special

Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights and published as the Rules of Procedure

of the Functional Commissions of the Economic and Social Council of 12 August 1947.



D. The US must ratify the following Optional Protocols to extend the protection of

human rights to all US citizens.



1. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23

March 1976 relating to the Human Rights Committee



2. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15 December 1989



3. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against

Women of 22 December 2000



4. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003



§44A High Commissioner of Human Rights



A. The High Commissioner for Human Rights has the rank of Under Secretary-General

of the United Nations and heads the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

(OHCHR).



B. The post of High Commissioner was established in December 1993 by a General

Assembly resolution, in accordance with a recommendation contained in the Vienna

Declaration and Programme of Action 25 June 1993.



1. The resolution specifies that the High Commissioner is the principal United Nations

official responsible for United Nations human rights activities, and that the High

Commissioner performs his/her duties under the direction and authority of the Secretary-

General.



2. The resolution gives the High Commissioner the broad mandate to promote and protect

all human rights: civil, political, economic, social and cultural.



§44B Human Rights Committee



A. The Human Rights Committee (HRC) was established in Part IV of the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976 and its first Optional Protocol

of 23 March 1976 allowing individuals to submit complaints to the Human Rights

Committee The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, was adopted on 15

December 1989 and entered into force on 11 July 1991.





288

B. The Human Rights Committee was established to monitor the implementation of the

Covenant and the Protocols to the Covenant in the territory of States parties. It is

composed of 18 independent experts who are persons of high moral character and

recognized competence in the field of human rights. The Committee convenes three times

a year for sessions of three weeks' duration, normally in March at United Nations

headquarters in New York and in July and November at the United Nations Office in

Geneva.



C. Each session of the Committee is preceded by two simultaneous pre-session working

groups established under rules 62 and 89 of its Rules of Procedure of 26 July 1989. The

working group established under rule 89 is entrusted with the task of making

recommendations to the Committee regarding communications received under the

Optional Protocol.



§44C Committee on Migrant Workers



A. The Committee on Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) was

established in Part VII of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of

All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families 18 December 1990 by its State

parties. It is the newest treaty body which held its first session in March 2004.



B. All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the

rights are being implemented. States must report initially one year after acceding to the

Convention and then every five years. The 14 expert Committee will examine each report

and address its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of

“concluding observations”. The Committee meets in Geneva and normally holds one

session per year.



§44D Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights



A. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), unlike the other

committees, was not established by its corresponding instrument - the International

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976. Rather, the

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) created the Committee, following the less than

ideal performance of two previous bodies entrusted with monitoring the Covenant.



B. The Committee was established in 1985, met for the first time in 1987 and has to date

held 14 sessions. Meeting initially on an annual basis, the Committee currently convenes

twice a year, holding two three-week sessions, generally in May and

November/December. It holds all its meetings at the United Nations Office at Geneva.



C. The Committee is comprised of 18 members who are experts with recognized

competence in the field of human rights. Members of the Committee are independent and

serve in their personal capacity, not as representatives of Governments. At present, the

Committee is made up of 13 men and five women. The Committee itself selects its





289

chairperson, three vice-chairpersons and rapporteur. Members of the Committee are

elected by ECOSOC for four year terms, and are eligible for re-election if re-nominated.



§44E Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women



A. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), was

established in Part V of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of

Discrimination against Women 3 September 1981.



B. The Committee's mandate is very specific: it watches over the progress for women

made in those countries that are the States parties. A country becomes a State party by

ratifying or acceding to the Convention and thereby accepting a legal obligation to

counteract discrimination against women. This body supplements the Commission on the

Status of Women (CSW) that was established in 1946 as a functional commission of

ECOSOC.



C. An expert body established in 1982, is composed of 23 experts on women's issues

from around the world.



1. Meetings are held twice annually, when the Committee reviews national reports

submitted by the States parties within one year of ratification or accession, and thereafter

every four years.



2. The Committee monitors the implementation of national measures to fulfill this

obligation.



3. An Optional Protocol Entered into Force 22 December 2000 granting the Committee

the authority to accept petitions from individuals.



§44F Committee on the Rights of the Child



A. The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) was established in Part II of the

Convention on the Rights of the Child of 2 September 1990



B. The CRC is composed of 18 independent experts who are persons of high moral

character and recognized competence in the field of human rights.



1. Members are elected for a term of four years by States parties in accordance with

article 43 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.



2. Members serve in their personal capacity and may be re-elected if nominated.



§44G Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination



A. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) was established

in Part II of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial



290

Discrimination of 4 January 1969



B. Since CERD was established many Non-Self-governing Territories, including some

administered by States under United Nations trusteeship agreements, have become

independent. Nevertheless, there are still 18 such Territories.



C. CERD is composed of 9 members as determined at the First Meeting of States Parties

to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

held in 1969.



§44H Committee against Torture



A. The Committee against Torture (CaT) was established pursuant to article 17 of the

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment of 26 June 1987 to monitor its implementation.



B. The 10-member Committee began to function on 1 January 1988, six months after the

entry into force of the Convention, adopted on 10 December 1984. An Optional Protocol

was made available for ratification 4 February 2003.



Art. 5 International Courts



§45 International Bar Association



A. Inspired by the vision of the United Nations (UN) and with the aim of supporting the

establishment of law and administration of justice worldwide; representatives of 34

national bar associations gathered in New York on 17 February 1947 to create the

International Bar Association (IBA).



1. In its role as a dual membership organisation, comprising 30,000 individual lawyers

and over 195 Bar Associations and Law Societies, the International Bar Association

(IBA) influences the development of international law reform and shapes the future of the

legal profession. Its Member Organisations cover all continents of the World.



B. IBA membership grew steadily and in 1970 was accelerated by the admission of

individual lawyers to the Association and the formation of the Section on Business Law.



1.In 1974 the Section on Legal Practice was formed and in 1982 a third Section, the

Section on Energy and Natural Resources Law was created.



2. The Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Just Rule of Law were formed in

the 1980s.



3. In 1992 an Action Plan was adopted to establish a Trial Observer Corps and investigate

cases where judges and lawyers or the independence of Bar Associations was threatened.





291

4. In 1995, the formation of the Human Rights Institute expanded this work and gave the

opportunity for member organisations and individual members to actively contribute.



C. Grouped into two Divisions –



1. the Legal Practice Division and



2. the Public and Professional Interest Division – the Association covers all practice areas

and professional interests. It provides members with access to leading experts and up-to-

date information as well as top-level professional development and network-building

opportunities through high quality publications and world-class conferences.



D. The IBA‟s Bar Issues Commission provides its Member Organisations with

substantive and social programmes at and between meetings and the IBA's Human Rights

Institute works across the Association, helping to promote, protect and enforce human

rights under a just rule of law, and to preserve the independence of the judiciary and the

legal profession worldwide.



§45A International Court of Arbitration



1. Since its foundation in 1923 by the International Chamber of Commerce the

International Court of Arbitration has settled over 10,000 cases from more than 170

countries and territories in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration. The purpose of the

International Court of Arbitration is to improve the settlement of international Alternative

Dispute Resolution and provide litigants with business disputes of an international

character an alternative to the higher cost of settling in national courts by appointing one

of 144 experts to arbitrate and settle the dispute while being monitored by the

International Court of Arbitration.



2. The American Arbitration Association (AAA) resolves 14,500 labor-management

disputes annually.



§45B International Court of Justice



A. The International Court of Justice or World Court was established by the UN General

Assembly in Chapter XIV of the 1945 Charter of the United Nations to settle disputes

between states in Peace Palace at the Hague in the Netherlands to take over the

operations of the Permanent Court of Justice.



1. The World Court is the principle judicial organ of the United Nations. The World

Court operates under the Statute of the Court and the Rules of Court.



2. The Court dockets contentious cases between nations regarding the legality of the use

of force, issues presented by the General Assembly, issues Advisory Opinions for

Specialized Agencies Authorized to Request Advisory Opinions and settles international

disputes regarding compensation.



292

3. Post World War II interpretations of international law by the court are founded in the

1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights, the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of

Genocide and the 1949 Geneva Convention.



4. The Court keeps records of their decisions since its creation in 1947 and for the

Permanent Court of Justice that preceded it at Peace Palace (1922-1946).



B. The first published decision of the Court assisted the General Assembly to establish

Condition for Admission of a State to Membership by reviewing Article 4, paragraph 1,

of the Charter enumerating that member nations be (1) a State; (2) peace-loving; (3) must

accept the obligations of the Charter; (4) must be able to carry out these obligations; (5)

must be willing to do so.



1. The most recent published decision of the Court as it relates to the USA is Mexico v.

United States of America where the court ordered the United States to grant clemency to

those Mexican nationals scheduled to die and not to execute the 54 Mexican nationals

sentenced to die in the United States. The argument is that (1) the prisoners have not

been given the protection of the Mexican Consulate required by the Vienna Convention

on Consular Relations and (2) the Mexican government, whose law prohibits the death

penalty, furthermore demands that no Mexican nationals be executed by the USA.



C. The United States of America has had more decisions (convictions) published on the

ICJ web site than other nation,



1. Avena and other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America) (2003-

2004)

2. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. United States of America) (1999),

3. LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America) (1999-2001)

4. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America)

(1998)

5. Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (1992-2003)

6. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising

from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of

America) (1992-2003)

7. Aerial Incident of 3 July 1988 (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)

(1989-1996)

8. Electronica Sicula S.p.A. (ELSI) (United States of America v. Italy) (1987-1989)

9. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United

States of America) (1984-1991)

10. Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United

States of America) (1981-1984)

11. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran) (1979-

1981)

12. Aerial Incident of 7 November 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1959)



293

13. Aerial Incident of 4 September 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1958)

14. Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States v. Bulgaria) (1957-1960)

15. Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States) (1957-1959)



D. On 12 January 2005 Information Officer Boris Heim wrote, the Court's activity is

limited to rendering judgments in legal disputes between States submitted to it by the

States themselves and giving advisory opinions when it is so requested by UN organs or

specialized agencies of the UN system under Article 34 of the Statute and Rules.



1. For a successful claim treaty obligations may be levied against States under Art. 36 of

the Statute of the Court for service upon the Secretary-General.



§45C International Criminal Court



A. International criminal courts and tribunals are a distinctive development of the 1990s.

At the start of that decade, no international criminal courts existed. Today, three

independent international bodies adjudicate international criminal law: the International

Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), established in 1993; the

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), established in 1994; and the

International Criminal Court (ICC), created by a treaty concluded in 1998. With the

exception of the ICC, these bodies were intended at their creation to have limited life

spans.



1. In Security Council Resolution 1534 (2004) the International Criminal Tribunal for the

former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda recalls that resolution

1503 (2003) cites the Completion Strategy (S/2002/678) called on the International

Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to take all possible measures to complete investigations by

the end of 2004, to complete all trial activities at first instance by the end of 2008, and to

complete all work in 2010. East Timor Special Panels and Serious Crimes Unit closed in

May 2005. It should be a simple matter to transfer responsibility of the detainees to

nations that grant them asylum and their voluminous records to the United Nations

Archives and Records Management Section.



2. As former ICTY prosecutor Louise Arbour, later High Commissioner of Human

Rights, wrote, "If we exploit the full potential of criminal trials for war crimes, we should

do so in part to punish, in part to deter, but, most importantly, to try to understand."



B. The International Criminal Court is the most recent development in the international

justice system and will try crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and acts of

aggression in accordance with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.



1. There are 18 judges from different states, nominated by their state and elected by 2/3

vote of the General Assembly to serve one 9 year, non-renewable term.









294

2. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was founded by UN

Security Council Resolution 827 in 1993 to prosecute the grave breaches in international

humanitarian law that began in 1991 and now has yearly budget of $500 million. The

Tribunal has conceded to close their doors.



3. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was created by UN Security Council

Resolution 955 in 1994 to prosecute those responsible for genocide and breaches in

international law, it has a current yearly budget of $177,739,400.



Art. 6 Regional Courts



§46 European Court of Justice



The European Court of Justice, or European Court of Human Rights as it was formerly

called, is the oldest and busiest continental court in the world. The Court operates in

conjunction with the laws of the Council of Europe.



1. The Court was founded in 1959 in accordance with the ratification of the Convention

for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms Articles 40-56 by

European nations in 1953 to uphold the rights and freedoms enumerated in Articles 2-18

of the Convention.



2. The bench currently accommodates 41 judges, 1 for each member nation, who are

elected to serve 6 year terms by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

Admission is reserved to the High Contracting Parties and the Commission on Human

Rights to bring cases before the court in accordance with Article 44.



3. The admission of more nations to the European Union has caused the number of

applications registered annually with the Commission to increase from 404 in 1981 to

2,037 in 1993 to 4,750 in 1997.



4. By 1997 the number of unregistered or provisional files opened each year in the

Commission had risen to over 12,000. The European Court is unique in that the

judgment is executed by the Council of Ministers.



§45 Inter-American Court of Human Rights



A. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights was founded in 1978 as an autonomous

judicial seat located in San Jose, Costa Rica composed of 7 judges elected for 6 year

terms by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States in accordance

with Article 52 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the Statute of the Inter-

American Court of Human Rights and the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American

Court of Human Rights. All cases are presented by member nations and the guests of the

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.









295

B. In Treaties Subject to the Consultative Jurisdiction of the Court the Court determined

in 1982 that Art. 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights grants the Court an

unlimited advisory jurisdiction rather than a limited venue for organizations to request

such an opinion from the court as offered by the International Court of Justice. The

model procedure is for the Court to issue a request to parties to submit their advisory

opinions so that the court can come to a well-researched opinion regarding any treaty in

the world.



§46 African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights



A. Article 18 of the Constitutive Act of the African Union adopted 11 July 2000 calls for

a Court of Justice to build peaceful institutions and try violations of human rights that

occur in African Republics. The Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union

was signed on 11 July 2003 however remains to be ratified.



B. To complicate matters the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People‟s

Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and People‟s Rights was

ratified on 15 January 2004 under the African Charter on Human and Peoples‟ Rights

adopted 27 June 1981 to assist the African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights.



Art. 7 US Courts



§47 Supreme Court of the United States



A. The US Supreme Court is the highest court in the US. The Court is framed by Article

III §1 of the US Constitution, Title 28 US Code (1)1 and the Rules of the Supreme Court.



1. In co-operation with the Judiciary Committee of the US Congress, the US Supreme

Court amends the Federal Rules of Evidence, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure,

and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.



B. The chief justice and eight associate justices are appointed by the president of the

United States, for a life term, with the consent of 2/3 of the Senate in accordance with

Article II §2 of the U.S. Constitution.



1. When the time comes for a justice, particularly chief justice, to retire, associate justices

are appointed to learn the procedures of the high court before a vacancy must be filled.



2. Decisions of the Court since 1893 are kept on public record.



C. Cases are filed in accordance with the Rules of Practice. Writ of certiorari are granted

by the grace of the Supreme Court when a federal question arises in the court of appeals

[or state supreme court] in accordance with III Rule 10.









296

1. Original actions may be heard in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public

ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party in accordance with IV

Rule 17.



2. Extraordinary writs are also sparingly reviewed in accordance with IV Rule 20.



D. The 2000 year end report shows the total number of cases filed in the Supreme Court

in 1999 to be 7,377. 5,282 were in forma pauperis. 2,092 paid the $300 filing fee, only

83 cases were argued and 79 were disposed of in 74-signed opinions.



1. The total number of cases filed in the Supreme Court increased from 7,496 filings in

the 2004 Term to 8,521 filings in the 2005 Term–an increase of 13.7%.



2. The number of cases filed in the Court„s in forma pauperis docket increased from

5,755 filings in the 2004 Term to 6,846 filings in the 2005 Term–a 19% increase. The

number of cases filed in the Court„s paid docket decreased from 1,741 filings in the 2004

Term to 1,671 filings in the 2005 Term–a 4% decline.



3. During the 2005 Term, 87 cases were argued and 82 were disposed of in 69 signed

opinions, compared to 87 cases argued and 85 disposed of in 74 signed opinions in the

2004 Term.



E. In the Amistad 40 US 518 (1841) the Court recognized that the government of the

United States is based on the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence,

by the Congress of 1776; 'that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their

Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of

happiness; and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted.' Recollecting that

there is among nations, as among men, a golden rule; let us do to them, as we wish them

to do to us. Therefore be declared free and dismissed from the custody of the court.



1. The landmark decision of the times is Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24,

2004 that eliminated sentencing guidelines schemes and, 20 years of sentencing reform.

Sentences imposed under such guidelines in cases currently pending on direct appeal, or

in cold habeas petitions, are in jeopardy.



2. In both legislative and litigate practice Criminal sentences must be adjusted downward

rather upward, mandatory minimum schemes eliminated and acquittals the norm for most

crimes where there are significant mitigating factors.



§48 American Bar Association



A. The American Bar Association (ABA) was founded on August 21, 1878; in Saratoga

Springs, New York, by 100 lawyers from 21 states. In 2005 membership to the ABA

reached more than 400,000 including more than 350,000 lawyer members. The ABA has

long served a dual role as advocate for the profession and for the public. With the







297

growing complexity of society and our legal system, the ABA's public role has gained

both emphasis and breadth. The 11 goals of the association are:



1. to promote improvement in the American system of justice

2. to promote meaningful access to legal representation and the American system of

justice for all persons regardless of their economic or social condition

3. to provide ongoing leadership in improving the law to serve the changing needs of

society

4. to increase public understanding of and respect for the law, the legal process and the

role of the legal profession

5. to achieve the highest standards of professionalism, competence and ethical conduct

6. to serve as the national representative of the legal profession

7. to provide benefits, programs and services which promote professional growth and

enhance the quality of life of the members

8. to advance the rule of law in the world

9. to promote full and equal participation in the legal profession by minorities, women,

and persons with disabilities

10. to preserve and enhance the ideals of the legal profession as a common calling and its

dedication to public service

11. to preserve the independence of the legal profession and the judiciary as fundamental

to a free society.



B. In 2004 the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that there are 2,362,860 people with a

legal occupation in the United States averaging a mean annual salary of $66,780.

1,504,540 people were law enforcement officers making an average of $54,455 a year.

464,250 of these people are lawyers who make an average of $90,360 per year. 27,250

are Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators and Hearing Officers who make an average

of $51,580 per year. 6,260 are Arbitrators, Mediators and Conciliators making an

average of $70,310 per year. 23,150 are Judges, Magistrates and prosecutors who make

an average of $67,150 per year. 175,870 are paralegals and legal assistants making an

average of $36,550 per year. 17,460 are Court Reporters making an average of $38,040.

26,060 are law clerks making an average of $29,280 per year. 38,730 are Title

Examiners, Abstractors and Searchers making an average of $30,880.



§49 Federal Judiciary



A. The Federal Judiciary was established by Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution and all

federal judges are appointed by the US President and the Senate Judiciary Committee

upon the recommendation of the US Department of Justice.



1. There are a total of 875 authorized federal judgeships. 9 with the Supreme Court, 179

with the Circuit Courts of Appeals, 678 with the District Courts and 9 with the Court of

International Trade. As of June 30, 2007 there were 51 vacancies. 13 on the Courts of

Appeal and 38 in the District Court.









298

B. By statute, federal district judges receive the same salaries as members of Congress,

$165,200 a year in 2005. Judges on the federal appeals courts received $175,100;

associate justices of the Supreme Court, $203,000; and the chief justice $212,100.



1. Their last substantial pay raise was a 25 percent increase provided by a 1989 law, the

Ethics Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 101-94, 103 Stat. 1716 (1989), under which judges lost

the right to earn most types of outside income in return for the raise and the promise of

regular cost-of-living increases.



2. In 1969, federal district judges earned slightly more than law school deans, $40,000

compared to $33,000, and substantially more than the $28,000 earned by senior law

professors, the situation by 2002 was completely reversed. In that year, the judges were

earning $150,000, compared to $250,000 for the professors and $325,000 for the deans.



3. In 2000 the Federal Judiciary received $2.374 billion, only 0.23% of the $2.025 trillion

federal budget.



4. There were 35 judicial confirmations in fiscal year 2000 and 66 vacancies listed in the

2000 year-end report.



C. In fiscal year 2000 there were 54,697 filings in the 12 regional courts of appeals. In the

district courts there were 259,517 civil cases and 62,745 criminal cases filed, totaling

83,963 criminal defendants. Fiscal Year 2000 numbers are the highest since 1933, when

the Prohibition Amendment was repealed. In 2006 there were an estimated 1.5 million

cases filed with the Federal Judiciary. 8,521 cases were filed by the Supreme Court. The

Circuit Courts of Appeals received 66,618 filing. 326,401 cases were filed with the

District Courts. 1,112,542 cases were filed with Bankruptcy Court.



§49A Circuit Court of Appeal



A. The United States Federal Judiciary is constituted into 12 regional and a Federal

circuit courts of appeals in accordance with Title 28 of the US Code, Chapter 3 §41-49.

The Circuit Court hears appeals of right, by permission and by leave of the Court

regarding the decisions of bankruptcy and district courts in their circuit.



B. In 2002 the Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal filed 57,555 cases- 18,272 from

prisoners, 11,569 criminal cases, 5,789 administrative cases, and 21,925 civil cases –

only 27,758 were terminated, leaving 40,965 cases pending before the Circuit Courts of

Appeals. The average circuit court judge wrote 165 decisions in 2002.



1. The number of appeals filed in the regional courts of appeals in fiscal year 2006

declined by 3% from the record level set in fiscal year 2005. The courts of appeals

received 66,618 filings. All categories of appeals, except original proceedings, declined.

Before 2006, the number of appellate filings had declined only twice since 1959.









299

C. The past year„s decline stemmed from decreases in criminal appeals and federal

prisoner petitions following the filing deadline for cases affected by the Supreme Court„s

decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), as well as a reduction in

appeals from administrative agency decisions involving the Board of Immigration

Appeals (BIA).



1. Nationwide, the number of criminal appeals dropped by 5% to 15,246 filings, after

rising by 28% in 2005 in response to the Booker decision. Despite that decline, the

number of criminal appeals in 2006 surpassed by more than 25% the number of filings in

the years before the Court„s decision in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004).



2. The number of administrative agency appeals fell by 4% to 13,102 because of a

reduction in the number of cases that the BIA completed in 2005. Since 2002, the number

of BIA appeals has soared by 168%.



3. The number of civil appeals declined by 3% to 31,991 as the statute of limitations

expired for the filing of Booker-related habeas corpus petitions. The number of prisoner

petitions filed by state prisoners rose by 3% to 11,129 filings.



4. The number of original proceedings climbed by 9% to 5,458 filings, as prisoners

continued to file second or successive motions seeking permission to file habeas corpus

petitions. The courts of appeals continue to receive petitions from the backlog of state

prisoners affected by the Blakely decision, who must exhaust their state court remedies

before seeking relief in federal court.



6. Despite the year„s overall decline, the total number of appeals increased by 16%, or

9,063 filings, from 2002 to 2006.



§49B District Court



A. The United States district courts are the trial courts of the federal court system and are

constituted in accordance with chapter 5 § 81-144. Within limits set by Congress and the

Constitution, the district courts have jurisdiction to hear nearly all categories of federal

cases, including both civil and criminal matters.



1. There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, three territories of the United States -- the Virgin

Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands.



2. In 2002 there were 344,546 cases filed in the US District Courts, 323,629 cases were

terminated and 312,971 cases pending. The average district judge hears 518 cases every

year- 413 civil, 84 criminal and 21 supervised release hearings.



B. Over the past five years, the number of civil cases filed in the United States district

courts has fallen by 6%, or 15,300 cases. The decline has occurred primarily in cases

involving civil rights, personal injury, and Social Security claims.



300

1. Nevertheless, the number of civil cases filed in 2006 increased by 2% to a total of

259,541 cases. That growth occurred primarily because of a sharp jump in asbestos-

related diversity cases in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.



2. Excluding those filings, civil cases declined by 4% from 2005 to 2006, as federal

question cases involving prisoner petitions and civil rights dropped significantly.



3. The national median time from filing of a civil case to its disposition was 8.3 months,

which reflected a decline from the 9.5-month median period in 2005.



4. Cases in which the United States was a plaintiff or defendant declined by 15% to

44,294 cases, while those in which the United States was a defendant fell by 17%. The

latter number declined because federal prisoner petitions decreased by 33% (down by

5,978 cases) as filings returned to levels consistent with the number of petitions filed

before the Supreme Court„s decision in Booker.



C. The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 decreased by 4% to 66,860 cases and

88,216 defendants. The decline stemmed from shifts in priorities of the United States

Department of Justice, which directed more of its resources toward combating terrorism.

The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 is similar to the number of cases filed in

2002, when criminal case filings jumped by 7% following the terrorist attacks on

September 11, 2001.



1. Although the number of criminal case filings declined in 2006, the median time for

case disposition for defendants climbed from 6.8 months in 2005 to 7.1 months in 2006.

The median time period, which was 27 days longer than in 2004, reflected an increase in

the time that courts needed to process post-Booker cases.



D. The number of drug-related criminal cases decreased by 4% to 17,429 filings. The

number of defendants charged with drug crimes fell by 6% to 30,567 individuals.



1. The number of immigration-related criminal cases, which rose to record levels in 2005,

declined by 5% to 16,353 cases. The number of defendants charged in those cases

decreased by 4% to 17,651 individuals. Most of the decline in immigration-related

criminal cases is attributable to a decline in cases charging offenses involving improper

first-time entry.



2. Sex-related criminal cases climbed by 6% to 1,885 filings, and the number of

defendants charged in those cases increased by 8% to 1,975 individuals.



3. Criminal cases involving firearms and explosives cases declined by 6% to 8,678

filings, and the number of defendants charged in those cases dropped 5% to 9,800

individuals.









301

4. For the second consecutive year, the number of criminal cases declined. The number of

cases had risen in nine of the previous ten years.



§49C Bankruptcy Court



A. Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases as constituted by

chapter 6 § 151-158. Bankruptcy cases cannot be filed in state court. Each of the 94

federal judicial districts handles bankruptcy matters in accordance with Title 11.



1. The primary purposes of the law of bankruptcy are: (1) to give an honest debtor a

"fresh start" in life by relieving the debtor of specific debts by prohibiting further

collection actions, and (2) to repay creditors in an orderly manner to the extent that the

debtor has property available for payment.



B. In 2002 the number of bankruptcy proceedings was 1.5 million. The number of filings

in the United States bankruptcy courts fell from 1,782,643 cases in 2005 to 1,112,542

cases in 2006. The past year„s number, which reflects the lowest number of bankruptcy

cases filed since 1996, was 38% below the record number in 2005, when filings soared as

debtors rushed to file before the October 17, 2005, implementation date of the

Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.



1. The 2005 surge in filings accelerated until the implementation date, and more than half

of the total 2006 filings occurred in the first month of the fiscal year. Non-business filings

dropped by 38%, and business petitions fell by 20%.



2. Chapter 7 and chapter 13 filings declined by 38% and 36%, respectively, and chapter

11 filings dropped by 10%. Chapter 12 filings rose by 3%, reflecting 12 more filings than

the previous year.



§49D US Sentencing Commission



A. Under 28 USC§991-998 there is established as an independent commission in the

judicial branch of the United States a United States Sentencing Commission which shall

consist of seven voting members and one nonvoting member. The President, after

consultation with representatives of judges, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, law

enforcement officials, senior citizens, victims of crime, and others interested in the

criminal justice process, shall appoint the voting members of the Commission, by and

with the advice and consent of the Senate.



B. The purposes of the United States Sentencing Commission are to establish sentencing

policies and practices for the Federal criminal justice system that -



1. assure the meeting of the purposes of sentencing as set forth in 18USC§3553(a)(2);



2. provide certainty and fairness in meeting the purposes of sentencing, avoiding

unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar records who have been



302

found guilty of similar criminal conduct while maintaining sufficient flexibility to permit

individualized sentences when warranted by a rehabilitated treatment not taken into

account in the establishment of general sentencing practices; and



3. reflect, to the extent practicable, advancement of knowledge of human behavior as it

relates to the criminal justice process; and



4. develop means of measuring the degree to which the sentencing, penal, and

correctional practices are effective in meeting the purposes of sentencing as set 18 USC

§3553(a)(2).



C. Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632. June 24, 2004 compels judges to disregard, as

federal legislation, sentencing guidelines of the US Sentencing Commission. The judge,

in making an authorized sentencing decision regarding probation, prison and fines under

§3553(a)(2) must adjust downward the sentencing estimate introduced by the prosecutor.



1. The calibration of sentences of imprisonment in the US Code allows the judge to

automatically sentence all offenders to probation unless they meet the legislative

threshold of 50 years for a Class A or B felony under federal law under

18USC(227)§3563.



§50 Tax Court



1. The U.S. Tax Court employs 19 presidential appointed judges who hear cases for $60

regarding the decisions of the Commissioner of the Internal Revenues Service that must

be filed within 90 days.



2. The jurisdiction of the Tax Court includes the authority to hear tax disputes concerning

notices of deficiency, notices of transferee liability, certain types of declaratory judgment,

readjustment and adjustment of partnership items, review of the failure to abate interest,

administrative costs, worker classification, relief from joint and several liability on a joint

return, and review of certain collection actions.



§51 Customs Court



A. The U.S. Court of International Trade was constituted by the Customs Court Act of

1980 at 28 U.S.C. Chapter 11 §251-258 to employ 12 presidential appointed judges who

hear claims against the United States under 28 USC Chapter 95 §1581-1585.



1. The 1930 Tariff Act, 1974 Trade Act and the Customs Courts Act of 1980 grant the

Court a residual grant of exclusive subject matter jurisdictional authority to decide any

civil action against the United States, its officers, or its agencies arising out of any law

pertaining to international trade, tariffs and customs.



2. The Court operates in accordance with the Rules of Court and in co-operation with the

Civil Division of the Department of Justice.



303

B. The name CoITUS needs to be renamed to Customs Court (CC) to better represent the

dignity of the United States in international law.



1. Title 22 Foreign Relations and Intercourse (A-FRaI-D) also needs to be cleaned up to

read just Foreign Relations (FR-EE).



2. The USAID Bureau for Asia and the Near East (ANE) has played asylum to all five of

our wars since WWII. It needs to be divided once and for all into two Bureaus for the

Middle East and Central Asia (MECA) and South East Asia (SEA).



§52 Court of Claims



A. The US Court of Federal Claims was recreated pursuant to Article I of the United

States Constitution in October 1982, by the Federal Courts Improvement Act. The U.S.

Court of Federal Claims is constituted under 28 USC Chapter 7 §171-179 and is subject

to the jurisdiction and venue set forth in 28 USC Chapter 91§1491-1509. The Court

consists of sixteen judges nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a

term of fifteen years.



1. The Court of Federal Claims is authorized to hear primarily money claims founded

upon the Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or contracts, express or

implied-in-fact, with the United States particularly those involving unjust imprisonment,

declaratory judgment, treaties, accounts of officers, patents and copyrights.



2. Approximately one-quarter of the cases before the Court involve tax refund suits, an

area in which the court exercise concurrent jurisdiction with United States district courts.

The cases tend to involve complex factual and statutory construction issues in tax law.



B. After 1982, the Court retained all the original jurisdiction of the Court of Claims and

continues, uninterrupted, a judicial tradition more than 140 years old.



1. The Court has been given new equitable jurisdiction in the area of bid protests, as well

as jurisdiction in vaccine compensation, civil liberties, product liability, oil spills,

intellectual property, government contracts (10% of docket), civilian and military pay

questions and various other areas of the law over the last sixteen years.



2. The 2,200 plus pending cases involve claims currently estimated in the tens of billions

of dollars, making the average claim well over one million dollars. The Court also

efficiently handles numerous smaller claims. Its expertise, in recent years, has been seen

as its ability to efficiently handle civil litigation in co-operation with the Civil,

Environmental and Tax Divisions of the Department of Justice.



Art. 8 Ministry of Justice



§53 Department of Justice



304

A.The U.S. Department of Justice was founded by the 1870 Act to Establish the

Department of Justice to process the increase in litigation after the civil war by

improving…



1. representation of the federal government in the Courts

2. representation of the federal government to the State Attorney Generals (SAG)

3. representation of state attorney generals to the federal government and

4. counsel to the president by serving as the member of the cabinet who supervises

judicial affairs and litigation with the title Attorney General of the United States.



B. The US Department of Justice is constituted in accordance with Article 3 of the

Constitution of the United States, Title 28, Part 2 United States Code and manages its

judicial administration in accordance with Title 28 Code of Federal Regulations and the

U.S. Attorney‟s Manual.



C. The US Department of Justice is the largest law firm in the world with a $16.78 billion

budget.



1. The Department of Justice consists of the principal organizational units listed in 28

CFR I 0.1 and this Chapter as restructured by the Homeland Security Act of 2002

yielding roughly 17 offices, 7 divisions and 2 boards with four immigration and customs

related agencies seceding to the Department of Homeland Security.



§53a Office of the Attorney General



A. Edmund Randolph 1789-1794 began the first presidential appointment for Office of

the Federal Attorney General (FAG) under the Judiciary Act of 1789 and served as the

first of three attorney generals who were appointed by President Washington.



Under 28 CFR I 0.5 the Attorney General shall



(a) Supervise and direct the administration and operation of the Department of Justice,

including the offices of U.S. Attorneys and U.S. Marshals, which are within the

Department of Justice.

(b) Represent the United States in legal matters generally.

(c) Furnish advice and opinions, formal and informal, on legal matters to the President

and the Cabinet and to the heads of the executive departments and agencies of the

Government, as provided by law.

(d) Appear in person to represent the Government in the Supreme Court of the United

States, or in any other court, in which he may deem it appropriate.

(e) Designate, pursuant to Executive Orders 9788 of October 4, 1946, and 10254 of

June 15, 1951, officers and agencies of the Department of Justice to act as disbursing

officers for the Office of Alien Property.

(f) Perform or supervise the performance of other duties required by statute or

Executive order.



305

§53b Office of the Deputy Attorney General



Under 28 CFR I 0.15 (a) The Deputy Attorney General is authorized to exercise all the

power and authority of the Attorney General, unless any such power or authority is

required by law to be exercised by the Attorney General personally.



(a) The Deputy Attorney General shall advise and assist the Attorney

General in formulating and implementing Department policies and programs

and in providing overall supervision and direction to all organizational

units of the Department. Subject to the general supervision of the Attorney General, the

Deputy Attorney General shall direct the activities of organizational units as assigned. In

addition, the Deputy Attorney General shall:

(1) Except as assigned to the Associate Attorney General, exercise the power and

authority vested in the Attorney General to take final action in matters pertaining to:

(i) The employment, separation, and general administration of personnel in the Senior

Executive Service and in General Schedule grades GS-16 through GS-18, or the

equivalent, and of attorneys and law students regardless of grade or pay in the

Department;

(ii) The appointment of special attorneys and special assistants to the Attorney General

(28 U.S.C. 515(b)) for $12,000 yearly;

(iii) The appointment of Assistant U.S. Trustees and fixing of their compensation; and

(iv) The approval of the appointment by U.S. Trustees of standing trustees and the

fixing of their maximum annual compensation and percentage fees

(v) The appointment, employment, separation, and general administration of Assistant

United States Attorneys and other attorneys to assist United States Attorneys when the

public interest so requires and fixing their salaries.

(2) Administer the Attorney General's recruitment program for honor law graduates

and judicial law clerks.

(3) Coordinate Departmental liaison with White House Staff and the Executive Office

of the President.

(4) Coordinate and control the Department's reaction to civil disturbances and

terrorism.

(5) Perform such other duties and functions as may be assigned from time to time by

the Attorney General.

(6) The Deputy Attorney General is authorized to exercise the authority vested in the

Attorney General under section 528(a), Public Law 101-509, to accept from federal

departments and agencies the services of attorneys and non-law enforcement personnel to

assist the Department of Justice in the investigation and prosecution of fraud or other

criminal or unlawful activity in or against any federally insured financial institution or the

Resolution Trust Corporation, and to supervise such personnel in the conduct of such

investigations and prosecutions.



§53c Office of the Associate Attorney General









306

The Associate Attorney General (AAG) shall advise and assist the Attorney General and

the Deputy Attorney General in formulating and implementing Departmental policies and

programs under 28 CFR I 0.19 (a). The Associate Attorney General shall also provide

overall supervision and direction to organizational units as assigned. In addition the

Associate Attorney General shall:

(a) Exercise the power and the authority vested in the Attorney General to take final

action in matters pertaining to the employment, separation, and general administration of

attorneys and law students in pay grades GS-15 and below in organizational units subject

to his direction.

(b) Perform such other duties as may be especially assigned from time to time by the

Attorney General.

(c) Exercise the power and authority vested in the Attorney General to authorize the

Director of the U.S. Marshals Service to deputize persons to perform the functions of a

Deputy U.S. Marshal.



§53d Office of the Solicitor General



The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or

supervised by, the Solicitor General, in consultation with each agency or official

concerned under 28 CFR I 0.20:



(a) Conducting, or assigning and supervising, all Supreme Court cases, including

appeals, petitions for and in opposition to certiorari, briefs and arguments, and settlement

thereof.

(b) Determining whether, and to what extent, appeals will be taken by the Government

to all appellate courts (including petitions for rehearing en banc and petitions to such

courts for the issuance of extraordinary writs) and, in accordance with Sec. 0.163,

advising on the approval of settlements of cases in which he had determined that an

appeal would be taken.

(c) Determining whether a brief amices curiae will be filed by the Government, or

whether the Government will intervene, in any appellate court.

(d) Assisting the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General and the Associate

Attorney General in the development of broad Department program policy.



Under 28 CFR I 0.21 the Solicitor General may in consultation with each agency or

official concerned, authorize intervention by the Government in cases involving the

constitutionality of acts of Congress.



Art. 9 Offices



§54 Office of Legal Counsel



The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or

supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General (AAG), Office of Legal Counsel under 28

CFR I 0.25:







307

(a) Preparing the formal opinions of the Attorney General; rendering informal opinions

and legal advice to the various agencies of the Government; and assisting the Attorney

General in the performance of his functions as legal adviser to the President and as a

member of, and legal adviser to, the Cabinet.

(b) Preparing and making necessary revisions of proposed Executive orders and

proclamations, and advising as to their form and legality prior to their transmission to the

President; and performing like functions with respect to regulations and other similar

matters which require the approval of the President or the Attorney General.

(c) Rendering opinions to the Attorney General and to the heads of the various

organizational units of the Department on questions of law arising in the administration

of the Department.

(d) Approving proposed orders of the Attorney General, and orders which require the

approval of the Attorney General, as to form and legality and as to consistency and

conformity with existing orders and memoranda.

(e) Coordinating the work of the Department of Justice with respect to the participation

of the United States in the United Nations and related international organizations and

advising with respect to the legal aspects of treaties and other international agreements.

(f) When requested, advising the Attorney General in connection with his review of

decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals and other organizational units of the

Department.

(g) Designating within the Office of Legal Counsel:

(1) A liaison officer, and an alternate, as a representative of the Department in all

matters concerning the filing of departmental documents with the Office of the Federal

Register, and

(2) A certifying officer, and an alternate, to certify copies of documents required to be

filed with the Office of the Federal Register (1 CFR 16.1).

(h) Approving certain blind trusts, as required by section 202(f)(4)(B) of the Ethics in

Government Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 1843.

(i) Consulting with the Director of the Office of Government Ethics regarding the

development of policies, rules, regulations, procedures and forms relating to ethics and

conflicts of interest, as required by section 402 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978,

92 Stat. 1862.

(j) Performing such special duties as may be assigned by the Attorney General, the

Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General from time to time.



§54a Office of Legislative Affairs



The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or

supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative and

Intergovernmental Affairs (OLA) under 28 CFR I 0.27:



(a) Maintaining liaison between the Department and the Congress.

(b) Reviewing, coordinating and submitting departmental legislative reports.

(c) Coordinating the preparation and submission of proposed departmental legislation.

(d) Maintaining liaison between the Department and State and local governments and

their representative organizations.



308

(e) Consulting with State and local officials and their representative organizations to

inform them of Department policy and law enforcement initiatives that may affect State

and local governments.

(f) Performing such other duties respecting legislative matters as may be assigned by

the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General.



§54b Office of Professional Responsibility



The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) shall be headed by a Counsel, appointed

by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.39. The Counsel shall be subject to the general

supervision and direction of the Attorney General or, whenever appropriate, of the

Deputy Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General or the Solicitor General.



(a)The Office of Professional Responsibility, which reports directly to the Attorney

General, is responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department

attorneys that relate to the exercise of their authority to investigate, litigate or provide

legal advice, as well as allegations of misconduct by law enforcement personnel when

they are related to allegations of attorney misconduct within the jurisdiction of OPR.

(b)The objective of OPR is to ensure that Department of Justice attorneys continue to

perform their duties in accordance with the high professional standards expected of the

Nation's principal law enforcement agency.

(c) The OPR submits an annual report to the Attorney General discussing the work of the

OPR and providing summaries of all the cases heard during the year.



§54c Office of Legal Policy



The Office of Legal Policy (OLP) shall be headed by an Assistant Attorney General. The

principal responsibilities of the Office shall be to plan, develop, and coordinate the

implementation of major policy initiatives of high priority to the Department and to the

Administration under 28 CFR I 0.23. In addition, the Assistant Attorney General, Office

of Legal Policy, shall:



(a) Examine and study legislation and other policy proposals and coordinate

Departmental efforts to secure enactment of those of special interest to the Department

and the Administration.

(b) Assist the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General in fulfilling

responsibilities of the Federal Legal Council to promote coordination and communication

among Federal legal offices with the goal of achieving effective, consistent, and efficient

management of legal resources throughout the Federal Government.

(c) Advise and assist the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General regarding

the selection and appointment of Federal judges.

(e) Administer the Federal Justice Research Program.

(f) Represent the Department on the Administrative Conference of the United States

and, as appropriate, on regulatory reform matters.

(g) Participate, as appropriate, in internal budget hearings of the Department with

regard to policy implications of resource allocations and resource implications of major



309

policy initiatives; and advise the Assistant Attorney General for Administration with

regard to information requirements for Departmental policy formulation.

(h) Advise appropriate Departmental officials, from time to time, on investigation,

litigation, negotiation, penal, or correctional policies to insure the compatibility of those

policies with overall Departmental and National goals.

(i) Perform such other duties and functions as may be specially assigned by the

Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General.



(2) In carrying out his responsibilities under this section, the Assistant Attorney General,

Office of Legal Policy, shall have the right to call upon the relevant Departmental units

for personnel and other assistance.



§54d Office of Public Affairs



The Office of Public Affairs is headed by a Director of Public Affairs (OPA) under 28

CFR I 0.28 who shall:



(a) Handle matters pertaining to relations with the public generally.

(b) Disseminate information to the press, the radio and television services, the public,

members of Congress, officials of Government, schools, colleges, and civic

organizations.

(c) Coordinate the relations of the Department of Justice with the news media.

(d) Serve as a central agency for information relating to the work and activities of all

agencies of the Department.

(e) Prepare public statements and news releases.

(f) Coordinate Department publications.

(g) Assist the Attorney General and other officials of the Department in preparing for

news conferences, interviews and other contacts with the news media.



§54e Office of the Pardon Attorney



The Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA) has the authority under 28 CFR I 0.35 to:



(a) Exercise of the powers and performance of the functions vested in the Attorney

General.

(b) Performance of such other duties as may be assigned by the Attorney General or

the Associate Attorney General.



(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.36 The Pardon Attorney shall submit all recommendations in

clemency cases through the Associate Attorney General and the Associate Attorney

General shall exercise such discretion and authority as is appropriate and necessary for

the handling and transmittal of such recommendations to the President.



§54f Office of Intelligence Policy and Review









310

A. The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR), under the direction of the

Counsel for Intelligence Policy, is responsible for advising the Attorney General on all

matters relating to the national security activities of the United States.



1. The Office prepares and files all applications for electronic surveillance and physical

search under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, assists Government

agencies by providing legal advice on matters of national security law and policy, and

represents the Department of Justice on variety of interagency committees such as the

National Counterintelligence Policy Board.



2. The Office also comments on and coordinates other agencies' views regarding

proposed legislation affecting intelligence matters.



3. The Office serves as adviser to the Attorney General and various client agencies,

including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the

Defense and State Departments, concerning questions of law, regulation, and guidelines

as well as the legality of domestic and overseas intelligence operations.



Art. 10 Executives



§55 Executive Office for Immigration Review



A. The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) was created on January 9,

1983, through an internal Department of Justice (DOJ) reorganization which combined

the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) with the Immigration Judge function previously

performed by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (now part of the

Department of Homeland Security). Besides establishing EOIR as a separate agency

within DOJ, this reorganization made the Immigration Courts independent of INS, the

agency charged with enforcement of Federal immigration laws.



1. The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) was added in 1987.

EOIR is also separate from the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair

Employment Practices in the DOJ Civil Rights Division and the Office of Immigration

Litigation in the DOJ Civil Division.



B. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2001 was the most

significant transformation of the U.S. government since 1947, when various branches of

the U.S. Armed Forces merged into the Department of Defense to better coordinate the

nation's defense against military threats and improve the dissemination of immigration

and customs information by consolidating.



1. DHS represents a similar consolidation whereby, 22 previously disparate domestic

agencies were consolidated into one department called the Department of Homeland

Security.









311

C. USCIS and other bureaus are charged with fundamentally transforming and improving

the delivery of immigration and citizenship services, while enhancing our nation's

security.



1. All authorities and functions of the Department of Homeland Security to administer

and enforce the immigration laws are vested in the Secretary of Homeland Security.

Delegation may be made by regulation, directive, memorandum, or other means deemed

appropriate by Congress.



D. There shall be in the Department of Justice a Board of Immigration Appeals, subject

to the general supervision of the Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review

(EOIR). The Board members shall be attorneys appointed by the Attorney General to act

in the cases that come before them. Membership on the Board shall be reduced to eleven

members. A vacancy, or the absence or unavailability of a Board member, shall not

impair the right of the remaining members to exercise all the powers under 8CFR§1003.1



§55a Community Relations Service



A. The following-described matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or

supervised by, the Director of the Community Relations Service (CRS) under 28 CFR I

0.30:



(a) Exercise of the powers and performance of the functions vested in the Attorney

General by sections 204(d), 205, 1002, and 1003(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78

Stat. 267) and section 2 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1966.

(b) Preparation and submission of the annual report to the Congress required by section

1004 of that Act.



B. In case of a vacancy in the Office of the Director of the Community Relations Service,

the Deputy Director of the Service shall perform the functions and duties of the Director

under 28 CFR I 0.31.



(a) The Director is authorized, in case of absence from his office or in case of his

inability or disqualification to act, to designate the Deputy Director to act in his stead. In

unusual circumstances, or in the absence of the Deputy Director, a person other than the

Deputy Director may be so designated by the Director.



C. Under 28 CFR I 0.32 Departmental regulations which are generally applicable to units

or personnel of the Department of Justice shall be applicable with respect to the

Community Relations Service and to the Director and personnel thereof, except to the

extent, if any, that such regulations may be inconsistent with the intent and purposes of

section 1003(b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.



§55b Executive Office for United States Attorneys









312

The Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) shall be under the direction

of a Director under 28 CFR I 0.22 who shall:



(a) Provide general executive assistance and supervision to the offices of the U.S.

Attorneys, including:

(1) Evaluating the performance of the offices of the U.S. Attorneys, making

appropriate reports and inspections and taking corrective action were indicated.

(2) Coordinating and directing the relationship of the offices of the U.S. Attorneys with

other organizational units of the Department of Justice.

(b) Publish and maintain a U.S. Attorneys' Manual and a United States Attorneys'

Bulletin for the internal guidance of the U.S. Attorneys' offices and those other

organizational units of the Department concerned with litigation.

(c) Supervise the operation of the Office of Legal Education, the Attorney General's

Advocacy Institute and the Legal Education Institute, which shall develop, conduct and

authorize the training of all Federal legal personnel.

(d) Provide the Attorney General's Advisory Committee of United States Attorneys

with such staff assistance and funds as are reasonably necessary to carry out the

Committee's responsibilities (28 CFR 0.10(d)).

(e) Establish policy and procedures for the satisfaction, collection, or recovery of

criminal fines, special assessments, penalties, interest, bail bond forfeitures, restitution,

and court costs in criminal cases consistent with 28CFR I 0.171.



§55c Executive Office for United States Trustees



A. The Executive Office for United States Trustees (UST) shall be headed by a Director

appointed by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.37.



1. Under 28 CFR I 0.38 the Director shall have responsibility for assisting the Attorney

General and the Deputy Attorney General in supervising and providing general

coordination and assistance to United States Trustees.

2. The Director shall perform such duties relating to such functions under the Bankruptcy

Reform Act of 1978 and the litigation of US Bankruptcy Courts.



§55d INTERPOL--United States National Central Bureau



The following functions are assigned to the Chief of the United States National Central

Bureau, International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL--U.S. National Central

Bureau), under 28 CFR I 0.34, as authorized by statute and within guidelines prescribed

by the Department of Justice, in conjunction with the Department of Treasury:



(a) Pay a pro rata share to the International Prison Commission under 22 U.S.C. 263a.

(b) Represent the U.S. National Central Bureau at criminal law enforcement and

international law enforcement conferences and symposia.

(c) Serve as a member of the Executive Committee of INTERPOL-United States

National Central Bureau (INTERPOL-USNCB).







313

(d) Transmit information of a criminal justice, humanitarian, or other law enforcement

related nature between National Central Bureaus of INTERPOL member countries, and

law enforcement agencies within the United States and abroad; and respond to requests

by law enforcement agencies, and other legitimate requests by appropriate organizations,

institutions and individuals, when in agreement with the INTERPOL constitution.

(e) Coordinate and integrate information for investigations of an international nature

and identify those involving patterns and trends of criminal activities.

(f) Conduct analyses of patterns of international criminal activities, when specific

patterns are observed.

(g) Establish and collect user fees to process name checks and background records for

licensing, humanitarian and other non-law enforcement purposes.



§55e Community Oriented Policing Services



A. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) shall be headed by a

Director appointed by the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.119 . The Director shall

report to the Attorney General through the Associate Attorney General.



B. The Director, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services under 28 CFR I 0.120

shall:



(a) Exercise the powers and perform the functions vested in the Attorney General by

title I and subtitle H of title III of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of

1994 (Pub. L. 103-322); and

(b) Perform such other duties and functions relating to policing and law enforcement as

may be specially assigned by the Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General.



C. Grant programs administered through the Office of Justice Programs, shall apply with

equal force and effect to grant programs administered by the Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services under 28 CFR I 0.121.



§55f Foreign Claims Settlement Commission



A. The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (FCSC)of the United States is a separate

agency within the Department of Justice that investigates claims of US citizens against

foreign countries.



1. It is composed of a full-time Chairman, and two part-time Commissioners.



2. All functions, powers, and duties of the Commission not directly related to

adjudicating claims are vested in the Chairman of the Commission, including the

functions set forth in section 3 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1954 and the authority to

issue rules and regulations.



3. The Attorney General provides necessary administrative support and services to the

Commission.



314

§55g U.S. Parole Commission



(1)The U.S. Parole Commission (USPC) is composed of nine Commissioners of whom

one is designated Chairman under 28 CFR I 0.124. The Commission:



(a) Has authority, to grant, modify, or revoke paroles of eligible U.S. prisoners serving

sentences of more than 1 year, and is responsible for the supervision of parolees and

prisoners mandatorily released prior to the expiration of their sentences, and for the

determination of supervisory conditions and terms;

(b) Has responsibility in cases in which the committing court specifies that the Parole

Commission shall determine the date of parole eligibility of the prisoner;

(c) Has responsibility for determining, in accordance with the Labor-Management

Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C.§504), whether the service as officials

in the field of organized labor or in labor oriented management positions of persons

convicted of certain crimes is contrary to the purposes of that act; and

(d) Has responsibility under the Employee Retirement Income Security

Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.§1111), for determining whether persons convicted of certain

crimes may provide services to, or be employed by, employment benefit plans.



(2) The Chairman of the United States Parole Commission shall make any temporary

assignment of a Commissioner to act as Vice Chairman, National Appeals Board

member, or Regional Commissioner in the case of an absence or vacancy in the position,

without the concurrence of the Attorney General under 28 CFR I 0.125.



(3) The U.S. Parole Commission is authorized to exercise the authority to make a finding

that a parolee is unable to pay a fine in whole or in part and to direct release of such

parolee based on such finding under 28 CFR I 0.127.



Art. 11 Programs



§56 Office of Justice Programs



A. Since the 1984 Justice System Improvement Act 42 US Code Chapter 46 Subchapters

1-15 the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) has supervised,



1. the Bureau of Justice Statistics,

2. the National Institute of Justice and

3. the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.



B. The Office of Justice Programs is headed by an Assistant Attorney General appointed

by the President. Under the general authority of the Attorney General, the Assistant

Attorney General maintains liaison with and provides information to Federal, State, local,

and private agencies and organizations on criminal justice matters, and provides staff

support to and coordinates the activities of the National Institute of Justice under 28 CFR

I 0.90.



315

§56a National Institute of Justice



The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is headed by a Director appointed by the President.

Under the general authority of the Attorney General and reporting through the Assistant

Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the Director performs functions and

administers programs, including provision of financial assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 3721-

3723 to support basic and applied research into justice issues.



§56b Bureau of Justice Statistics



A. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), is headed by a Director appointed by the

President under 28 CFR I 0.93. Under the general authority of the Attorney General and

reporting through the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the

Director performs functions and administers programs, including provision of financial

assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 3731-3734, to provide a variety of statistical services for the

criminal justice community.



B. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported a total of 2,131,180 prisoners in the Census

of 30 June 2004. 726 prisoners per 100,000 people. At midyear 2004 there were 4,919

black male prison and jail inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States,

compared to 1,717 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 717 white

male inmates per 100,000 white males.



§56c Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention



The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is headed by an

Administrator appointed by the President under 28 CFR I 0.94. Under the general

authority of the Attorney General and reporting through the Assistant Attorney General,

Office of Justice Programs, the Administrator performs functions and administers

programs, including provision of financial assistance, under 42 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.,

relating to juvenile delinquency, the improvement of juvenile justice systems and missing

children. Their most impressive achievement is the National Juvenile Court Data

Archive that compiles statistics for juvenile courts.



§56d Bureau of Justice Assistance



(1) The Bureau of Justice Assistance is headed by a Director appointed by the Attorney

General under 28 CFR 0.94-1. Under the general authority of the Attorney General and

reporting through the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, the

Director performs functions and administers programs, including provision of financial

assistance, under 42 U.S.C. §3741-3742, §3750-3766b; §3769, relating to the

administration of State and local criminal justice systems. The Director also administers

the Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits Program under 42 U.S.C. §3796.









316

(a) Subject to the authority and direction of the Attorney General, the Director of the

Bureau of Justice Assistance is authorized to exercise the power and authority vested in

the Attorney General by Executive Order No. 11755 of December 29, 1973, 39 FR 779,

with respect to work-release laws and regulations.



Art. 12 Divisions



§57 Justice Divisions



There are 7 Divisions to the US Department of Justice that have Assistant Attorney

Generals appointed to them (1) Anti-Trust Division, (2) Civil Division, (3) Civil Rights

Division, (4) Criminal Division, (5) Environment and Natural Resources Division, (6)

Tax Division, and (7) Justice Management Division.



§57a Antitrust Division



A.The following functions are assigned to and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised

by, the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division (ATR) under 28 CFR I 0.40:



(a) General enforcement, by criminal and civil proceedings, of the Federal antitrust

laws and other laws relating to the protection of competition and the prohibition of

restraints of trade and monopolization, including conduct of surveys of possible

violations of antitrust laws, conduct of grand jury proceedings, issuance and

enforcement of civil investigative demands, civil actions to obtain orders and injunctions,

civil actions to recover forfeitures or damages for injuries sustained by the United States

as a result of antitrust law violations, proceedings to enforce compliance with final

judgments in antitrust suits and negotiation of consent judgments in civil actions,

civil actions to recover penalties, criminal actions to acquit including actions against the

prosecution and judiciary for the imposition of penalties for conspiring to defraud the

Federal Government by violation of the antitrust laws, participation as amices curiae in

private antitrust litigation; and prosecution or defense of appeals in antitrust proceedings.

(b) Intervention or participation before administrative agencies functioning wholly or

partly under regulatory statutes in administrative proceedings which require consideration

of the antitrust laws or competitive policies, including such agencies as the Civil

Aeronautics Board, Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Communications

Commission, Federal Maritime Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Federal Reserve Board, Federal Trade Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

and Securities and Exchange Commission, except proceedings referred to any agency by

a federal court as an incident to litigation being conducted under the supervision of

another Division in this Department.

(c) Preparing the approval or disapproval of the Attorney General whenever such

action is required by statute from the standpoint of the antitrust laws as a prerequisite to

the development of Defense Production Act voluntary programs or agreements and small

business production or raw material pools, the national defense program and atomic

energy matters.







317

(d) Assembling information and preparing reports required or requested by the

Congress or the Attorney General as to the effect upon the maintenance and preservation

of competition under the free enterprise system.

(e) Preparing for transmittal to the President, Congress, or other departments or

agencies views or advice as to the propriety or effect of any action, program or practice

upon the maintenance and preservation or competition under the free enterprise system.

(f) Representing the Attorney General on interdepartmental or interagency committees

concerned with the maintenance and preservation of competition generally and in various

sections of the economy and the operation of the free enterprise system and when

authorized participating in conferences and committees with foreign governments and

treaty organizations concerned with competition and restrictive business practices in

international trade.

(g) Collecting fines, penalties, judgments, and forfeitures arising in antitrust cases.

(h) The Attorney General is authorized to grant export trade certificates in accordance

with 15 U.S.C. Chapter 66 §4011-4021.



(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.41 the following functions are assigned to, and shall be conducted,

handled, or supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division:

(a) Institution of proceedings to impose penalties for unjustly or unreasonably

discriminating among persons, classes of persons, or localities.

(b) Representing the United States before three-judge district courts under title 28 U.S.

Code chapter 157 §2321-2325 to enforce, suspend, enjoin, annul, or set aside, in whole or

in part, any order of the Interstate Commerce Commission.

(c) Representing the United States in proceedings before courts of appeals under 28

U.S.C. chapter 158 §2341-2350.

(d) Defending the Secretary of the Treasury

(e) Guaranteeing Standby Energy Authority under 42 U.S.C. Chapter 77 §6272-6285.



§57b Civil Division



(1)The following-described matters are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General of the

Civil Division (CD) under 28 CFR I 0.45:



(a) Admiralty and shipping cases--civil and admiralty litigation in any court by or

against the United States, its officers and agents, which involves ships, shipping,

workmen's compensation, litigation and waiver of claims and tariffs under reciprocal-aid

maritime agreements with foreign governments.

(b) Court of Federal Claims cases--litigation by and against the United States

(c) Civil litigation at the Court of International Trade, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1581(i)

(d) Fraud cases--civil claims arising from fraud and (gross) negligence 19 U.S.C. 1592

(e) Gifts and bequests to the United States.

(f) Patent, copyright, and trademark litigation before the U.S. courts and the Patent

Office and the Court of Federal Claims (28 U.S.C. 1498)

(g) suits for compensation under the Patent Secrecy Act where the invention was

ordered to be kept secret by he government (35 U.S.C. 183),







318

(h) suits for compensation for unauthorized practice of a patented invention in the

furnishing of assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act (22 U.S.C. 2356),

(i) suits for compensation for the unauthorized communication of restricted data by

the Atomic Energy Commission to other nations (42 U.S.C. 2223),

(j) Tort cases--defense of tort suits against the United States, Government contractors

and Federal employees whose official conduct is involved.

(k) Consumer litigation--All civil and criminal litigation and grand jury proceedings

arising under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301-397), the Fair

Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), the Automobile Information

Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1231 et seq.).

(l) All civil litigation arising under the passport, visa and immigration and nationality

laws and related investigations and other appropriate inquiries pursuant to all the power

and authority of the Attorney General to enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act and

all other laws relating to the immigration and naturalization of aliens except all civil

litigation, investigations, and advice with respect to forfeitures, return of property actions,



(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.46 The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division

shall direct all other civil litigation including claims by or against the United States, its

agencies or officers, in domestic or foreign courts, special proceedings, and similar civil

matters not otherwise assigned, and shall employ foreign counsel to represent before

foreign criminal courts, commissions or administrative agencies officials of the

Department of Justice and all other law enforcement officers of the United States who are

charged with violations of foreign law as a result of acts which they performed in the

course and scope of their Government service.



(3) Under 28 CFR I 0.48 the Attorney-in-Charge, International Trade Field Office, at 26

Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10007, in the Office of the Assistant Attorney

General, Civil Division, is designated to transmit letters of request to foreign tribunals in

connection with the United States Customs Court.



§57c Civil Rights Division



(1)The following functions are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or

supervised by, the Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division (CRT) under 28

CFR I 0.50:



(a) Enforcement of all Federal statutes affecting civil rights as it applies to equal

employment, including those rights pertaining to religion, elections and voting, public

accommodations, public facilities, school desegregation, employment (42 U.S.C. 2000e)

(b) Protecting housing, credit, and constitutional and civil rights of Indians arising

under 25 U.S.C. 1301 et seq., and of institutionalized persons.

(c) Title 18 U.S. Code §591-611, relating to criminal elections and political activities;

(d) Title 18 U.S. C. Chapter 13 §241-248 pertaining to criminal aspects of Civil Rights.

(e) Requesting and reviewing investigations arising from reports or complaints of

public officials or private citizens with respect to matters affecting civil rights.







319

(f) Conferring with individuals and groups who call upon the Department in

connection with civil rights matters, advising such individuals and groups thereon, and

initiating action appropriate thereto.

(g) Coordination within the Department of Justice of all matters affecting civil rights.

(h) Consultation with and assistance to other Federal departments and agencies and

State and local agencies on matters affecting civil rights.

(i) Research on civil rights matters, and the making of recommendations to the

Attorney General as to proposed policies and legislation relating thereto.

(j) Representation of civil rights to Federal officials in private litigation arising from

discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin under 42 U.S.C. 2000d.

(k) Administration of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1973c).

(l) Administration of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 (50 U.S.C. App. 1989b).

(m) Upon request, Federal Protection certification under 18 U.S.C. §245.

(n) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 42 U.S.C. §12101-12213

(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.51

(a) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division shall

exercise the authority vested in and perform the functions assigned to the Attorney

General by Executive Order 12250 (`Leadership and Coordination of Nondiscrimination

Laws'').

(b) Under paragraph (a) of this section, the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the

Civil Rights Division shall be responsible for coordinating the implementation and

enforcement by Executive agencies of the nondiscrimination provisions of the following

laws:

(i) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §2000d).

(ii) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §1681).

(iii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. §794).

(c) Any other provision of Federal statutory law which provides, in whole or in part,

that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, national origin,

handicap, religion, or sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or

be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial

assistance.



§57d Criminal Division



(1)The following functions are assigned to and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised

by, the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division (CD) under 28 CFR I 0.55:



(a) Prosecutions for Federal crimes not otherwise specifically assigned.

(b) Civil petitions for remission or mitigation of forfeitures and civil penalties, in

compromise, and related proceedings for prison-made goods (18 U.S.C. §1761-1762).

(c) Immigration and Nationality authority under 8 U.S.C. §1182-1183

(d) Coordination of enforcement activities directed against organized crime and

racketeering.

(e) All civil proceedings seeking exclusively equitable relief against Criminal Division

activities including criminal investigations, prosecutions and other criminal justice

activities (including without limitation, applications for writs of habeas corpus,



320

deportation or detention under the immigration laws and coram nobis) not supervised by

another division

(f) International extradition proceedings.

(g) Relation of military to civil authority with respect to criminal matters affecting

both.

(h) §241, 242, , 1201 and 594 of title 18, and §1973i and 1973j of title 42, U.S. Code,

insofar as they relate to voting and election matters not involving discrimination or

intimidation on grounds of race or color, and §245(b)(1) of title 18 U.S. Code, insofar as

it relates to matters not involving discrimination or intimidation on

grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin;

(i) §245(b)(3) of title 18, U.S. Code, pertaining to forcible interference with persons

engaged in business during a riot or civil disorder; and

(j) Administrative Subpoenas under 39 U.S.C. §3016 (Postal Reorganization Act).

(k) Resolving questions that arise as to Federal prisoners held in custody by Federal

officers or in Federal prisons, commitments of mentally defective defendants and juvenile

delinquents, validity and construction of sentences, probation, and parole.

(l) Supervision of matters of Prisoners arising under the Escape and Rescue Act (18

U.S.C. §751, 752), the Fugitive Felon Act (18 U.S.C. §1072, 1073), and the Influencing

or Injuring Jurors (18 U.S.C. §1503).

(m) Supervision of prisoner release matters arising under the Bail Reform Act of 1966

arrest and release 28 U.S.C.§3041-3063, release and detention pending judicial

proceedings 28 U.S.C.§3141-3156.



(2) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division is authorized to

determine administratively whether the Federal Government has exclusive or concurrent

jurisdiction over offenses committed upon lands acquired by the United States, and to

consider problems arising there from under 28 CFR I 0.56.



(3) The FBI estimates 1,417,745 violent crimes occurred nationwide in 2006. There were

an estimated 473.5 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants. When data for 2006 to 2005

were compared, the estimated volume of violent crime increased 1.9 percent. The 5-year

trend (2006 compared with 2002) indicated that violent crime decreased 0.4 percent. For

the 10-year trend (2006 compared with 1997) violent crime fell 13.3 percent. Aggravated

assault accounted for the majority of violent crimes, 60.7 percent. Robbery accounted for

31.6 percent and forcible rape accounted for 6.5 percent. Murder, the least committed

violent offense, made up 1.2 percent of violent crimes in 2006. In 2006, firearms were

used in 67.9 percent of the Nations murders, in 42.2 percent of the robbery offenses, and

in 21.9 percent of the aggravated assaults.



§57f Environment and Natural Resources Division



(1)The following functions are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of

the Land, Environment, and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) under 28 CFR I 0.65:



(a) Civil suits and matters in Federal and State courts (and administrative tribunals), by

or against the United States, its agencies, officers, or contractors, or in which the United



321

States has an interest, whether for specific or monetary relief, and also non-litigation

matters, relating to:

(i) The public domain lands and the outer continental shelf of the United States.

(ii) Other lands and interests in real property owned, leased, or otherwise claimed or

controlled, or allegedly impaired or taken, by the United States, its agencies, officers, or

contractors, including the acquisition of such lands by condemnation proceedings or

otherwise,

(iii) The water and air resources controlled or used by the United States, its agencies,

officers, or contractors,

(iv) The other natural resources in or related to such lands, water, and air,

(b) Rendering opinions as to the validity of title to all lands acquired by the United

States, except as otherwise specified by statute.

(c) Civil and criminal suits and matters involving air, water, noise, and other types of

pollution, the regulation of solid wastes, toxic substances, pesticides under the Federal

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and the control of the environmental impacts

of surface coal mining.

(d) Civil and criminal suits and matters involving obstructions to navigation, and

dredging or filling (33 U.S.C. § 403).

(e) Civil and criminal suits and matters arising under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954

(42 U.S.C. § 2011) insofar as it relates to the prosecution of violations committed by a

company in matters involving the licensing and operations of nuclear power plants.

(f) Civil and criminal suits and matters relating to the natural and biological resources

of the coastal and marine environments, the outer continental shelf, the fishery

conservation zone and, where permitted by law, the high seas.

(g) Performance of the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, section 201(f), 91 Stat. 450, and contained

in 30 CFR part 706.

(h) Conducting the studies of processing sites required by section 115(b) of the

Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, publishing the results of the

studies and furnishing the results thereof to the Congress.

(i) Criminal suits and civil penalty and forfeiture actions relating to wildlife law

enforcement under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.§1531-1544); the

Lacey Act and related provisions (18 U.S.C. §41-48); the Airborne Hunting Act (16

U.S.C. §742j-1); the Migratory Bird Act (16 U.S.C. §701); the Wild Horses and Wild

Burros Act (16 U.S.C. §1331-1340); the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16

U.S.C.§668-668d); and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C.§661-667d).



(2) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land, Environment]and Natural

Resources Division or such members of his staff as he may specifically designate in

writing, are authorized to sign the name of the Attorney General to opinions on the

validity of titles to property acquired by or on behalf of the United States, except those

which, in the opinion of the Assistant Attorney General involve questions of policy or for

any other reason require the personal attention of the Attorney General under 28 CFR I

0.66 (a).

(a) the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land and Natural Resources

Division is authorized:



322

(i) To exercise the Attorney General's power of delegating to other departments and

agencies his (the Attorney General's) responsibility for approving the title to lands

acquired by them,

(ii) With respect to delegations so made to other departments and agencies, to exercise

the Attorney General's function of general supervision regarding the carrying out by such

departments and agencies of the responsibility so entrusted to them, and

(iii) To promulgate regulations and any appropriate amendments thereto governing the

approval of land titles by such departments and agencies.



(3) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land, Environment and Natural

Resources Division, and such members of his staff as he may specifically designate in

writing, are authorized to execute the power and authority of the Attorney General under

the provisions of section 3 of the act of August 7, 1947, 61 Stat. 914, 30 U.S.C.§ 352,

respecting the leasing of minerals on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of

Justice under 28 CFR I 0.68.



§57g Tax Division



(1) The following functions are assigned to the Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division

(TD) under 28 CFR I 0.70:



(a) Prosecution and defense in all courts, other than the Tax Court, of civil suits,

and the handling of other matters, arising under the internal revenue laws, and

litigation resulting from the taxing provisions of other Federal statutes

(b) Criminal proceedings arising under the internal revenue laws,

(c) Enforcement of tax liens, and mandamus, injunctions, and other special actions

or general matters arising in connection with internal revenue matters.

(d) Defense of actions arising under of title 28 U.S.C.§2410 whenever the United

States is named as a party to an action as the result of the existence of a Federal

tax lien.

(e) Petitions to review decisions of the Tax Court of the United States.



(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.71 the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Tax Division is

Authorized to handle matters involving the immunity of the Federal Government from

State or local taxation and State or local taxation involving contractors performing

contracts for or on behalf of the United States.



§57h Justice Management Division



(1) The Assistant Attorney General for Administration shall head the Justice

Management Division (JMD) and shall provide advice relating to basic Department

policy for budget and financial management, program evaluation, auditing, personnel

management and training, procurement, information processing and telecommunications,

security and for all matters pertaining to organization, management, and administration

under 28 CFR I 0.75.







323

The following matters are assigned to, and shall be conducted, handled, or supervised by,

the Assistant Attorney General for Administration:

(a) Conduct, direct, review, and evaluate management studies and surveys of the

Department's organizational structure, functions, and programs, operating procedures and

supporting systems, and management practices throughout the Department; and make

recommendations to reduce costs and increase productivity.

(b) Supervise, direct, and review the preparation, justification and execution of the

Department of Justice budget, including the coordination and control of the programming

and reprogramming of funds.

(c) Review, analyze, and coordinate the Department's programs and activities to ensure

that the Department's use of resources and estimates of future requirements are consistent

with the policies, plans, and mission priorities of the Attorney General.

(d) Plan, direct, and coordinate Department-wide personnel management programs,

and develop and issue Department-wide policy in all personnel program areas, including

training, position classification and pay administration, staffing, employee performance

evaluation, employee development, employee relations and services, employee

recognition and incentives, equal employment opportunity programs, including the equal

opportunity recruitment program (5 U.S.C. §7201), personnel program evaluation, labor

management relations, adverse action hearings and appeals, employee grievances, and

employee health programs.

(e) Develop and direct Department-wide financial management policies, programs,

procedures, and systems including financial accounting, planning, analysis, and reporting.

(f) Supervise and direct the operation of the Department's central payroll system,

automated information services, publication services, library services and any other

Department-wide central services which are established by or assigned to the Justice

Management Division.

(g) Formulate and administer the General Administration Appropriation of the

Department's budget.

(h) Formulate Department-wide audit policies, standards and procedures; develop,

direct and supervise independent and comprehensive internal audits, including

examinations authorized by 28 U.S.C.§526, of all organizations, programs, and functions

of the Department, and audits of expenditures made under the Department's contracts and

grants to ensure compliance with laws, regulations and generally accepted accounting

principles; economy and efficiency in operation; and that desired results are being

achieved.

(i) Develop and direct a Department-wide directives management program and

administer the directives management system.

(j) Plan, direct, administer, and monitor compliance with Department-wide policies,

procedures, and regulations concerning records, reports, procurement, printing, graphics,

audiovisual activities (including the approval or disapproval of production and equipment

requests), forms management, supply management, motor vehicles, real and personal

property, space assignment and utilization, and all other administrative services

functions.

(k) Formulate Department policies, standards, and procedures for information systems

and the management and use of automatic data processing equipment; review the use and

performance of information systems with respect to Department objectives, plans,



324

policies, and procedures; provide technical leadership and support to new Department-

wide information systems; review and approve all contracts for information processing

let by the Department, and provide the final review and approval of systems and

procedures and standards for use of data elements and codes.

(l) Formulate policies, standards, and procedures for Department telecommunications

systems and equipment and review their implementation.

(m) Provide computer and digital telecommunications services on an equitable

resource-sharing basis to all organizational units within the Department.

(n) Formulate Department policies for the use of consultants and non-personal service

contracts, review, and approve all non-personal service contracts, and review the

implementation of Department policies.

(o) Serve as liaison with state and local governments on management affairs, and

coordinate the Department's participation in Federal regional interagency bodies.

(p) Direct all Department security programs including personnel, physical, document,

information processing and telecommunications, special intelligence, and employee

health and safety programs and formulate and implement Department defense

mobilization and contingency planning.

(q) Review legislation for potential impact on the Department's resources.

(r) Develop and implement a legal information coordination system for the use of the

Department of Justice and, as appropriate, the Federal Government as a whole.



Art. 13 Armed Forces



§58 Federal Bureau of Investigation



(1)The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)under 28 CFR I 0.85 shall:



(a) Investigate violations of the laws, of the United States and collect evidence in cases

in which the United States is or may be a party in interest.

(b) Conduct the acquisition, collection, exchange, classification and preservation of

fingerprints and identification records from criminal justice and other governmental

agencies, including fingerprints voluntarily submitted by individuals for personal

identification purposes; provide expert testimony in Federal, State and local courts as

to fingerprint examinations; and provide fingerprint training and provide identification

assistance in disasters and for other humanitarian purposes.

(c) Conduct personnel investigations requisite to the work of the Department of Justice

and whenever required by statute or otherwise.

(d) Carry out the Presidential directive of September 6, 1939, as reaffirmed by

Presidential directives of January 8, 1943, July 24, 1950, and December 15, 1953,

designating the Federal Bureau of Investigation to take charge of investigative work in

matters relating to espionage, sabotage, subversive activities, and related matters.

(e) Establish and conduct law enforcement training programs to provide training for

State and local law enforcement personnel; operate the Federal Bureau of Investigation

National Academy; develop new approaches, techniques, systems, equipment, and

devices to improve and strengthen law enforcement and assist in conducting State and







325

local training programs, pursuant to section 404 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe

Streets Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 204.

(f) Operate a central clearinghouse for police statistics under the Uniform Crime

Reporting Program, and a computerized nationwide index of law enforcement

information under the National Crime Information Center.

(g) Operate the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory to serve not only the

Federal Bureau of Investigation, but also to provide, without cost, technical and scientific

assistance, including expert testimony in Federal or local courts, for all duly constituted

law enforcement agencies, other organizational units of the Department of Justice, and

other Federal agencies, which may desire to avail themselves of the service. As provided

for in procedures agreed upon between the Secretary of State and the Attorney General,

the services of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory may also be made

available to foreign law enforcement agencies and courts.

(h) Make recommendations to the Office of Personnel Management in connection with

applications for retirement under 5 U.S.C.§8336(c).

(i) Investigate alleged fraudulent conduct in connection with operations of the

Department of Housing and Urban Development and other alleged violations of the

criminal provisions of the National Housing Act, including 18 U.S.C.§1010.

(j) Exercise the power and authority vested in the Attorney General

to approve and conduct the exchanges of identification records enumerated at Sec.

50.12(a) of this chapter.

(l) Exercise Lead Agency responsibility in investigating all crimes for which it has

primary or concurrent jurisdiction and which involve terrorist activities or acts in

preparation of terrorist activities within the statutory jurisdiction of the United States.

Within the United States, this would include the collection, coordination, analysis,

management and dissemination of intelligence and criminal information as appropriate. If

another Federal agency identifies an individual who is engaged in terrorist activities or in

acts in preparation of terrorist activities, that agency is requested to promptly notify the

FBI. Terrorism includes the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or

property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment

thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

(o) The acronym of the Bureau, FBI, and their arrest record indicate that a name

change is needed to eliminate the, “fib” from acceptable prosecutions.



§58a Bureau of Prisons



(1) The Director of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) shall direct all activities of the Bureau of

Prisons under 28 CFR I 0.95 including:



(a) Management and regulation of all Federal penal and correctional institutions and

prison commissaries (including military prisons).

(b) Provision of suitable quarters for, and safekeeping, care, and subsistence of, all

persons charged with or convicted of offenses against the United States or held as

witnesses or otherwise.

(c) Provision for the protection, instruction, and discipline of all persons charged with

or convicted of offenses against the United States.



326

(d) Classification, commitment, control, or treatment of persons committed to the

custody of the Attorney General.

(e) Payment of rewards with respect to escaped Federal prisoners (18 U.S.C.§3059).

(f) Certification with respect to the insanity or mental incompetence of a prisoner

whose sentence is about to expire pursuant to title 18U.S.C.§4247.

(g) Entering into contracts with State officials for the custody, care, subsistence,

education, treatment, and training of State prisoners, upon certification with respect to the

availability of proper and adequate treatment facilities and personnel, pursuant to section

18U.S.C.§5003.

(h) Conduct and prepare, or cause to be conducted and prepared, studies and submit

reports to the court and the attorneys with respect to disposition of cases in which

juveniles have been committed, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §5037, and to contract with public

or private agencies or individuals or community-based facilities for the observation and

study and the custody and care of juveniles, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §5040.

(i) Conduct of examinations to determine whether an offender is an addict, mentally ill

or a sexual offender who is likely to be rehabilitated through treatment, as well as the

preparation and submission of reports to committing courts.

(j) Transfer of prisoner to appropriate hospital pursuant to 18U.S.C.§4245.

(k) Providing technical assistance to State and local governments in the improvement

of their correctional systems (18 U.S.C. §4042).



(2) Under 28 CFR I 0.96 the Director of the Bureau of Prisons is authorized to exercise or

perform any of the authority, functions, or duties conferred or imposed upon the Attorney

General by any law relating to the commitment, control, or treatment of persons

(including insane prisoners and juvenile delinquents) charged with or convicted of

offenses against the United States, including the taking of final action in the following-

described matters:

(a) Requesting the detail of Public Health Service officers for the purpose of

furnishing services to Federal penal and correctional institutions (18 U.S.C. §4005).

(b) Payment of claims less than $1,000 by officers losing property (31 U.S.C. §3722)

(c) Designating places of imprisonment or rehabilitation where the sentences of

prisoners shall be served and ordering transfers from one institution to another,

whether maintained by the Federal Government or otherwise, 18 U.S.C.§4082b

(d) Designation of agents for the transportation of prisoners (18 U.S.C. §4008).

(e) Performing the functions of the Attorney General under the provisions of Offenders

with Mental Disease or Defect (18 U.S.C. §4241-4247).

(f) Settlement of claims arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act as provided in 28

CFR 0.172.

(g) Entering into reciprocal agreements with fire organizations for mutual aid and

rendering emergency assistance in connection with extinguishing fires within the vicinity

of a Federal correctional facility, as authorized by sections 2 and 3 of the Act of May 27,

1955 (42 U.S.C. §1856a, 1856b).

(h) Prescribing rules and regulations applicable to the carrying of firearms by Bureau

of Prisons officers and employees (18 U.S.C. §3050).

(i) Promulgating rules governing the control and management of Federal penal and

correctional institutions and providing for the classification, government, discipline,



327

treatment, care, rehabilitation, and reformation of inmates confined therein (18 U.S.C.

§4001, §4041, and §4042).

(j) Granting permits to states or public agencies for rights-of-way upon lands

administered by the Director in accordance with the provisions of 43 U.S.C.§931c, §961;

18 U.S.C. §4001, §4041, §4042.

(k) Authority under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. §4082(b) to provide law enforcement

representatives with information on Federal prisoners who have been convicted of felony

offenses and who are confined at a residential community treatment center located in the

geographical area in which the requesting agency has jurisdiction.

(l) Approving inmate disciplinary and good time regulations (18 U.S.C. §3624).

(m) Contracting, for a period not exceeding three years, with the proper authorities of

any State, Territory, or political subdivision thereof, for the imprisonment, subsistence,

care, and proper employment of persons convicted of offenses against the United States

(18 U.S.C. §4002).



(3) Under 28 CFR I 0.99 the Board of Directors of Federal Prison Industries, or such

officer of the corporation as the Board may designate, may exercise the authority vested

in the Attorney General by 18U.S.C.§4126, as amended, to prescribe rules and

regulations governing the payment of compensation to inmates of Federal penal and

correctional institutions employed in any industry, or performing outstanding services in

institutional operations, and to inmates or their dependents for injuries suffered in any

activity connected with the maintenance of operation of the institution where confined.



(4) The Federal Penitentiary is particularly weak in conviction being comprised of 60%

drug offenders and an estimated 25% white collar offenders.



§58b United States Marshals Service



(1) The Director of the United States Marshals Service (USMS) shall direct and supervise

all activities of the U.S. Marshals Service under 28 CR I 0.111 including:



(a) Execution of Federal arrest warrants pursuant to rule 4 of the Federal Rules of

Criminal Procedure,

(b) The service of all civil and criminal process emanating from the Federal judicial

system

(c) Re-employment at the same pay grade if laid off in good behavior pursuant to

28U.S.C.§569(b)

(d) Provisions for the health, safety, and welfare of Government witnesses and their

families, including the psychological well-being and social adjustment of such persons,

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3521.

(e) Administration and implementation of courtroom security requirements for the

Federal judiciary.

(f) Protection of Federal jurists, court officers, witnesses, defendants and other

threatened persons in the interests of justice whereas criminal intimidation impedes the

functioning of the Federal judicial process.

(g) Provision of assistance in the protection of Federal property and buildings.



328

(h) Direction and supervision of a training school for United States Marshals Service

personnel.

(i) Disbursement of appropriated funds to satisfy Government obligations incurred in

the administration of justice.

(j) Maintenance of custody, management control, and disposal of property and money

seized or forfeited pursuant to any law enforced or administered by the Department of

Justice, when the property is seized by the U.S. Marshals Service or delivered to the U.S.

Marshals Service in accordance with regulations; and administer the Department of

Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund.

(k) Receipt, processing and transportation of prisoners held in the custody of a marshal

or transported by the U.S. Marshals Service under cooperative or intergovernmental

agreements.

(l) Sustention of custody of Federal prisoners from the time of their arrest by a marshal

or their remand to a marshal by the court, until the prisoner is committed by order of the

court to the custody of the Attorney General for the service of sentence, otherwise

released from custody by the court, or returned to the custody of the U.S. Parole

Commission or the Bureau of Prisons.

(m) Coordination and direction of the relationship of the offices of U.S. Marshals with

the other organizational units of the Department of Justice.

(n) Approval of staffing requirements of the offices of U.S. Marshals.

(o) Investigation of alleged improper conduct on the part of U.S. Marshals Service

personnel.

(p) Acquisition of adequate and suitable detention space, health care and other services

and materials required to support prisoners under the custody of the U.S. Marshal who

are not housed in Federal facilities.

(q) Approval of ``other necessary expenditures in the line of duty'' of U.S. Marshals

and Deputy U.S. Marshals under 28 U.S.C. §567(3)

(r) Exercising the delegate authority vested in the Attorney General under 28 U.S.C.

§510 to conduct and investigate fugitive matters, domestic and foreign, involving escaped

federal prisoners, probation, parole, mandatory release, and bond default violators.



Art. 14 State Courts



§59 State Supreme Courts



(1)The Supreme Courts of the 50 states are the highest courts in their respective state and

act in accordance with their state constitution & code that are drafted within the

constraints of Federal Law. State Supreme Court Justices appoint many of the state

administrators, review habeas corpus, prohibitions, mandamus, precedendo and have

original jurisdiction in cases regarding the behavior of state officials. The Supreme

Courts publish all rules and regulations governing attorneys and judges licensed by their

state.



(2) State Supreme Courts are led by the Conference of Chief Justices. As of 2005

Justices are paid an average of $150,000 per year who in turn pay Appeals Court Judges

$125,000 per year, County Judges $100,000 per year and Municipal Judges $50,000.



329

Judges and Justices are democratically elected for 3-15 year terms. Most states have a

state court of claims to settle tort claims against the state.



(3)The appeals process in the state courts follows a hierarchical structure similar to the

Federal Judiciary whereby municipal courts, county circuit courts or county common

pleas courts appeal to circuit or district courts that in turn may petition the State Supreme

Court from whence the US Supreme Court may be petitioned for a writ of certiorari.



(4) The National Center for State Courts represents the state courts nationally.



§59a County Courts



The majority of the 93 million judicial cases filed in 2001 were processed by 15,555 state

trial courts operating under the supervision of the county; 13,515 were of limited

jurisdiction and 2,040 of general jurisdiction, operated by 29,266 judges. 6 states have

developed what they call a unified jurisdiction rather than a general jurisdiction that

permits these courts to hear 88% civil cases rather than 60% civil cases while

dramatically reducing mental health cases. The County Courts are the trial courts where

defendants may contest their charges and the prosecution can make their case. The

principal subdivisions of the County Court are the Criminal Division, Civil Division and

Traffic Division. Most trials are heard in courts of general jurisdiction.



§59b Criminal Division



A. The Criminal Division detains, indicts, posts bond, holds jury trials, sentences,

dismisses charges, confines, posts bail, and supervises state and county jails and releases

prisoners in accordance with state criminal and correction statutes that are drafted under

federal criminal law as set forth in Title 18U.S.C.



1. In 2001 14.1 million criminal cases were filed. In the two tier court system

misdemeanor cases are tried in the lower court while felonies are indicted in the lower

court and tried in the higher court. In the unified jurisdiction cases are heard by one

court.



2. The number of criminal filings are directly correlated to the population of the state, the

median number of filings per 100,000 is roughly 1,441. Only 3% of criminal cases are

resolved in trial, guilty pleas dispose of 65% of cases and 25% of cases are dismissed or

the prosecutor refuses to prosecute nolle prosequi.



3. Felonies are the more serious crimes and usually come with more than 1 year of jail

time, between 1987-2001 felony filings rose 49% to a yearly total of 2.5 million.



§59c Civil Division



A.The Civil Division hears claims of a civil nature. Typically Small Claims Court hears

cases involving sums of money less than $1,000, the county court hears cases involving



330

sums less than $10,000, the state district or circuit court hears cases involving sums

typically less than $25,000 and federal district court sums in private civil claims up to

$50,000.



1. In 2001 15.8 million cases were filed with the civil division. The majority of civil

filings deal with tenant/landlord relations and small claims. Tort filings that are

conducted roughly in accordance with 28U.S.C.§2671-2680 regarding medical

malpractice, defamation, insurance premiums and claims against the state have hovered

around 250,000 yearly. 57% of automobile insurance premium cases resulted in a +/-

$18,000 settlement whereas on 27% of medical malpractice cases resulted in +/-287,000

compensation. There are roughly 250,000 contract cases in any given year that deal with

breach of contract, such as debt collection.



2. In 2001 the highest settlement was a $28 billion tobacco product liability tort.



B. Although Courts of general jurisdiction cannot be completely deprived of their civil

trials under this chapter the vast majority of civil trials should be judged by licensed

social workers elected to judgeships.



§59d Traffic Division



A. Traffic Courts hears cases under the supervision of the National Highway Traffic

Safety Commission regarding the traffic tickets, driving under the influence 23USC§408

makes decisions regarding points on a persons license 23 CFRPart1327, fines, the

roadworthiness of vehicles and compliance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control

Devices 23CFR655.601.



1.In 2001 there were 55.7 million traffic cases filed, roughly half of them were heard in

traffic courts because the defendant wished to contest the case or had difficulty paying.

Traffic court is the most frequently filed of all courts.



§59e Municipal Court



Municipal Courts are found in all but the smallest of towns. The Municipal Court

enforces misdemeanor criminal and traffic offences against city code and passes

judgment in civil cases valued less than $1,000. The municipal court indicts felons with

the grand jury for prosecution in a county court of general or unified jurisdiction.



§59f Juvenile Court



A. Juvenile Courts are led nationally by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention. They operate primarily in accordance with 42USC Chapter 72 The

jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court can be subdivided into three major subdivisions…



1. juvenile delinquency proceedings to try juveniles for their crimes as set forth in

18U.S.C. Part IV Correction of Juvenile Offenders



331

2. interstate family support to provide for the support of single parents by billing the

absentee parent in accordance with 42USC§666 unless the father (or absent mother) is

too poor, living below the poverty line, to afford child support thereby requiring the court

to request Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) from the state under

42USC§601 if the caregiver is in need of assistance to pay for their basis subsistence as

the result of time involved in child care.

3. custodial determinations between competing parents and between parents and the state

as the result of neglect and abuse in accordance with the wishes and best interest of the

child. The Court must contact the extended family to find a relative who can take care of

the child who the child would like to live with. Institutionalization is fundamentally

negligent and abusive and is to be used only as a last resort and with a full spectrum of

appeals available for care giving relatives, foster families and the child to appeal their

homelessness to be placed in a safe home with a relative or friendly foster parent.



B. In 2001 2 million criminal cases were filed in Juvenile Courts a decrease of 100,000

from 1998 primarily due to stricter pre-adjudication screening. 61% of these cases

involve criminal charges that are treated as juvenile delinquency proceedings, 20% are

child victim cases where the state prosecutes the parents and removed the child into the

custody of the state, 16% were status offenses such as runaways and truants who are

typically sent to foster care, counseling or placed on probation.



1. Of the 1,673,042 delinquency offenders 23.1% were regarding personal offenses,

42.2% property, 11.4% drugs and 23.2% for public order offences. An alternative

Juvenile Court is called Children Court.



§59g Appellate Court



A. Appellate Courts hear cases disposed of by the trial courts to guarantee fairness,

constitutional trials and justice by providing for the judicial review of the decisions of the

trial court. There are two types of appellate courts (1) intermediate courts of appeal and

(2) courts of last resort.



1. For the initial term 47% of judges are appointed and 53% are elected, only 43% are

retained for a second term. Appellate Courts provide an important opportunity to remedy

errors of the trial court. Only 11 small jurisdictions function without an appellate court.



2. In 2001 276,408 cases were filed with the Appellate Courts. 68% of these cases were

mandatory appeals by leave of the court and 32% were discretionary appeals of right.



Art. 15 Social Division



§60 Probate Court



A. Probate Court was typically the first court to be established in colonial and frontier

communities and is still the official compiler of vital records in many states where the job

is not done by the County Clerk. The National College of Probate Judges was founded in



332

1968 to exchange information regarding Probate Courts to Probate Judges in the United

States. Probate Courts have a diverse jurisdiction that intersects with many aspects of

life, they,



(i) issue marriage certificates in accordance with state marriage statute

(ii) administer and appoint executors for wills, 24U.S.C.§420

(iii) provide duplicate legal forms for the national census such as name changes, births

and paternity.



B. On the condition that they abolish the slavery of the alleged mentally ill (ami) and

elect a social worker to judge wills, trusts and estates etc. the “Probate Court” has the

option to change their name to “Justice of the Peace” for graduation from the National

College of Probate Judges as directed in Chapter 7 National Cemeteries.



§60a Family Court



A. The principal function of Domestic Relations and Family Courts is to conduct divorce

proceedings in accordance with the divorce laws of the state. As divorce involves the

separation two people who have become financially and psychologically dependent upon

each other the Family Court is also responsible for…



1. child custody determinations make arrangements for visitation, housing and care of the

child as defined by 28USC§1738A and in accordance with the wishes and best interest of

the child.

2. interstate family support cases to provide for the support of single parents by billing

the absentee parent in accordance with 42USC§666 unless the father (or absent mother)

is too poor to afford child support requiring the court to request Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF) from the state under 42USC§601 if the caregiver is in need of

assistance to pay for their basis subsistence as the result of time involved in child care.

3. alimony is a consideration in divorce proceedings where on spouse faces a decrease in

their standard of living and their former spouse can afford to make some payments.

4. adoption of children is conducted under 42USC Chapter 67 Subchapter II



B. To accommodate the high divorce rates in the United States where more than 50% of

marriages end in divorce the Domestic Relations and Family Courts processed 5.3

million cases in 2001.



1. Despite the prevalence of divorce, as of 2001 the parental makeup of families is

7% single father, 23% single mother and 70% married couples. 935,000 filings

in 2001 were regarding the custody of children, 88,928 of cases filed were

regarding Interstate Family Support, 800,000 regarding divorce, 250,000 paternity

and 73,000 regarding Adoption. Between 1996 and 2001 filings of domestic

violence rose 16% from 521,000 to 602,000 in reporting states.



C. To redress the high rates of divorce and unsatisfactory divorce settlements, that often

leave the mother without the independence of her maiden name, licensed social workers



333

shall take full responsibility for and be elected to Divorce, Domestic Relation and Family

Court Judgeships.



§60b Mental Health Court



Mental Health Courts under the Justice System Improvement Act Sub-Chapter XII-J

should be adjudicated by the Community Board of Mental Health social workers. State

mental institution and private psychiatric hospitals have been thoroughly condemned,

most recently by the World Health Organization Report on Mental Health in 2001.

Propaganda is to “close state mental institution and private psychiatric hospitals in favor

of community mental health. The State Mental Institution Library Education (SMILE)

buildings are given the right choice to be the community mental health headquarters or

the option to become a high security penal institution for criminal defendants Chapter 4.



§60c Drug Court



A. There are currently 1,200 specialized Drug Courts in operation or planned in the

United States eligible for drug court grants under the 1994 Omnibus Crime and Safe

Street Act 42U.S.C.§3789d upholding Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and

Rehabilitation 21U.S.C.Chapter 16.



1. Since the inception of drug courts in 1989 drug court programs have treated 300,000

drug addicts and 71% of them have either quit or continue to participate in programs.

Drug courts have been proven to reduce recidivism to 4-21% rather 49% for drug

offenders who are not professionally treated.



2. Drug offenders continue to account for 21% of state sentencing and 57% of sentenced

federal inmates. Severe drug addiction and crime are distinctly related and the average

severe addict commits 63 crimes a year, 16% of prison inmates report to have committed

crimes to support their drug addiction.



3. The drug court provides a much less expensive and more effective method of treating

people for their drug addiction both reducing the cost of correctional care, usually +/-

25,000 a year to +/-$4,000 a year and greatly decreasing recidivism.



B. Under this Chapter licensed professional social workers trained in drug treatment shall

Judge the adjudication of substance abuse offenders.



Art. 16 Employees



§61 Clerk



A. The Clerk or Registrar of the Court monitors all the activities of judiciary by indexing

the decisions and judgments of the court, information provided by deputies and the

transportation to and from correctional facilities. The County Clerk is an elected office

that publishes all of the decisions of the Common Pleas and Appeals Judges and manages



334

many of the licensing accounts of the county including, in many states, the election of

county officials. Although the judges do the decision-making, the Clerk supervises all

the judges and deputies in their jurisdiction and is the Clerk is holder of county funds

allotted to the judiciary that are dispensed in accordance with the approval of the judges

and the budgets of county organizations.



B. Under 28USCIII(57)Sec. 951 each clerk of court and his deputies shall take the

following oath or affirmation before entering upon their duties: ''I, _ _ _ _ _ _, having

been appointed _ _ _, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will truly and faithfully enter

and record all orders, decrees, judgments and proceedings of such court, and will

faithfully and impartially discharge all other duties of my office according to the best of

my abilities and understanding. So help me God.''



§62 Police



A. The International Association of Chiefs of Police standardizes police practices around

the world in accordance with the 1979 Law Enforcement Code of Conduct that ensures

that police protect the populace from illegal acts and refrain from the excessive use of

force themselves. Interpol conducts international policing operations in co-operation

with National Departments of Justice whose statistics are data-based by the United

Nations Crime and Justice Information Network. The primary purpose of law

enforcement is to keep the peace by apprehending criminals and patrolling the streets

under the supervision of courts who ensure that people apprehended enjoy their

constitutional right to a fair trial and rehabilitation.



B. Policing is one of the integral responsibilities of the government. Most police officers

attend a police academy for 6 months before being employed however many officers are

merely hired and trained on the job as long as they have no felony convictions on their

record. Funding for the police in the USA has risen 244% since 1982 from $20 billion to

$65 billion in 1999. The major trend in police funding has been to demilitarize the police

force by advocating for collaboration with other public safety officials to provide

Community Oriented Policing Services.



C. Police Officers are supervised by a geographic law enforcement agency that defines

the jurisdiction of the police officers. The Bureau of Justices Statistics reported that in

2000 the federal government employed 88,496 full-time law enforcement officers

authorized to make arrests and carry fire arms. 17,784 state and local law enforcement

agencies employed 708,022 full time officers. 12,666 local police agencies employed

440,920 full time officers. 3,070 county sheriffs employed 164,711 deputies. 49 primary

state agencies employed 56,348 officers. 1,376 special jurisdictions employed 43,413

officers. 623 Texas constable offices employed 2,630 law enforcement officers.



§63 Pre-Trial



A. Pre-Trial supervises the administration of bonds and bails to guarantee that felony

defendants go to court, have an opportunity for pretrial release and can post bail. In 1998



335

Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that 64% of defendants were released by the court

prior to the disposition of their case.



1. Thirty-six percent were detained until case disposition, including 7% who were denied

bail. Released defendants were most likely to be released on commercial surety bond

(34%) or their own recognizance (30%).



2. Murder defendants (13%) were the least likely to be released prior to case disposition,

followed by defendants whose most serious arrest charge was robbery (38%), rape (47%),

burglary (50%), or motor vehicle theft (50%).



3. Less than half of defendants with an active criminal justice status, such as parole

(18%) or probation (43%), at the time of arrest were released, compared to 71% of these

with no active status.



4. About a third of released defendants were either rearrested for a new offense, failed to

appear in court as scheduled, or committed some other violation that resulted in the

revocation of their pretrial release.



5. Of the 24% of released defendants who had a bench warrant issued for their arrest

because they did not appear in court as scheduled, about a fifth, representing 5% of all

released defendants, were still fugitives after 1 year.



B. The number of federal defendants activated in pretrial services, including pretrial

diversion cases, dropped by nearly 3% from 99,365 cases in 2005 to 96,479 cases in

2006. As a result, the number of pretrial services reports prepared by Pretrial Services

officers declined by more than 2%.



1. The number of cases opened in 2006, including pretrial diversion cases, was nearly 6%

greater than the 91,314 cases opened in 2002. During that same period, the number of

persons interviewed grew by 1% from 63,528 to 64,018 individuals.



§64 District Attorney



A. The District Attorney oversees the prosecution of felony defendants in a specific

prosecutorial district such as a court, county or group of several counties.



1. In 2000 there were 2,341 state court prosecutors most of whom are democratically

elected in county elections and employ 79,000 attorneys, investigators and support staff

who prosecuted a total of 928,000 adults and 36,000 juveniles in 1998, 68% of whom

were sentenced to incarceration.



2. The prosecution was funded approximately $4 billion in 2000. As a rule the

prosecutor‟s offices are highly over funded and overstaffed.









336

B. In 2000 the offices of the 93 US Attorneys, the federal prosecutors, opened

investigations against 123,559 people for violations of federal law.



1. Forty percent were investigated for public-order offenses such as regulatory (5%),

immigration (13%) and weapons (7%) offenses; a third (32%) were investigated for drug

offenses; 23% for property offenses; and 5% for violent offenses such as murder, rape,

assault, and robbery.



2. Of the 117,450 suspects in matters concluded during 2000, 74% were referred for

prosecution either before a U.S. district court judge (62%) or a U.S. magistrate (12%).



3. Nearly all (97%) of those investigated for immigration offenses were referred for

prosecution. 46% of defendants were released following their initial court appearance.



4. Of the 68,156 defendants convicted and sentenced during 2000, 74% were sentenced to

a term of imprisonment (either alone or in conjunction with probation), 18% were

sentenced to probation (either alone or with incarceration), and 4% were sentenced to pay

a fine alone.



5. The average prison sentence imposed during 2000 was 57 months. Defendants

convicted of weapons felonies (92 months), violent felonies (87 months), and drug

felonies (76 months) received the longest prison terms, on average.



C. The Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of 27 August-7 September 1990 explain.



1. The office of prosecutors shall be strictly separated from judicial functions.



2. Prosecutors carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social,

religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination.



3. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or

believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods,

which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving

torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human

rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used

such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to

ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.



§65 Public Defender



A. The purpose of lawyers is to establish conditions under which justice can be

maintained. International treaties obligate lawyers exclusively in the role of defending

the criminally accused.



1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before

the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public hearing by an



337

independent and impartial tribunal, and all the guarantees necessary for the defense of

everyone charged with a penal offence.



2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights proclaims, in addition, the

right to be tried without undue delay and the right to a fair and public hearing by a

competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.



3. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recalls the

obligation of States under the Charter to promote universal respect for, and observance

of, human rights and freedoms.



4. The Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention

or Imprisonment provides that a detained person shall be entitled to have the assistance

of, and to communicate and consult with, legal counsel.



5. The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners recommend, in

particular, that legal assistance and confidential communication with counsel should be

ensured. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990



B. The Public Defender‟s Office represents criminally accused people who are too poor

to afford legal counsel to uphold the 6th Amendment right to counsel. Assigned counsel

program and open contracts to local defense attorneys.



1. Among the Nation's 100 most populous counties in 1999, public defender programs

were operating in 90 counties, assigned counsel programs in 89 counties, and contract

programs in 42 counties.



C. In 1999 an estimated $1.2 billion was spent to provide indigent criminal defense in the

Nation's 100 most populous counties. About 73% of the total was spent by public

defender programs, 21% by assigned counsel programs, and 6% on awarded contracts.



1. This $1.2 billion represents an estimated 3% of all local criminal justice expenditures

used for police, judicial services, and corrections in these counties. County governments

provided 60% of all funds for indigent criminal defense services in the largest 100

counties followed by State governments providing 25%.



2. Public defender offices in the largest 100 counties employed over 12,700 individuals

during 1999, including over 6,300 assistant public defenders, 1,200 investigators, 300

social workers, 2,700 support staff, and nearly 400 paralegals.



3. Over 30,700 private attorneys were appointed through assigned counsel programs to

represent indigent defendants in the largest 100 counties during 1999. Over 1,000

contracts for indigent defense services were administered by contract attorney programs.



D. Conviction rates for indigent defendants and those with their own lawyers were about

the same in Federal and States courts.



338

1. About 90% of the Federal defendants and 75% of the defendants in the most populous

counties were found guilty regardless of the type of their attorneys.



2. Of those found guilty, however, those represented by publicly financed attorneys were

incarcerated at a higher rate than those defendants who paid for their own legal

representation 88% compared to 77% in Federal courts and 71% compared to 54% in the

most populous counties.



3. On average, sentence lengths for defendants sent to jail or prison were shorter for those

with publicly-financed attorneys than those who hired counsel.



a. In Federal district court those with publicly financed attorneys were given just under 5

years on average and those with private attorneys just over 5 years.



b. In State courts those with publicly financed attorneys were sentenced to an average of

2½ years and those with private attorneys to 3 years.



§66 Prisoners



A. Jails and Prisons are expected to meet the safety and civility of the Standard Minimum

Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Federal Bureau of Prisons statutes are set forth in

Title 18 US Code Part 3 Chapters 301-319 and Title 28 CFR Chapters 3&5 . State

departments of corrections manage prisons and local jails in accordance with applicable

state and federal laws.



B. The US Correctional population has increased 357.9% between 1980 and 2002 at an

average annual growth rate of 3.6%. At year end 2002 6.7 million people were in jail or

on probation or parole, 3.2% of the adult population. A total of 2,178,577 people were

detained - 1,440,665 were in prison, 1,277,127 in state prisons and 163,528 in federal

prison, another 737,912 were held in local jails awaiting trial or serving a misdemeanor

sentence of less than a year. By year end 2002 4.7 million people were on probation and

753,100 were on parole.



1. The Bureau of Justice Statistics has published the new total of 2,131,180 from the

Census of 30 June 2004. 726 prisoners per 100,000 people. At midyear 2004 there were

4,919 black male prison and jail inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States,

compared to 1,717 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 717 white

male inmates per 100,000 white males. The correctional census needs to be done every

year, preferably in January, Jail month, while promoting the goal of a dramatic reduction

to only 1 million detention beds.



2. 50% of the increase in prison population is attributed to a 340% increase in violent

offences from 173,300 in 1980 to 589,100 in 2000. The incarceration of drug offenders

increased 1,322% from 19,000 in 1980 to 251,100 in 2000 and is attributed with more

than half of the federal inmates and 27% of state inmates.







339

3. The number of prisoners on death row has dramatically increased since the death

penalty was reinstated in 1978 from 134 to 3,593 in 2001 when 71 people were executed.



4. The United States has the largest prison population in the world as the result of

mandatory minimum sentencing legislation.



C. Prisoners are entitled to fair trial and treatment under the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and

Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution, Excessive bail shall not be required, nor

excessive fines imposed, nor cruel punishments inflicted. Under the Thirteenth

amendment they may not be incarcerated except for a crime for which they have been

duly convicted. In 1970 the US Supreme Court remanded Hurtado v. United States 410

US 578 (1973) to the United States Congress requiring and raising the fee awarded to

pre-trial detainees from $20 to $21 a day. Inflation has caused the current witness fee for

prisoners to rise to $40 per day of pre-trial detention, the same as witnesses, but a lower

hourly rate under 28USC§1821(d)(4).



1. People should not be jailed for misdemeanor offences that should ticketed and tried, if

misdemeanor offenders are incarcerated, they should be released by the jail within 24

hours.

2. The Court shall appoint counsel for the defense if the prisoner cannot afford it on his

own.

3. Jailers shall help to overturn the convictions of people who they believe to have been

arrested on false charges or falsely imprisoned or abducted in some miscarriage of justice

3. Once sentenced, the prisoner has the right to appeal the decision at the Court of

Appeals and therefrom to the Supreme Court.



§67 Judges



A. In the United States there are an estimated 27,250 Administrative Law Judges,

Adjudicators and Hearing Officers who make an average of $51,580 per year. 6,260 are

Arbitrators, Mediators and Conciliators making an average of $70,310 per year. 23,150

are Judges, Magistrates and prosecutors who make an average of $67,150 per year.

175,870 are paralegals and legal assistants making an average of $36,550 per year.

17,460 are Court Reporters making an average of $38,040. 26,060 are law clerks making

an average of $29,280 per year.



1. On average State courts pay their justices $150,000, appeals judges $120,000 and give

county judges of general jurisdiction $100,000, magistrates $50,000 and municipal

judges of the Grand Jury $50,000 and adjudicators of the Traffic Division $25,000-

$35,000.



2. Judges are responsible for the adjudication of criminals, the settlement of civil disputes

and claims against the state that suit the authorization of their office.



(a) Municipal Judges are typically authorized to disburse funds up to $1,000, ie. For

the grand jury.



340

(b) County Judges are authorized to settle funds up to $10,000 for a felony trial.

(c) State Appeals Judges are authorized to settle up to $25,000 for the state.

(d) Federal Judges are authorized to settle $50,000 private matters and may authorize

all cases, great and small.

(e) The Supreme Courts and Court of International Trade have no limit.



3. The duties of judges and justices are simple…



(a) employ a staff competent to respond to all petitioners in a civilized and human

manner.

(b) Obey the law.

(c) Issue summons, and pay, attorneys, witnesses, educators and jurists.

(d) Hold trials to hear arguments regarding the merits of the laws.

(e) Remain certified to practice law by the Supreme Court of their state and nation.

(f) Publish decisions at the Clerk‟s Office.



4. Judges are typically served by several assistants, a representative to the Clerk‟s Office,

a bailiff and as many deputies as is required to hear the defendants. These assistants

typically are not licensed attorneys and make between $25,000 and $50,000.



5. Magistrate Judges are licensed attorneys who are appointed by the local Jury of Judges

to serve the court in the capacity of Magistrate Judge.



B. The premise of the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary of 1985 is

that the judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in

accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,

pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting of

Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002 explains, a judge shall

exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of the judge's assessment of the

facts and in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any

extraneous influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect,

from any quarter or for any reason. A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate

connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government,

but must also appear to a reasonable observer to be free there from.



§68 Probation and Parole Officers



A. Probation officers and correctional treatment specialists who counsel criminal

offenders as they reenter society held about 84,000 jobs in 2002 according to the

American Probation and Parole Association. Many people who are convicted of crimes

are placed on probation, instead of being sent to prison. During probation, offenders must

stay out of trouble and meet various other requirements. Probation officers, who are

called community supervision officers in some States, supervise people who have been

placed on probation. Correctional treatment specialists, who may also be known as case

managers, counsel prison inmates and help them plan for their release from incarceration.



341

1. Probation officers supervise offenders on probation or parole through personal contact

with the offenders and their families. Instead of requiring offenders to meet officers in

their offices, many officers meet offenders in their homes and at their places of

employment or therapy.



2. Probation and parole agencies also seek the assistance of community organizations,

such as religious institutions, neighborhood groups, and local residents, to monitor the

behavior of many offenders.



3. Some offenders are required to wear an electronic device so that probation officers can

monitor their location and movements.



4. Officers may arrange for offenders to get substance abuse rehabilitation or job training.



B. The number of persons under federal post-conviction supervision in 2006 increased by

less than 1% to 114,002 individuals. As of September 30, 2006, the number of persons

serving terms of supervised release after their release from a correctional institution

totaled 85,729 individuals. That number constituted 75% of all persons under post-

conviction supervision, compared to 73% in the previous year.



1. Persons on parole declined by nearly 10% from 3,183 individuals in 2005 to 2,876

individuals in 2006. The parole cases accounted for less than 3% of post-conviction

cases. Because of a continuing decline in the imposition of sentences of probation by

both district court judges and magistrate judges, the number of persons on probation

decreased by 5% to 25,178 individuals. That figure represented 22% of all persons under

post-conviction supervision.



2. Proportionately, the number of individuals under post-conviction supervision for a

drug-related offense remained unchanged from a year ago at 44%. From 2002 to 2006,

the number of persons under post-conviction supervision grew by 5%, an increase of

5,210 individuals. The number of persons released from correctional institutions who

served terms of supervised release increased by 17% over the same time period.



§69 Witnesses



A. Witnesses and Writers should be summoned in felony trials, and other trials their

evidence impacts, to assist in the cross-examination of the evidence and witnesses, with

the police and attorneys to determine the truth. The Court may not hire exclusively

witnesses for the prosecution to eliminate the counsel for the defense, due to the damage

that does to the truth.



1. Witnesses and Writers should be recognized for any work they do for the court -

investigating a crime scene, litigating the jail, writing for the county, state or federal

government. Witnesses and writers should not be harassed, intimidated or threatened

with unjustified incarceration, prosecution or espionage for fear that the truth might be

known.



342

B. Witnesses are entitled to the payment of $40 per diem when they attend trial under

28USC§1821(b). Deference should be given to the defense attorney to authorize the

payment of witness fees for the family and friends who have come to counsel the defense.



1. Writers are entitled to payment. Due to the time it takes to render briefs of sufficient

depth and scope, greater than 5 pages, for a felony, it is obligatory that judges and clerks

authorize the payment of an estimated $50 per 5 pages of relevant information submitted

to the court, particularly those in which the lawyers go naked.



2. Police officers often earn time-and-a-half while attending court proceedings however

this policy must be terminated to eliminate bribery. The police should be paid the same

rate as they are on the street so as not to cloud their minds when they witness atrocious

crimes, distortions of the truth and injustices at trial.



§70 Jury



A. Commissioners of jurors are appointed by a judge and shall be officers of the courts of

record in such county and shall attend upon each term of such courts for which a jury is

drawn. Compensation is made at regular or special term of the court. Issues of facts and

law are triable by jury who are sworn under the voir dire, “to tell the truth”. Claims for

actual damages may be assessed by the jury in each case, as instructed by the court.

When the jury cannot agree or the parties to the proceeding do, the jury may be

discharged. R. v. Spencer, SCC 11 2007: March 8.



B. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is dedicated to the primacy, coherence

and implementation of international law and principles that promote human rights

through the rule of law. The ICJ provides legal expertise at both the international and

national levels to ensure that developments in international law adhere to human rights

principles and that international standards are implemented at the national level. The

Commission was founded in Berlin in 1952 and its membership is composed of sixty

eminent jurists who are representatives of the different legal systems of the world.



1. Based in Geneva, the International Secretariat is responsible for the realisation of the

aims and objectives of the Commission.



2. In carrying out its work, the International Secretariat benefits from a network of

autonomous national sections and affiliated organisations located in all continents.



C. Jurists are randomly selected from the people who respond to the solicitation and are

selected by the attorneys on the basis of the potential jurists desire to serve on the jury.



1. Jurists may serve longer, if they choose to remain in the jury pool, to serve judges on

the Grand Jury and in civil trials regarding multiple claims for money and/or jail time

exceeding the $20 limit set forth in the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution.



343

2. A typical jury consists of 12 people who earn $20 a day, $240 a day.



3. Every quarter the Court shall appoint a Grand Jury to Conduct a census of the jails and

inspect human rights conditions in the local correctional community.



D. The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) is a public policy nonprofit, tax-exempt

educational foundation under Section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. The FIGA

mission is to educate Americans regarding the power of jury nullification. Jury

nullification allows jurors the ability to rely on personal conscience, to judge the merit of

the law and its application, and to nullify bad law, when necessary for justice, by finding

for the defendant. Jurors are often not informed of these rights because court officers

have such a vested interest in a conviction that attorneys are often threatened if they

attempt to educate the jury of the power of jury nullification.



1. Juries protect society from dangerous individuals and also protect individuals from

dangerous government. Juries must take into account the facts of the case, mitigating

circumstances, the merits of the law, and the fairness of its application in each case.



2. The recognition of the authority and right of jurors to weigh the merits of the law and

to render a verdict based on conscience, dates from before the writing of our Constitution,

in cases such as those of William Penn and Peter Zenger. Should this right ever be

suppressed, the people will retain the right to resist, having an unalienable right to veto or

nullify bad and oppressive laws, and in fact then would be morally compelled to do so.



3. An accused or aggrieved party‟s right to trial by jury, in all instances where the

government or any of its agencies is an opposing party, includes the right to inform the

jurors of their power to judge the law as well as the evidence, and to vote on the verdict

according to conscience.



4. This right shall not be infringed by any statute, juror oath, court order, or procedure or

practice of the court, including the use of any method of jury selection which could

preclude or limit the empanelment of jurors willing to exercise this power.



5. Nor shall this right be infringed by preventing any party to the trial, once the jurors

have been informed of their powers, from presenting arguments to the jury which may

pertain to issues of law and conscience, including (1) the merit, intent, constitutionality or

applicability of the law in the instant case; (2) the motives, moral perspective, or

circumstances of the accused or aggrieved party; (3) the degree and direction of guilt or

actual harm done, or (4) the sanctions which may be applied to the losing party.



6. Failure to allow the accused or aggrieved party or counsel for that party to so inform

the jury shall be grounds for mistrial and another trial by jury.”



E. Jury nullification of law is a traditional right that was rigorously defended by

America's Founding Fathers. Those great men, Patriots all, intended the jury to serve as a



344

final safeguard – a test that laws must pass before gaining sufficient popular authority for

enforcement. Thus the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power –

representatives, senate, executive, judges – and finally juries. Each enactment of law

must pass all these hurdles before it gains the authority to punish those who may choose

to violate it.



1. First US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay, writing in Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794,

concluded:



"The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy."



2. Thomas Jefferson said,



"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government

can be held to the principles of its constitution."



3. The power of the jury to judge the justice of the law and to hold laws invalid by a

finding of "not guilty" for any law a juror felt was unjust or oppressive, dates back to the

Magna Carta, in 1215. Chief Justice Vaughan issued an historically-important ruling:

that jurors could not be punished for their verdicts. Bushell's Case (1670) was one of the

most important developments in the common-law history of the jury.



4. John Hancock, the wealthy Massachusetts patriot and smuggler who as President of the

Continental Congress affixed his familiar bold signature to the Declaration of

Independence was prosecuted via this admiralty jurisdiction in 1768 and fined £9,000 –

triple the value of the goods aboard his sloop "Liberty" which had been previously

forfeited.



5. John Adams eloquently argued the case, chastising Parliament for depriving

Americans of their right to trial by jury. Adams later said of the juror, "it is not only his

right, but his duty – to find the verdict according to his own best understanding,

judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court."



6. Until the middle of the 1800s, federal and state judges often instructed the juries they

had the right to disregard the court's view of the law. Northern jurors began to refuse to

convict abolitionists who had violated the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law. Modern treatments

of abolitionism praise these jury-nullification verdicts for the role they played in helping

the anti-slavery cause.



7. In Sparf and Hansen v. U.S 1895, the Supreme Court, under pressure from large

corporations, rendered in a bitter split decision that courts no longer had to inform juries

they had the power to veto an unjust law. Courts began concealing jurors' rights from

American citizens and falsely instructing them that they may consider only the facts as

admitted by the court.









345

8. Researchers in 1966 found that jury nullification occurred only 8.8 percent of the time

between 1954 and 1958, and suggested that "one reason why the jury exercises its very

real power [to nullify] so sparingly is because it is officially told it has none." Today, no

officer of the court is allowed to tell the jury of their veto power.



9. The jury's veto power protects minorities from "the body of the people, operating by

the majority against the minority." Twelve people taken randomly from the population

will represent both friends and opponents of the party in power. With fully-informed

juries, the government cannot exercise its powers over the people without the consent of

the people. Trial by jury is trial by the people.



10. For more than six hundred years, since Magna Carta, in 1215, there has been no

clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it

is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and

what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary

and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that

are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or

resisting the execution of such laws.



11. Congress must enact laws to educate citizens of their power as jurists to judge the

merit of both the facts and the laws and render a not guilty verdict on conscience, before

they are sent to a courtroom and can no longer be influenced by pamphlets. Jury

nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of “Not Guilty” despite its belief that

the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. The jury nullifies a law that it finds

immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant.



Bibliography



1. Act to Establish the Department of Justice 1870

2. Act of May 27, 1955 42 U.S.C. 1856a, 1856b

3. Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM) Ban HA-10-5-07

4. Administration of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 50 U.S.C. App. 1989b

5. Administration of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 42 U.S.C. 1973c

6. Admission of Non-Immigrants 8USC§1184

7. Adoption of children 42USC Chapter 67 Subchapter II

8. Advisory Opinion regarding the Legal Consequences of Constructing a Wall in the 9.

Occupied Palestinian Territory No. 131 on 9 July 2004 was reviewed in the third and

final draft, the Will of the Palestinian People HA-11-11-04

10. Aerial Incident of 7 November 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1959)

11. Aerial Incident of 4 September 1954 (United States v. USSR) (1958)

12. Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States v. Bulgaria) (1957-1960)

13. Aerial Incident of 3 July 1988 (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)

(1989-1996)

14. Afghanistan & Iraq v. USA HA-2-11-05

15. African Charter on Human and Peoples‟ Rights adopted 27 June 1981

16. African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights



346

17. African Court of Human and Peoples‟ Rights

18. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali v. US Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights HA-22-6-06

19. Airborne Hunting Act 16 U.S.C. 742j-1

20. American Arbitration Association (AAA)

21. American Bar Association

22. ABA. Model Code of Judicial Conduct. 2004 Edition

23. ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility

24. ABA Justice Kennedy Commission Recommendations 2004

25. American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU v. NSA

26. American Convention on Human Rights

27. American Probation and Parole Association

28. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 42 U.S.C. §12101-12213

29. Amistad 40 US 518 (1841)

30. Amnesty International. Fair Trials Manual

31. Amnesty International, International standards on the death penalty, AI Index: ACT

50/06/97, 1997

32. Antidiscrimination policy; minority recruitment program 5 U.S.C. 7201

33. Anti-Trust Division 28 CFR I 0.40

34. Apple, James G.; Deyling, Robert P. A Primer on the Civil-Law System. Federal

Judicial Center. 1994-1995

35. Applications for retirement 5 U.S.C.8336

36. Appointment of special attorneys and special assistants to the Attorney General 28

U.S.C. 515

37. Approval of “necessary expenditures in the line of duty'' of U.S. Marshals and Deputy

U.S. Marshals 28 U.S.C. 567

38. Approving inmate disciplinary and good time regulations 18 U.S.C. 3624

39. Arrest warrants were issued, under seal, against five LRA leaders: J Kony, V Otti, R

Lukwiya, O Odhiambo and D Ongwen. D Ongwen ICC-02/04-01/05 8 July 2005

40. Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U. S. 564 (2002)

41. Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union No. 03-218 (2004)

42. Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division 28 CFR I 0.46

43. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division 28 CFR I 0.56

44. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Environment and Natural Resources

Division 28 CFR I 0.66

45. Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Tax Division 28 CFR I 0.71

46. Astrue, M.J. Annual Report of the Supplemental Security Income Program. Social

Security Administration. 2011

47. Atomic Energy Act of 1954 42 U.S.C. 2011

48. Attorney-in-Charge, International Trade Field Office 28 CFR I 0.48

49. Attorney General's Advisory Committee of United States Attorneys 28 CFR 0.10

Recovery 28CFR I 0.171

50. Authority of Attorney General to investigate United States attorneys, marshals,

trustees, clerks of court, and others 28 U.S.C.526

51. Authority to provide law enforcement representatives with information on Federal

prisoners 18 U.S.C. 4082







347

52. Authorization for the interception of wire, oral or electronic communications limited

18USC(119)§2516

53. Automobile Information Disclosure Act 15 U.S.C. 1231

54. Avena and other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America) (2003-

2004)

55. Baier v. Alberta 2007 SCC 31 June 29

56. Bail Reform Act of 1966 arrest and release 28 U.S.C.3041-3063

57. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 16 U.S.C.668-668d

58. Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct as revised at the Round Table Meeting of

Chief Justice at Peace Palace, the Hague, 25-16 November 2002

59. Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 28US Code Chapter 6 § 151-158

60. Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims

of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of

International Humanitarian Law of 16 December 2005

61. Basic Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary of 6 September 1985

62. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers 27 August to 7 September 1990

63. Bell, Derrick. Race, Racism and American Law. Little Brown and Company. Law

School Case Book Series. Third Edition. Boston. 1992

64. Bergel, Jean Louis. Principal Features and Methods of Codification, 48 La. L. Rev.

1073, 1078–79 (1988)

65. Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41 (1967)

66. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of September 9,

1886

67. Blairon, Laurence, Mrs. ICJ Information Officer. 3 September 2004

68. Blakely v. Washington No. 02-1632 of June 24, 2004

69. Bloom v. Social Security Administration (10th Cir.) No. 02-3362 (2003)

70. Board of Directors of Federal Prison Industries 28 CFR I 0.99

71. Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005

(Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House) HR 4437

72. Border Security Act S. 2394

73. British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie 2007 SCC 21 25 May

74. Boumedine v. Bush No. 06-1195 (2008)

75. Buergenthal, Thomas; Shelton, Dinah. Protecting Human Rights in the Americas,

Cases and Materials, N.P. Engel, Publisher, Kehl, Strasbourg, Arlington, 1995

76. Bureau of Justice Assistance 28 CFR 0.94-1

77. Bureau of Justice Statistics 28 CFR I 0.93, 42 U.S.C. 3731-3734

78. Bureau of Prisons 28 CFR I 0.95

79. Bush v. Gore on 12 December 2000

80. Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board writ of certiorari to the Florida

Supreme Court December 4, 2000

81. Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)

82. Canada Attorney General v. Hislop 2007 SCC 10 March 1

83. Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta 2007 SCC 22 May 21

84. Care of juveniles 18 U.S.C. 5040

85. Central Committee of the Hamilton County Republican Party v. Dalton C-060269

Ohio 1st Circuit May 30, 2007



348

86. Chairman of the United States Parole Commission 28 CFR I 0.125

87. Chapter XIV of the 1945 Charter of the United Nations

88. Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of 1997

89. Chief Justice John G. Roberts. 2006 Year-End-Report of the Federal Judiciary.

January 1, 2007 Chief Justice Rehnquist. Year-End Report. 2000

90. Child custody determinations 28USC§1738A

91. Child Support Enforcement 42USC§666

92. Circuit Courts of Appeals 28US Code Chapter 3 §41-49

93. Civil Division 28 CFR I 0.45

94. Civil litigation at the Court of International Trade Against the United States and

Agencies and Officers Thereof 28 U.S.C. 1581

95. Civil Rights Act of 1875 passed March 1, 1875 Chapter 13 of Title 18

96. Civil Rights Act of 1957

97. Civil Rights Act of 2 July 1964 PL 88-352, 42 USC Chapter 21 §1981 - §2000h

98. Civil Rights Act of 21 November 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166)

99. Civil Rights Cases 109 U.S. 3 (1883)

100. Civil Rights Division 28 CFR I 0.50

101. Comision Interamericana de Derechos Humanos - Diez años de actividad 1971,

Secretaría General de la Organización ede los Estados Americanos, Washington D.C.,

1982

102. Community Relations Service 28 CFR I 0.30

103. Conditions of Probation 18USC(227)§3563

104. Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non Governmental Economics (CHANGE)

105. Constitutive Act of the African Union. 11 July 2000

106. Contracting, for the imprisonment, subsistence, care, and proper employment of

persons convicted of offenses against the United States 18 U.S.C. 4002

107. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment of 26 June 1987

108. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1953

109. Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of February 13,

1946

110. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 3

September 1981

111. Convention on the Prohibition of Development, Production and Stockpiling of

Bacteriologic (Biologic) and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (BTWC) of 1972 that

entered into force on 26 March 1975

112. Convention on the Rights of the Child of 2 September 1990

113. Coordination and Assistance of United States Trustees 28 CFR I 0.38

114. Crime Victims‟ Rights 18USC§3771

115. Criminal Aspects of Civil Rights 18 U.S. C. Chapter 13 §241-248

116. Criminal Division 28 CFR I 0.55

117. Criminal Elections and political activities 18 U.S. Code §591-611

118. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power

of 29 November 1985

119. Defense of actions 28 U.S.C.2410







349

120. Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United

States of America) (1981-1984)

121. Deputy Director 28 CFR I 0.31

122. Designating places of imprisonment or rehabilitation where the sentences of

prisoners shall be served and ordering transfers from one institution to another, whether

maintained by the Federal Government or otherwise 18 U.S.C.4082b

123. Designation of agents for the transportation of prisoners 18 U.S.C. 4008

124. Director of COPS 28 CFR I 0.120

125. Director of the Bureau of Prisons 28 CFR I 0.96

126. Dismissal on motion of action against individual entitled to immunity

22USC(6)§254d

127. Disposition of cases in which juveniles have been committed 18 U.S.C. 5037

128. Disposition of the Effects of the Deceased 24U.S.C.420

129. D.J. Harris, M. O'Boyle, C. Warbrick, Law of the European Convention on Human

Rights, Butterworths, 1995.

130. Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation 21U.S.C.Chapter 16

131. Education Amendments of 1972 20 U.S.C. §1681

132. Eggen, Dan and Goldstein, Amy. Number of Fired Prosecutors Grows: Dismissals

Began Earlier than Justice Department Says. Washington Post. May 10, 2007

133. Electronica Sicula S.p.A. (ELSI) (United States of America v. Italy) (1987-1989)

134. Eligibility for SSI Benefits Sec. 1611 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act

42USC(7)XVI§1382

135. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 29 U.S.C.1111

136. Endangered Species Act of 1973 16 U.S.C.1531-1544

137. Enforcement of Civil Rights 42 U.S.C. 2000e

138. Entering into contracts with State officials for the custody prisoners 18U.S.C.5003

139. Environment and Natural Resources Division 28 CFR I 0.65

140. Equal Force 28 CFR I 0.121

141. Escape and Rescue Act 18 U.S.C. 751, 752

142. Eskridge, William N. Jr.; Frickey, Philip P. Cases and Materials on Legislation:

Statutes and the Creation of Public Policy. American Casebook Series. 2nd Edition. West

Publishing Company. St. Paul, Minn. 1995

143. Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 1843

144. Ethics Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 101-94, 103 Stat. 1716 (1989)

145. Executive Office for Immigration Review 8CFR§1003.1

146. Executive Office for United States Attorneys 28 CFR I 0.22

147. Executive Office for United States Trustees 28 CFR I 0.37

148. Export Trade Certificates 15 U.S.C. Chapter 66 4011-4021

149. Fair Packaging and Labeling Act 15 U.S.C. 1451

150. Federal Bureau of Investigation 28 CFR I 0.85

151. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crime in the United States-2005. 2006

152. Federal Custody; Remedies on Motion Attacking Sentence 28USC(153)§2255

153. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act 21 U.S.C. 301-397

154. Federal Protection 18 U.S.C.§245

155. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

156. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure



350

157. Federal Rules of Evidence

158. Federal Tort Claims Act 28 CFR 0.172

159. Findings on Juvenile Justice 42 U.S.C. 5601

160. First Amendment Privacy Protection 42USC(21A) IA §2000aa

161. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 16 U.S.C.661-667d

162. Foreign Assistance Act 22 U.S.C. 2356

163. Foreign Claims Settlement Commission 28 CFR I 0.128

164. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 50USC(36)I§1801

165. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 50USC(36)I§1809

166. Free Insider Trader Settlement (FITS) HA-1-4-04

167. Fugitive Felon Act 18 U.S.C. 1072, 1073

168. Functions of the Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division 28 CFR I 0.41

169. Garner, Bryan A. Black‟s Law Dictionary. West Group. St. Paul, Minn. 7th Edition.

2000

170. Geneva Protocol (to the Hague Conventions) for the Prohibition of the Use in War

of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare

17 June 1925

171. George W. Bush et al v. Her Majesty the Queen: House Judiciary Committee HA-3-

3-06

172. Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794

173. Granting permits to states or public agencies for rights-of-way upon lands

administered by the Director 43 U.S.C.931c, 961; 18 U.S.C. 4001, 4041, 4042.

174. Greenhouse, Linda. Chief Justice Advocates Higher Pay for Judiciary. New York

Times. January 1, 2007

175. Guaranteeing Standby Energy Authority under 42 U.S.C. Chapter 77 §6272-6285

176. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors of 27 August-7 September 1990

177. Habeas Corpus Act 1679, Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 S.185,

H.R.267, H.R.1189, H.R. 2543 and H.R.1416

178. Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, suspended 1794-1801

179. Hamdi v. Rumsfield No. 03-6696 (2004)

180. Himmelstein, David U.; Thorne, Deborah; Warren, Elizabeth; Woolhanderler,

Steffie. Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study.

American Journal of Medicine. Elsevier Inc. April 2009

181. Hossain & Aref v. FBI (Comey) HA-6-8-04

182. Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR),

et al, plaintiffs v. US Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and John McCain whose

foreign policies fail Asia and the Near East (ANE), US Congress in defense of Title 22

Foreign Relations and Intercourse (a-FRaI-d) and the Court of International Trade

(CoITUS), defendants HA-28-7-08

183. Hurtado v. United States 410 US 578 (1973)

184. Immigration and Nationality 8 U.S.C. 1182-1183

185. Immunity of Witnesses Generally 18USCV(601)§6002

186. Influencing or Injuring Jurors 18 U.S.C. 1503

187. Insanity or mental incompetence of a prisoner 18U.S.C.4247

187. Inter-American Court of Human Rights 1978

188. Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States) (1957-1959)



351

189. International Bar Association ICC Monitoring and Outreach Program HA-27-6-06

190. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and

Members of Their Families 18 December 1990

191. International Court of Arbitration , Rules of Arbitration.

192. International Court of Justice

193. ICJ. Condition for Admission of a State to Membership

194. International Court of Justice. History of the Court

195. International Court of Justice. Statute of the Court

196. International Criminal Court

197. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

198. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the H(P)lague HA-25-

12-04

199. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 23 March 1976

200. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 3 January 1976

201. International Prison Commission 22 U.S.C. 263a

202. International Society for Individual Liberty (ISIL). History of Jury Nullification.

June 2001

203. INTERPOL--United States National Central Bureau

204. Investigate Fugitive Matters 28 U.S.C. 510

205. Jefferson, Thomas. Declaration of Independence ratified by the Congress of the 15

states with 56 signatories on 4 July 1776. Drafted between 11 June and 28 June 1776

206. Jenks, Chris. Square Peg in a Round Hole: Government Contractor Battlefield Torts

Liability and the Political Question Doctrine. Berkeley Journal of International Law. Vol.

28 Is. 1. (2010)

207. Judicial Conference of the United States. Statement of Judge Paul G. Cassell United

States District Court District of Utah to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and

Homeland Security Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of

Representatives on “Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Laws – The Issues”. June 26, 2007

208. Judiciary Act of 1789

209. Judgment on the Prosecutor's Application for Extraordinary Review of Pre-Trial

Chamber I's 31 March 2006 Decision Denying Leave to Appeal ICC-01/04-168 of 13

July 2006

210. Jurisdiction and venue of the Court of Claims 28 USC Chapter 91§1491-1509

211. Jurisdiction and Venue of the Court of International Trade 28USCode Chapter 95

§1581-1585

212. Justice Management Division 28 CFR I 0.75

213. Justice System Improvement Act of 1984 42 US Code Chapter 46 Subchapters 1-15

214. Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings 18U.S.C. Part IV

215. Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 42USC Chapter 72

216. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)

217. King Blackwell (Ohio) HA-17-1-05

218. Kirby v United States 174 US 47, 55 (1899)

219. Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 29 U.S.C.504

220. Lacey Act and related provisions 18 U.S.C. 41-48

221. Laeven, Luc; Laryea, Thomas. Principles of Household Debt Restructuring. IMF

Staff Papers. June 26, 2009



352

222. LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America) (1999-2001)

223. Law Enforcement Code of Conduct 1979

224. Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, What is a Fair Trial? A Basic Guide to

Legal Standards and Practice, 1995

225. Legal Consequences of Off-Season Flu Delivery HA-14-5-09

226. Leasing of minerals on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice.

August 7, 1947, 61 Stat. 914, 30 U.S.C.352

227. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. United States of America) (1999)

228. London (City) v. RSJ Holdings Inc. 2007 SCC 29 June 21

229. Magna Carta June 15, 1215

230. Mandatory Restitution 18USC(77)§1593

231. Manfred Nowak, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary,

NP Engel, 1993

232. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 23CFR655.601

233. Martinez et al v. Astrue No. Cal. No 08-CV-48735-CW August 11, 2009

234. Matters involving obstructions to navigation, and dredging or filling 33 U.S.C. 403

235. McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451 (1948)

236. Migratory Bird Act 16 U.S.C. 701

237. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United

States of America) (1984-1991)

238. Military Commissions Act S. 3930. October 17, 2006

239. National Association of Attorney General (NAAG)

240. National Housing Act 18 U.S.C.1010

241. National Highway Traffic Safety Commission 23USC§408

242. National Institute of Justice 42 U.S.C. 3721-3723

243. National Juvenile Court Data Archive

244. Nigel S. Rodley, The Treatment of Prisoners Under International Law, Clarendon

Press, Oxford, 1987, (new edition forthcoming).

245. Norwegian Institute of Human Rights, Manual for Trial Observation, March 1996.

246 No Social Security Benefits for Prisoners Act of 2009, Public Law 111-115

247. Oath of Deputy 28USCIII(57) 951

248. Obituary of Milan Babic HA-5-3-06.

249. Obituary of Slobodan Milosevic HA-11-3-06

250. O'Donnell, Daniel. Protectión internacional de los derechos humanos, Comisión

Andina de Juristas, Lima 1988

251. Offenders with Mental Disease or Defect 18 U.S.C. 4241-4247

252. Office of the Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.5

253. Office of the Associate Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.19

254. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) 28 CFR I 0.119

255. Office of the Deputy Attorney General 28 CFR I 0.15

256. Office of Intelligence Policy and Review

257. Office of Justice Programs 28 CFR I 0.90

258. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

259. Office of Legal Counsel 28 CFR I 0.25

260. Office of Legal Policy 28 CFR I 0.23

261. Office of Legislative Affairs 28 CFR I 0.27



353

262. Office of Professional Responsibility 28 CFR I 0.39

263. Office of Public Affairs 28 CFR I 0.28

264. Office of the Federal Register 1 CFR 16.1

265. Office of the Pardon Attorney 28 CFR I 0.35

266. Office of the Solicitor General 28 CFR I 0.20

267. Office of the Solicitor General may in consultation with each agency or official

concerned, authorize intervention by the Government in cases involving the

constitutionality of acts of Congress 28 CFR I 0.21

268. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

269. Ohio Elections: Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Staff HA-5-1-05

270. Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (1992-2003)

271. Old-age and survivors insurance benefit payments. Sec. 202 of Title II of the Social

Security Act 42USC(7)II§402

272. Omnibus Crime and Safe Street Act 42U.S.C.§3789d

273. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 204

274. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against

Women of 22 December 2000

275. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 4 February 2003

276. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil an Political Rights of 23

March 1976

277. Recommendation for Justice of the Supreme Court HA-11-6-05

278. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

279. Patent and Copyright Cases 28 U.S.C. 1498

280. Patent Secrecy Act 35 U.S.C. 183

281. Payment of Benefits Sec. 1631 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act

42USC(7)XVI§1383

282. Payment of claims less than $1,000 by officers losing property 31 U.S.C. 3722

283. Payment of rewards with respect to escaped Federal prisoners 18 U.S.C.3059

284. Penalties for Fraud and (gross) negligence 19 U.S.C. 1592

285. Penalties for Fraud Sec. 208 of Title II of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§408

286. Penalties for Fraud Sec. 1632 of Title XVI of the Social Security Act

42USC(7)XVI§1383a

287. Pennsylvania v. Balenger, 704 A2d 1385, 1389-90 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1997)

288. Peterson, Trudy Huskamp. US Institute of Peace. Special Report: Temporary Courts,

289. Permanent Record. August 2006

290. Pointer v Texas 380 US 400, 405 (1965)

291. Points on a persons license 23 CFRPart1327

292. Postal Reorganization Act 39 U.S.C. 3016

293. Power to Grant Writ 28USC(153)§2241

294. Prescribing rules and regulations applicable to the carrying of firearms by Bureau of

295. Prison-made goods 18 U.S.C. 1761-1762

296. Prisons officers and employees 18 U.S.C. 3050

297. Procedure for the Payment of Benefits 42USC(7)XVI(B)§1393

298. Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights and published as the Rules of







354

299. Procedure of the Functional Commissions of the Economic and Social Council of 12

August 1947

300. Promulgating rules governing the control and management of Federal penal and

correctional institutions and providing for the classification, government, discipline,

treatment, care, rehabilitation, and reformation of inmates confined therein 18 U.S.C.

4001, 4041, and 4042

301. Protection of Human Test Subjects. National Research Act. July 12, 1974. Title II,

Public Law 93-348 45 CFR 46 .

302. Protocol (III) Additional to the Geneva Conventions relating the Adoption of a

New Distinctive Emblem of 8 December 2005

303. Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union 11 July 2003

304. Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People‟s Rights on the Establishment

of an African Court on Human and People‟s Rights. 15 January 2004

305. Provisions for the health, safety, and welfare of Government witnesses and their

families, including psychological well-being and social adjustment 18 U.S.C. 3521

306. Preparation of the code and supplement for the United States and the District of

Columbia 1USC(3)§213 and §202(c)

307. Privileges and immunities of mission of nonparty to Vienna Convention

22USC(6)§254b

308. Providing technical assistance to State and local governments 18 U.S.C. 4042

309. Public Health Service officers serving correctional institutions 18 U.S.C. 4005

310. Purposes of Sentencing 18USC§3553

311. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention

arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of

America) (1992-2003)

312. Rakas v. Illinois 439U.S.128 (1978)

313. Rasul v. Bush No. 03-334 (2004)

314. Recommendation in Clemency Cases 28 CFR I 0.36

315. Recounts Fla. Stat. §102.141(4) (2000)

316. Recovery of Civil Damages 18USC(119)§2520

317. Re-employment at the same pay grade if laid off in good behavior 28U.S.C.569

318. Regulation of Department of Justice Applicable 28 CFR I 0.32

319. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 29 U.S.C. §794

320. Release and detention pending judicial proceedings 28 U.S.C.3141-3156

321. Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844 (1997)

322. Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1966

323. Representation to Federal Officials for Private Litigation 42 U.S.C. 2000d

324. Representing the United States in proceedings before courts of appeals 28 U.S.C.

chapter 158 §2341-2350

325. Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007 S. 576 and HR 1415

326. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998

327. Rules and regulations governing the payment of compensation to Inmates

18U.S.C.4126

328. Rules of Court of International Trade

329. Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Court. 3-10

September 2002



355

330. Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee 26 July 1989

331. Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

332. Rules of the Supreme Court

333. R. v. Couture 2007 SCC 28 June 15

334. R. v. Davis [2008] UKHL 36 June 18

335. R. v. Spencer, SCC 11 2007: March 8

336. Sanders, Tony J. Defense of Social Security Caucus. Hospitals & Asylums HA-1-7-

11

337. Sanford Levinson, Assessing the Supreme Court’s Current Caseload: A Question of

Law or Politics?, 119 Yale L.J. 99 (2010)

338. Second Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the death penalty of 15

December 1989

339. Slobodan Milosevic v. Int’l Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia HA-25-12-04

340. Smith v Illinois 390 US 129, 131 (1968)

341. Sparf and Hansen v. U.S 1895

342. Spooner, Lysander. An Essay on The Trial By Jury. 1852

343. Statute of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

344. Strasbourg Agreement Concerning International Patent Classification of March 24,

1971

345. Strother v. 3464920 Canada Inc. 2007 SCC 24 June 1

346. Suits for compensation for the unauthorized communication of restricted data by the

Atomic Energy Commission to other nations 42 U.S.C. 2223

347. Supreme Court of the United States Title 28 US Code (1)1

348. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 30 CFR part 706

349. Tariff Act 1930

350. Tax Division 28 CFR I 0.70

351. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 42USC§601

352. Title 22 Foreign Relations and Intercourse (A-FRaI-D)

353. Trade Act 1974

354. Tennessee v. Culbreath, 30 S.W.3d 309, 314 (Tenn. 2000); KBA E-275 (July 1983)

355. The Special Court for Sierra Leone will use ICC Facilities for Trial of Charles

Taylor. The Hague, 21 June 2006

356. Three Judge District Court Panel 28 U.S. Code chapter 157 §2321-2325

357. Tort filings 28U.S.C.2671-2680

358. Transfer of prisoner to appropriate hospital 18U.S.C.4245

359. Treaties Subject to the Consultative Jurisdiction of the Court 1982

360. Treatment referrals for individuals with alcoholism or drug addiction condition

42USC(7)(XVI)(B)§1383e

361. Tullock, Gordon. Trials on Trial: The Pure Theory of Legal Procedure. Columbia

University Press. New, York. 1980

362. Unauthorized intrusion and violation of rules and regulations 24USC(3)V§154

363. Uniform Commercial Code. The American Law Institute and the National

Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. 1978, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991,

1992, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2001

364. United Kingdom Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights Fourth Report on

the Mental Health Bill 4 February 2007



356

365. UN Centre for Human Rights, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Branch,

Human Rights and Pre-Trial Detention, 1994. (UN Sales No. E.94.XIV.6)

366. UN Chronicle: Human Rights Council HA-30-3-06

367. United Nations Crime and Justice Information Network

368. United Nations Law Commission. Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for

Internationally Wrongful Acts of 2001 with Comments

369. U.S. Attorney‟s Manual

370. U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

371. U.S. Court of Federal Claims 28 USC Chapter 7 §171-179

372. U.S. Court of International Trade 28 U.S.C. Chapter 11 §251-258

373. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran)

(1979-1981)

374. United States District Court. 28US Code Chapter 5 § 81-144

375. United States Marshals Service 28 CR I 0.111

376. U.S. Parole Commission 28 CFR I 0.124-0.127

377. US Sentencing Commission 28USC§991-998

378. United States v. Booker No. 04-104 (2005)

379. U.S. v One 1976 Mercedes Benz 280S 618 F2d 453 [1980]

380. United States v. Truong, 629 F.2d 908, 913 (4th Cir. 1980).

381. United States v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 407 U.S. 297 (1972)

382. Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948

383. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. 1963.

384. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America)

(1998)

385. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action 25 June 1993

386. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-322)

387. Voting Rights Act, adopted initially in 1965 and extended in 1970, 1975, and 1982

and 2005

388. Weissbrodt, David. "International Trial Observers", Stanford Journal of

International Law, Volume 18, Issue 1, Spring 1982.

389. Weissbrodt, David and Wolfrum, Rüdiger. The Right to a Fair Trial, Beiträge zum

Ausländischen Recht öffentichen und Völkerrecht, Vol. 129, Springer, Berlin 1998.

390. WHO Working Paper on Patent Issues Relating to the influenza Virus and their

Genes. And Annex November 17, 2007

391. Whisner, Mary. The United States Code: Prima Facie Evidence and Positive Law.

Law Library Journal. Vol. 101:4 [2009-30]

392. Wild Horses and Wild Burros Act 16 U.S.C. 1338

393. William A. Schabas, The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law,

second edition, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1997

394. Will of Mr. Lee Jong-wook HA-31-3-06

395. Witness fees 28USC§1821

396. Witness Relocation and Protection Program 18USC§3521

397. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963)

398. World Prison Population HA-16-12-04

399. Young v. United States, 481 U.S. 787 (1987)







357