Unpopular opinion: It always bothers me when people say "rule of law" and "the law is the law"

[AZLD4Candidate]

Law making has always been abused by those who scream the loudest to follow it.

Look at laws we have had in this country that law enforcement has blindly and robotically followed by saying "I'm just doing my job," "I'm just following orders," or "Talk to your Congressman, not me” as if turning off your humanity is a logical defense:

Laws preventing women from voting
Laws enabling slavery
Indian Removal Act
Slave codes to control the conduct of a slave
Fugitive Slave Law
Black Codes
Poll Tax
Jim Crow laws
Separate but equal laws
Chinese Exclusion Act
Asia Act - expanding the Chinese Exclusion Act to all Asians in 1924
Redlining Codes
Laws where you were old enough to kill but not to vote (Vietnam and 18-20 year olds)
Anti-miscegenation laws that would make my marriage illegal in 37 states before 1967
Anti-sodomy laws designed to make homosexual acts illegal
Anti-gay marriage laws
Anti Right to Die laws (dogs can be given a painless, merciful death, but humans need to suffer right to the end)
Pro-hanger for abortion laws
Outlawing obscenity laws (as Lenny Bruce said, if you outlaw the "F" word, you outlaw the ability to say "F the Government."
Civil Forfeiture laws
Qualified Immunity laws
Removal of civil rights laws for felons
Credit rating applying to car insurance premiums laws
USA PATRIOT Act (that was supposed to be temporary)

In colonial times, in Maryland, you could be arrested and executed if you didn't worship Jesus in some way or another.
In the Bay Colony, you could lose everything if you didn't follow the theocratic laws.

Laws are about control. Who is getting controlled and who is doing the controlling? Usually, it's white, christian, heterosexual men who try to control everyone (and have your centuries). Now that non-white, non-Christian, non-male, and non-straight are gaining social, political, and economic power, there is an insane pushback.

Gandhi said it best: First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. We are now at stage three.

And all these voting restriction laws, these are a problem looking for a solution because the Republicans LOST in the election.

Law making is a process that is abused by those with a hidden agenda.

[The Magistrate]

1. Sound Points, Sir

"The law in its majesty forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges and steal bread."

[AZLD4Candidate]

2. I'm an old Dungeons and Dragons player, so I hope you understand the reference

Lawful Neutral alignment is idiotic.

[ananda]

3. This speaks for me.

Thank you!

[AndyS]

4. I'm with you on this.

The same goes for the final arbiter of Law, the Constitution.

The founding fathers were no mystical beings endowed with infinite wisdom. They were just guys who put their pants on one leg at a time.

GUYS, white guys who owned property (some of which was human beings). How's that 3/5 person working out for ya'? Oh, and Original Intent? How the hell is anyone to know the 'intent' of somebody living 240 years ago?

It's time to re-write the Constitution. Call a new Convention and use that old document as a loose format for the new one.

[AZLD4Candidate]

7. BTW, there is a right to privacy in the Bill of Rights

The 9th amendment is also known as the "including, but not limited to" amendment.

But most people forget that.

I agree. . .I'm just nervous what will come out of a REWRITE of the Constitution with the MAGA Party firmly entrenched now.

[mathematic]

5. The rule of law sucks, let's go back to absolute monarchs

Even your central point, that law making is abused by those that scream the loudest to follow it is nonsense.

Contrast the two most popular populists politicians of the last half decade: Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Trump famously claims that he is above the law and could literally murder somebody in public and get away with it. Sanders famously calls out powerful lawbreakers and calls for more effective enforcement of the law.

Bad laws do not make the rule of law bad. There is only one major political party arguing against the rule of law in america and it ain't the democrats.

[AZLD4Candidate]

6. I never gave you "they are all the same"-ism.

But if you are honestly saying that rule of law is great. . .ask a random black person if they are equal under the rule of law.

Why was cocaine treated lighter in the war on drugs than crack? Simple. . .cocaine is the drug of right white people, crack was the drug of the "ghetto."

I'm not calling out more effective enforcement. Bad laws are bad laws, and rule of law states whether a law is bad, it is the law.

Defend every single law I mentioned in my OP if you think blindly adhering to the rule of law benefits anyone except the power structure.

[mathematic]

8. The rule of law IS great. I can't believe you're serious

If you think the powerful act badly with laws you should see how they act without laws.

The rule of law is what makes justice possible. You keep talking about specific bad laws. Do you even know what the rule of law is? It's the idea that we are not ruled by the whims of the powerful and that everybody is subject to the law.

NO, I do not consent to be ruled by the whims of a madman, monarch, dictator, committee, junta, oligarch, or high priest. I demand the rule of law.

[AZLD4Candidate]

9. But you are. . .if madman control your legistlaure and your executive, like in Russia,

you still have rule of law.

Each one of my examples I asked you to defend. You still haven't. You're putting up strawmen.

Justice? Ask black people railroaded into prison. . .ask the poor that can't afford a good attorney. Ask Mr. Affluenza.

Yes, I know what the rule of law is. . .but if you are making bad laws, the rule of law turns into tyranny.

The "it's okay to drive your car into protestors" law is now the law. Defend it. So are "stand your ground" laws.

As for your last statement. . .look at Florida and Georgia. Those laws are the whim of Republican oligarchs, and if you are in them, you must consent. You may not like it, but oh well. . ."it's the law."

The Rule of Law requires:
01. measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law (doesn't matter is the law is unequal)
02. equality before the law (give me a break. poor and minorities have a huge disadvantage)
03. accountability to the law (qualified immunity much)
04. fairness in the application of the law (black people are sentenced harsher than white people for the same crime)
05. separation of powers (so far we have one REQUIREMENT met)
06. participation in decision-making (one billionaire has more voice than a million people)
07. legal certainty (mandatory minimums)
08. avoidance of arbitrariness (enforcement targeting poor and minorities rather than rich and white)
09. procedural and legal transparency (transparency of a broken and corrupted system that enforces bad law is still bad)

Now, keep defending the indefensible.

[meadowlander]

29. Right, so in the scenarios that you're describing

to the extent that (2), (3), (4), (6), and (8) have not been achieved, "rule of law" has not been achieved.

Your issue is not with the concept of "rule of law" but with the imperfect administration of it in the US. So the goal should be to improve the implementation of the rule of law, not to replace the concept with something else.

[AZLD4Candidate]

30. Yep. Exactly

My issue is those who blindly follow it and use it as a defense against obviously injustice.

[Dream Girl]

16. I think someone doesn't really fully understand the meaning of the phrase.

[ShazzieB]

32. Absolutely!

[LanternWaste]

38. Reductio ad absurdum

"let's go back to absolute monarchs..."

Odd you argue against a point no one at all is making, or has even mentioned... except yourself.

Good luck with any further fallacies, though!

[Klaralven]

10. What do you propose as an alternative?

Anarchy?

Oligarchs, crime bosses, and war lords making it up as they go along?

Autocratic dictator and a command and control police state?

[AZLD4Candidate]

12. Aren't we almost already there? Go to jail for handing out food to homeless?

Qualified immunity for murder by police?
Insider trading never prosecuted by elected officials?
Affluenza defense?
Go to jail for handing out water to people waiting to vote?

A black woman in Texas sentenced to years in prison for voting in the wrong precinct accidently?

We have rule by oligarchs, crime bosses, and world lords. We live in a police state. Look at the militarization of our police force.

Anarchy? I subscribe to the social contract theory of Rousseau. I believe the contract HAS been broken.

[Klaralven]

18. So the US should be broken up into small city-states ruled by a directly elected aristocracy?

[AZLD4Candidate]

24. Soverign states and plutocratic rule. . .We sort of that that already don't we?

Your answer is the extreme.

[Dream Girl]

11. "The rule of law" is aspirational. It just means that the law should apply to everyone.

Same as “ no person is above the law”. There are unjust laws, but that has nothing to do with the concept of the rule of law vs. the rule of a man. Which would you prefer?

[AZLD4Candidate]

13. I prefer "the rule of law" being in practice rather than a nice little phrase trotted out

when a horrific law is passed and unequally enforced.

And since man creates law. . .rule of law IS rule of man, logically.

[Dream Girl]

21. So wat do you propose ?

Edicts? Decrees? That lawmakers intact the unjust laws does not mean there are no legal remedies..

[AZLD4Candidate]

23. I have no solution. . .I've lived under both and both are equally abused.

[Politicub]

27. So you're just venting, then,

I don’t understand the point of your post.

The law has been used as a weapon against the gay community, for instance. But on the other hand, the law has been an important part of modern gay liberation.

[AZLD4Candidate]

28. It's venting.

My point is you're right. . .the law has been done that way. People who were arrested for anti-gay sexual laws were told "well, the law is the law" and "the rule of law states you must obey it."

My point is to blindly follow an idea is dumb especially if it's destructive. Rule of law was used with the Enabling Act, which was legally and democratically passed and signed.

[kairos12]

14. Often it's not possible to equate law with justice.

The U.S. system is based on the premise you are innocent until proven broke.

[AZLD4Candidate]

15. Let's look at the Pledge that we were forced under law to recite until 1943

I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
And to the Republic of which it stands
One nation
(under God) [since 1954]
Indivisible
With liberty and justice for all . . . who can afford it.

So I agree with you.

[oldsoftie]

17. And there's a difference between "Constitutional" & "legal"

Like having to let an obviously guilty person go because of an unconstitutional search.
We dont like it, but we HAVE to do it.
However, simple LAWS are different in that we can easily change them

[AZLD4Candidate]

19. Chinese Exclusion Act was on the books for over sixty years

That's just one example.

Everything else I agree with. But I never mentioned unconstitutional search.

Remember, before Gideon V. Wainright, Florida law said you were only allowed an attorney if it was a life or capital offense. Rule of law there!

George Carlin was arrested for saying the "F" in 1972 in Milwaukee on stage due to Wisconsin law. Rule of law.

[Beastly Boy]

20. In a democracy, flawed law are created by flawed legislators. Still, it beats the hell out of

tyranny of the mob on one hand and tyranny of a despot on the other. Law does not guarantee justice. Law makes the difference between elimination of justice and likelihood for justice.

[AZLD4Candidate]

22. And I've lived under rule by despot for 12 years.

Most here don't know what that's like. I do.

[ShazzieB]

34. This comment is impenetrably cryptic.

Maybe you meant it to be, in which case, fine, carry on.

If that was not your intention, you might want to clarify. IF.

[AZLD4Candidate]

35. I lived in China for 12 years, met my wife, and bought a house there

I know what it's like to live under a government of whim and edict.

I've lived under both systems. Both can be abused.

All I'm saying is those that use "rule of law" and "law is law" to turn a blind eye to injustice do us no favors.

[ShazzieB]

36. Okay that helps a lot!

I doubt that everyone here knew that you lived in China for 12 years. In any case, I didn't know that, and without that bit of info, the mind goes to "What despot? Where?" and "Is this a literal statement of fact or is something being implied that I'm in the dark about?"

So now I know it was a literal statement of fact, and you are definitely in a position to know what that's like. Thanks for clearing that up.

I completely agree that using phrases like "the law is the law" as an excuse for injustice does no one any favors!

I think what tripped some of us up was your use of the phrase "rule of law." That phrase actually has a specific meaning, but it is very often misused.

Here's how the American Bar Association defines this phrase: "The rule of law is a set of principles, or ideals, for ensuring an orderly and just society. Many countries throughout the world strive to uphold the rule of law where no one is above the law, everyone is treated equally under the law, everyone is held accountable to the same laws, there are clear and fair processes for enforcing laws, there is an independent judiciary, and human rights are guaranteed for all." https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/rule-of-law/

Please note the first few words of this: "The rule of law is a set of principles, or ideals, for ensuring an orderly and just society." (Emphasis added by me) As another poster said, it is "aspirational," in that it is something to strive for rather than a destination that has already been reached.

It sounds to me like what you're objecting to is not the actual concept of the "rule of law" but rather people using that phrase to mean that "all laws must be obeyed at all times, even stupid and/or unfair ones, just because they are laws." I have a feeling most of us here would agree with that sentiment. I definitely do. We just got thrown off the track by the phrase itself in your original post.

Have I got this right? Am I understanding correctly now?

[AZLD4Candidate]

37. Yes. I don't like it used as a cover all for injustice. Because, as I did in my OP, I can prove

law is law sucks with laws we've had and are getting now.

[Beastly Boy]

39. You appear to be critical of the concept of law rather than abuses in its application.

I hope I am wrong, and I am looking forward to you disputing my impression.

If I remember correctly, you posted that you are running for Congress. You want to be a lawmaker. If you were to become one, do you intend to exercise control over the laws you pass, or do you, as a lawmaker, intend to abdicate that control?

Of course legislative bodies of all sorts are about control. It is not a bad thing. People elect lawmakers to exercise control over US laws. It sure beats a government which is not controlled by laws, doesn't it? Otherwise, how can we change bad laws without revolutions and bloodshed?

BTW, the whole process of electing lawmakers and changing bad laws is itself regulated by laws.

[AZLD4Candidate]

40. I'm critical of using law making to marginalize, then hiding behind "it's the law"

Take an extreme example.

Man beats his wife and kids. Suddenly, sexist clown railroad through a law that says you can't beat your wife and kids unless you are "provably angry at them." So, he beats it wife and kids now because he is "provably angry."

The law is the law.

We all screamed about SYG with George Zimmerman. . .but again, the law is the law.

Remember, the Scopes Monkey Trial was over "the law is the law and it must be obeyed."

Go back to my OP.

[Beastly Boy]

41. So if I understand you correctly, and please tell me if i don't, you are not against laws, you are

against lawmakers who pass bad laws, since they determine their content. Well, that's the side effect of majority rule (a sexist clown can't pass a law all by himself). In this case, I can only repeat what has been attributed to Winston Churchil a long time ago: Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

[AZLD4Candidate]

42. In a Democracy, the people say they know what the want, and deserve to get it good and hard

HL Menchen.

[Beastly Boy]

43. Since you are quoting Mencken, a known Nietzche admirer, in the context of parliamentary lawmaking,

I am assuming that you are all in favor of lone sexist clowns passing laws in opposition to majority rule, as long as the said clown thinks himself superior to his duly elected peers. Was that your intention?

[AZLD4Candidate]

44. My intention is whatever you want it to be. I'm not going down this rabbit hole

You are looking for a fight and I am not going to bite.

Have a wonderful day.

[Beastly Boy]

45. I am looking for clarity of intent on your part. However, if that's too much to ask,

by all means, don't bite. I will get over the disappointment.

[AZLD4Candidate]

47. You are looking for a fight and doing it in a very smug fashion

Again, I am not going down this rabbit hole and am stopping this. Your tone is very aggressive.

Have a wonderful night.

[halfulglas]

25. Its cousin is A contract is a Contract.

But the people who say that have the money to break contracts, to renegotiate contracts, and on and on. Signing a contract should be the same as keeping your word, but yeah, so what. If the contract has the intent in itself to cheat you, you should break it. But that's not what the money people mean. They mean if they change their mind.

[AZLD4Candidate]

26. Agree completely.

As I said:

I've lived under "rule of law"
I've lived under "rule by edict"

Both are abused and I really have no solution.

[keithbvadu2]

31. The law is not about right, justice, or fairness. The law is about what is legal.

The law is not about right, justice, or fairness.

The law is about what is legal.

And that depends on the intent of those passing said law(s).

[AZLD4Candidate]

33. Agree, and as I have been saying, just because it's the law doesn't make it just, right

And I couldn't care less about fair.

I'm saying in my rant that those that use those two phrases as a shield to deny social injustice "because it's the law" are dishonest with ulterior motives.

[Elessar Zappa]

46. I prefer rule of law to the alternative.

True, law can be unjust and we must always strive to improve it but the concept is good and resulted in societies that are more just than societies under other systems.

[Justice matters.]

48. The easiest thing to do is to criticize without proposing a betterment.

The US Criminal Code is here to stay, like it or not.

[AZLD4Candidate]

49. You missed my entire point with your snarky, superior response

Please reread.

And as I said in a previous post, if I knew a solution, I'd say it.