The BAR UNIONS The BAR CULTS protecting Their Turf through CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS …. I would say this is SELF DEALING / SELF INTERESTS on Steroids and a significant Racketeering Activity which must be strictly constrained and outlawed
Woe Unto You Lawyers
by Fred Rodell
Publication date 1939Topics Legal SystemCollection opensourceLanguage EnglishNo lawyer will like this book. It isn’t written for lawyers. It is written for the
average man and its purpose is to try to plant in his head, at the least, a seed of skepticism about the whole legal profession, its works and its ways.
In case anyone should be interested, I got my own skepticism early. Before I ever studied law I used to argue occasionally with lawyers – a foolish thing to do at any time. When, as frequently happened, they couldn’t explain their legal points so that they made any sense to me I brashly began to suspect that maybe they didn’t make any sense at all. But I couldn’t know. One of the reasons I went to law school was to try to find out. At law school I was lucky. Ten of the men under whom I took courses were sufficiently skeptical and common-sensible about the branches of law they were teaching so that, unwittingly of course, they served together to fortify my hunch about the phoniness of the whole legal process. In a sense, they are the intellectual godfathers of this book. And though all of them would doubtless strenuously disown their godchild, I think I owe ito them to name them.
Listed alphabetically, they are:
Thurman Arnold, now Assistant Attorney-General of the United States; Charles E. Clark, now Judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; William O’ Douglas, now Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; Felix Frankfurter, now Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court;
Leon Green, now Dean of the Northwestern University Law School; Walton Hamilton, Professor of Law at Yale University; Harold Laski, Professor of Political Science at the London School of Economics; Richard Joyce Smith, now a practicing attorney in New
York City; Wesley Sturges, now Director of the Distilled Spirits Institute; and the late Lee Tulin.
By the time I got through law school, I had decided that I never wanted to practice law. I never have. I am not a member of any bar. If anyone should want, not unreasonably, to know what on earth I am doing – or trying to do – teaching law, he may find a hint of the answer toward the end of Chapter IX.
When I was mulling over the notion of writing this book, I outlined my ideas about the book, and about the law, to a lawyer who is not only able but also extraordinarily frank and perceptive about his profession. “Sure,” he said, “but why give the show away?” That clinched it. READ MORE
WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION does it say Americans MUST have a BAR CARD and be in GOOD Standing with the Drunkards Club ? Why should these BAR CULT MEMBERS Rule the Judicial Branch, Prosecutorial Branch, Police Forces in America ? HOW did the BAR take over and WHY ?
For the record I will state that the CONFLICTS OF INTEREST of a BAR FLY Judge as “IT” sits on a case of SO Called Unauthorized Practice of Law … The Greatest of Conflicting Interests Exists and is as UNLAWFUL as can be. Succinctly stated the BAR COVENS are just that Witch and Warlock UNIONS. JBW
In other colonies, however, such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, the introduction of common law was militantly and successfully resisted while the emergent lawyer had enormous difficulty gaining status and recognition as a professional advocate. The suppression of the legal profession in many of the colonies did not consist essentially in prohibitions against the practice of law-though it was sharply circumscribed by measures that limited fees so severely that few men of the time cared to assume the financial risks of full-time law practice-but in the colonial refusal to recognize that judging, pleading, or the giving of legal advice was the exclusive preserve of a single class of men. Nevertheless, by the time of the Revolution, the common law was fairly well received in the colonies and a distinctive and recognizable body of men called lawyers had arisen.
The Antebellum Years and the Emergence of Pro Per Representation VS The Lawyers
“That God designed the sexes to occupy different spheres of action, and that it belonged to men to make, apply, and execute the laws, was regarded as an almost axiomatic truth.”
“In view of these facts, we are certainly warranted in saying
that when the legislature gave to this Court the power of granting licenses to practice law, it was with not the slightest expectation that this privilege would be extended to women.”
Bradwell v. The State, 83 U.S. 130 (1872) – Justia Law
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/83/130
Bradwell v. The State, 83 U.S. 16 Wall. 130 130 (1872) 3. Nor is the right to practice law in the state courts a privilege or immunity of a citizen of the United States, within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Article of amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
[PDF] View of Woe Unto You Lawyers – Scholarship@Cornell Law scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1428&context…
by HD Laube – 1940 – Related articlesIt is fear, fear of the unknown, fear of the policeman.8 That at least is the psychoanalytical secret that Rodell’s lawyer-friend must have bade him to keep locked up within his own skeptical breast and not to “give the show away.”9 Then came “Woe Unto You, Lawyers !”.
Woe Unto You, Lawyers! | The Last Bastille
https://thelastbastille.wordpress.com/2014/05/24/woe-unto-you-lawyers/
May 24, 2014 – Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea … Regarding constitutional law, Rodell had this to say: “Those little laws …
Fred Rodell Quotes
www.notable-quotes.com/r/rodell_fred.html
FRED RODELL, Woe Unto You, Lawyers. The Lawyers‘ trade is a trade built entirely on words. And so long as the lawyers carefully keep to themselves the key …
People’s Digital Law … Corpus Juris Unlimited Thousands and Thousands of Professional Legal Forms Practice Materials and Pleadings covering nearly every aspect of the field of Law …
We work for You Stay Tuned Everyone
Lawyers and Attorneys Are Not Licensed To Practice Law
http://www.freedom-school.com/lawyers-and-attorneys-are-not-licensed-to-practice–law.html
In 1909 they incorporated this TRAITOROUS group in the state of Illinois and had the State Legislature(which was under the control of lawyers) pass an unconstitutional law that only members of this powerful union of lawyers, called the ABA, could practice law and hold all the key positions in law enforcement and the making of laws.
Texan Claims Bar Exam Is Unconstitutional – Above the Law
https://abovethelaw.com/2013/07/texan-claims-bar-exam-is-unconstitutional-which-kind…
Jul 17, 2013 · “Anyone who disagrees with the Board of Law Examiner’s interpretation of the law is denied a license to practice law and ultimately denied the right to work,” alleges the June 24 complaint Citizens Against The Bar v. State of Texas, et al.
- Author: Elie Mystal
Before the BARS in America
Lets begin to examine what Law was on Turtle Island before the United States began … During the First Years of the United States and Before ….. BAR EXAMS and Law Licenses DID NOT Exist when the US Constitution was Created. And so the STUDY begins …. JBW THE LAWS OF TURTLE ISLAND THE SEVEN … Read more
ATTORNEY LICENSE FRAUD – Law Notes — Home Page
https://www.1215.org/lawnotes/work-in-progress/attorney-license-fraud.htm
In 1909 they incorporated this TRAITOROUS group in the state of Illinois and had the State Legislature(which was under the control of lawyers) pass an unconstitutional law that only members of this powerful union of lawyers, called the ABA, could practice law and hold all the key positions in law enforcement and the making of laws.
PROOF: “BAR” attorney’s are AGENTS of a FOREIGN power and …
https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/proof-bar-attorneys-are-agents-of-a-foreign…
Aug 21, 2012 · In 1909 they incorporated this TRAITOROUS group in the state of Illinois & had the State Legislature (which was under the control of lawyers) pass an unconstitutional law that only members of this powerful union of lawyers, called the “ABA,” could practice law & hold all the key positions in law enforcement & the making of laws.
Are You Licensed? – lawyersmutualnc.com
https://www.lawyersmutualnc.com/blog/are-you-licensed
Jul 23, 2012 · Of course you are: you have made it through law school, met the requirements to take the Bar Exam, successfully endured two days of mental athletics, cleared the character and fitness hurdles, received your law license from the Board of Law Examiners, and were sworn in by a duly authorized official. That is enough to practice law, right? Wrong.
Alabama Bar Reciprocity | BarReciprocity.com
Alabama Bar Reciprocity. Rule III of the Rules Governing Admission to the Alabama Bar governs admission to the Alabama Bar for attorneys licensed in other jurisdictions. The process in Alabama is called Reciprocity. Attorneys must have been primarily engaged in the practice of law in one or more states, territories,…
Admission to the bar in the United States – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admission_to_the_bar_in_the_United_States
Each may have social, educational, and lobbying functions, but does not regulate the practice of law or admit lawyers to practice or discipline lawyers. An example of this is the New York State Bar Association. There is a statewide voluntary bar association in each of the eighteen states that have no mandatory or integrated bar association.
A Comprehensive Guide to Bar Reciprocity: What States Have …
https://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900046195/A-Comprehensive-Guide-to-Bar-Reciprocity…
Nov 10, 2015 · In order to “practice law” in the courts of a particular state, someone must first be admitted to the bar of that state. An attorney who passed the New York bar exam and is admitted to practice in New York, for example, cannot practice law in California without first passing the California bar exam and being admitted in California.
- 4.7/5
- Author: Harrison Barnes
Durham Attorney Scott Holmes Challenges N.C. Court Fees as …
www.barcomplaint.com/article-of-interest-copypaste-ok/durham-attorney-scott-holmes…
It should not come as a surprise to anyone that the courts do NOT want to pass monies collected to another agency – no matter what the North Carolina Constitution requires. Possession is 9/10th of the lawwhen it comes to money.Durham Attorney Scott Holmes Challenges N.C. Court Fees as Unconstitutio
Seehttps://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8f97/1d1e5b8b22315f2696f9ac87df4e12294427.pdf
The Cambridge History of Law in America – Volume 2
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0521803063
Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins – 2008 – Preview – More editionsThis volume covers American law in the nineteenth century and describes the development of modern legal systems.The Cambridge History of Law in America – Volume 3
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0521803071
Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins – 2008 – Preview – More editionsThis volume covers the twentieth century after World War I and makes predictions for the twenty-first century.The Cambridge History of Law in America – Volume 1
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0521803055
Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins – 2008 – Preview – More editionsThis volume covers American law from the earliest settlement and colonization of North America.
next friend — One acting without formal appointment as guardian for the benefit of an infant or person of unsound mind not judicially declared incompetent, or other person under some disability. This disability often arises from minority, mental incapacity, or lack of access to counsel. A next friend has full power over the proceedings in the action as if he or she were an ordinary plaintiff, until a guardian or guardian ad litem is appointed in the case; but the next friend is entitled to present evidence only on the same basis as any other witness.
One use of next friend status was in connection with many suits brought by detainees at Guantanamo Bay before the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Another case arose following the Monkey selfie affair, when the animal rights organization People for Ethical Treatment of Animals sued photographer David Slater, asserting itself as the next friend of a Celebes crested macaque. When a relative who is next of kin acts as a next friend for a person, that person is sometimes instead described as the natural guardian of the person.
A McKenzie friend assists a litigant in person in a court of law in England and Wales, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia by prompting, taking notes and quietly giving advice.
They need not be legally trained or have any professional legal qualifications.
The right to a McKenzie friend was established in the 1970 case of McKenzie v McKenzie.[1] Although in many cases a McKenzie friend may be an actual friend, it is often somebody with knowledge of the area and the presumption is heavily in favour of admitting a McKenzie friend into court.[2] He or she may be liable for any misleading advice given to the litigant in person[citation needed] but is not covered by professional indemnity insurance.
A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.
NAACP v. Button (371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs (383 U.S. 715); and Johnson v. Avery 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969). Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with “Unauthorized practice of law.”
The power of the States to control the practice of law cannot be exercised so as to abrogate federally protected rights. NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963); Sperry v. Florida, 373 U.S. 379 (1963)
Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar (377 U.S. 1); Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425. Litigants may be assisted by unlicensed layman during judicial proceedings.
Title 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, Wood v. Breier, 54 F.R.D. 7, 10-11 (E.D. Wis. 1972). Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. Pa. 1973). “Each citizen acts as a private attorney general who ‘takes on the mantel of sovereign’,”
“The practice of law can not be licensed by any state/State. Schware v. Board of Examiners, United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239. In Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925) “The practice of law is an occupation of common right.” A bar card is not a license, its a dues card and/or membership card. A bar association is that what it is, a club, A association is not license, it has a certificate though the State, the two are not the same….
Law for the Layman 