J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California                                           March 22, 2006
______________________________________________________
The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter or Reform Abusive Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights Depend
 
Not WHO, But WHAT
That "What" is the Abuse of Judicial Immunity
By Barbie, ACIC, National J.A.I.L. Admin.
victoryusa@jail4judges.org
 
As most of you know, there has been a lot of confusion over the phrase "...and all other persons claiming to be shielded by judicial immunity" (1b of the South Dakota J.A.I.L. Amendment).  The focus of that phrase is "judicial immunity" since it is that doctrine, and more particularly its abuse, that has caused the necessity for J.A.I.L. throughout the nation.
 
The Preamble, which states the purpose of the Amendment, says (and this applies to all states): "We, the People of South Dakota, find that the doctrine of judicial immunity has the potential of being greatly abused; that when judges do abuse their power, the People are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. In order to insure judicial accountability and domestic tranquility, we hereby amend our Constitution by adding these provisions as 28 to Article VI, which shall be known as 'The J.A.I.L. Amendment.' "
 
The Preamble follows the admonition given in the Declaration of Independence, to wit, "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
 
The "long train of abuses and usurpations" creating the necessity for J.A.I.L. is the abuse of the doctrine of judicial immunity by the judiciary in whatever state the Amendment is presented-- the abuse occurs in all states.
 
It is presented in South Dakota first for purely economic reasons-- it has the least number of signatures required, the longest period of time to collect those signatures, and thus the state in which a measure is most likely to qualify for the ballot. It is not a question of one state "needing" the Amendment more than another state-- they ALL need it. What is important is that J.A.I.L. be on the ballot in some state, to start the precedent of J.A.I.L. eventually being on the ballots in all states. J.A.I.L. is a national cause, with South Dakota being just the first state in the nation to present the Amendment to the People. No single state can be disassociated from the national effort. The entire country is in this cause together, state by state.
 
The doctrine of judicial immunity is not law-- it is not found in the Constitution, state nor federal. It is a doctrine that was established in Europe for the King's courts, under the theory "The King can do no wrong" and the "Divine Right of Kings." There is no kingship in America; however the judiciary created the doctrine for themselves originally to avoid "frivolous" lawsuits. Although the term "frivolous" is a conclusion that should be based on findings, it has become an arbitrary "finding" in and of itself, thus leading to the arbitrary unconditional application of "judicial immunity."
 
Because the doctrine is not law but is a creation of the judiciary, it naturally "has the potential of being greatly abused," as stated in the Preamble, as long as judges are not accountable to an entity other than themselves. While the potential for abuse exists, it is only "when judges do abuse their power, [that] the People are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury" by "throw[ing] off such government, and ...provid[ing] new guards for their future security." (DOI, supra). In a government by the People and for the People, it is to the People that accountability must be enforced.
 
As far as "all other persons claiming to be shielded by judicial immunity," it would necessarily be limited only to those having authority to finally rule on constitutional procedural issues as set forth in 2 of the Amendment. That limitation would eliminate administrative agencies, such as "boards" and "councils" etc. since they do not have such final authority. In order to qualify for J.A.I.L. scrutiny, a litigant would have to first exhaust all judicial remedies which are presided over by judges having authority to finally rule on administrative proceedings involving constitutional questions. "Boards" and "councils" are not part of the judicial remedy required under J.A.I.L.
 

 

J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To be added or removed, write to VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
Your help is needed: www.sd-jail4judges.org
 
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
 
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

Return To JNJ 2006

Return To JNJ Library Index for All Years