Of course that is a silly question – Most politicians ARE lawyers!
And it is also important to note there are some good moral lawyers who are trying to do the right thing – just not enough of them to rein in their self-seeking peers. Are there some good politicians? Where is the Endangered Species Act when we need it?
What brings this up is a minor piece in an interesting site (written by one of those good lawyers!) about the mechanism by which the Trump Administration is trying to bring common sense to the US’s failed immigration system:
… The lawsuit started when the Trump Administration began to enforce a long-overlooked law called the Alien Registration Act of 1940. Also called the “Smith Act,” the law requires all non-citizen adult residents —age 14+ and in the US for more than 30 days— to register with the federal government … The Smith Act has been sitting there, on the dusty books on the bottom shelf, unenforced for ages. …
… “The fines,” NBC said, “stem from a 1996 law that was enforced for the first time in 2018, during President Donald Trump’s first term in office.” Another unenforced law! The apothegmatically-named Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 imposes civil penalties on noncitizens who willfully fail to comply with final removal orders. …
Politicians in Congress pass lots & lots of laws which make themselves feel good, but then pay no attention to whether those laws ever get enforced (except against their enemies).
In the Coming Post-Collapse world, we may finally get a real Constitutional provision that an unassailable defense against any prosecution is that there has been at least one prior occasion on which that particular law has not been enforced. That would automatically repeal that particular law without any vote of Congress – and all the CongressCritters who voted for that law would be publicly flogged. OK – maybe I am just dreaming about the last point.
The kooks on the Left (I repeat myself) are always going on about the rule of law and Our Democracy™ (which Dies in Darkness). Well, Congress passed those laws and they need to rule. Suck it up, buttercups.
Oh Gavin, I you but I hate your title! Why do you hate lawyers so much?
Substantively: selective enforcement of a statute is usually not a successful defense.
On American Thinker a few days ago Maureen Steele wrote a rant about how we should “abolish the bar”. Let’s just go back to “common law”, and let everybody just argue their own cases.
I love the phrase “common law”. it sounds all wholesome, rustic, oat-mealy……but what common law IS, is judicial precedent. Created by lawyers arguing and judges deciding.
Do you think every civil dispute, every instance in which someone is accused of violating social norms, should be decided sui generis on a purely emotional basis, or on “moral” grounds?
I mean ,if you do think so, okay, I reckon. It would certainly be …exciting.
I’ve been thinking about this off & on for some time. I don’t have a complete answer, but I think I can identify several components. One piece is the cultural abandonment of limits of any kind. Limiting principles as to most everything I can think of no longer exist. In law, this has translated to winning at any cost; similarly in leftist politics.
Long story short, the Founders were correct. Our system can only endure where civic virtue reigns, where individuals are self-governing and self-restrained, where those in power adhere to a basic set of principles and do not seek unlimited power over their fellows in the name of some abstraction.
Lawyers and politicians have been the levers and pulleys by which the few power-crazed leftists have all-but undone the last, best hope. It doesn’t seem to have required majorities of either politicians or lawyers, just a dedicated, vocal, unprincipled minority with religious “progressive” unbounded zeal. I’m blessed in that I don’t hate. I do despise and disdain these self-appointed elites who knew where to strike and have successfully seized the reins of power. The rot is pervasive and deep. I’m afraid Trump may be too little too late
My progression went something like this:
first, I became disgusted with the lack of Justice in our world … but lawyers as a group seemed to be quite OK with it. Notice the lack of pro bono lawyers arguing to free citizens accused of … something or other … in the J6 travesty. Where were those righteous defenders of ordinary citizens versus The Man? That put lawyers on the hit list – although I will be the first to say (was the first to say in this thread) that there are good lawyers too. The enemies are the big law firms which are mostly arms of the Far Left wing of the Democrat Party.
That connection between (certain) lawyers and politics made me realize the real enemy was politicians. Again, there are a VERY few politicians who are trying to do the right thing – but most of them are self-serving Enemies of the People. Flogging would be too kind.
And then I realized that lawyers and politicians are unfortunately a distinction without a difference. How many politicians are not lawyers? Hate one – have to hate the other. Would a return to the days of Hammurabi make a difference? I don’t know, but would be prepared to give it a try.
Indeed! That is why I suggested a provision in the Post-Collapse Constitution to require mandatory uniform enforcement of ALL statutes. That same refreshed Constitution will disbar all lawyers from elected positions, and make Congress truly representative of the people by randomly selecting citizens for limited periods in office. Of course, Congress may hire lawyers to advise them – and pay them appropriately. Maybe three times the hourly minimum wage?
Greetings from sunny Puerta Vallarta! I have not kept up with forums - too lazy sitting in the sun.
But I really, really liked the article you pointed to. While much of it was stuff we all knew - piecemeal - it managed to collect the info in a cohesive way that makes it easy to piece together.
This kind of brings up the whole question of why Congress couldn’t figure this all out. Chuck Grassley seems a good guy at heart but perhaps he’s been there too long. ?Why couldn’t he have hired someone the likes of Elon and gotten to the bottom of all this long ago. One can only surmise that either he isn’t bright enough or didn’t want to.
Which brings me to your original proposition - should we hate politicians more than lawyers. With all deference to @Hypatia, who appears to be an honourable, honest, well-intentioned, open minded lawyer, I think the basic problem with lawyers is that they seem “plastic” in their allegiances. Soldiers like me fought for the country. We went because the country called - and we answered. That the government lied to us is not material to our response - only to how we now view “government”. It is no longer seen as “the country” butt as a group of grifters who have no allegiance but to themselves. That is what makes even “the good ones” suspect.
Perhaps the easiest example is traffic court. There a police officer is accepted as correct even when it is patently obvious he isn’t a very good observer. The old requirement of charge and specification goes out the window. I have watched a judge overlook a ticket where the officer got the make of the vehicle wrong, then a case where he got the license plate wrong - yet the judge still found the people guilty. What a scam! By definition, you have to have the specification correct, or it becomes any old time anywhere.
We miss you @Devereaux ! But CTFO: it isn’t a matter of shifting allegiances. Would you refuse to treat a patient you knew was a criminal? I’ll bet you must’ve patched up many of ‘em working in the ER. Your allegiance is to medicine itself, innit? Just like ours is to law. But don’t worry about me—yes,I AM all you kindly say,thank you! but you left out “open-minded”…
This comparison is less than ideal. Lawyers often refuse to represent potential clients for a variety of reasons, which includes personal reasons. Presumably, that would include cases when the lawyer finds the client’s behavior so repulsive as to render the lawyer unable to provide a good defense. This may not apply to court-appointed attorneys but would to private practice. If a mobster approaches a defense attorney, I presume he can be turned down. Nothing like this applies in medicine.
But I found this from Washington State; ( see number 9 )
WASHINGTON STATE ATTORNEY SEASON AND BAG LIMITS **********************************************************************
1300.01 GENERAL
Any person with a valid Washington State hunting license may harvest attorneys.
Taking of attorneys with traps or dead falls is permitted. The use of currency as bait is prohibited.
Killing of attorneys with a vehicle is prohibited. If accidentally struck, remove dead attorney to roadside and proceed to nearest car wash.
It is unlawful to chase, herd, or harvest attorneys from a snow machine, helicopter, or aircraft.
It shall be unlawful to shout “whiplash”, “ambulance”, or “free Perrier” for the purpose of trapping attorneys.
It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 100 yards of BMW dealerships.
It shall be unlawful to use cocaine, young boys, $100 bills, prostitutes, or vehicle accidents to attract attorneys.
It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 200 yards of courtrooms, law libraries, whorehouses, health spas, gay bars, ambulances, or hospitals.
9. If an attorney is elected to government office, it shall be a felony to hunt, trap, or possess it.
Stuffed or mounted attorneys must have a state health department inspection for AIDS, rabies, and vermin.
It shall be illegal for a hunter to disguise himself as a reporter, drug dealer, pimp, female legal clerk, sheep, accident victim, bookie, or tax accountant for the purpose of hunting attorneys.
One can’t be serious with something like: Q: Why won’t sharks attack lawyers? A: Professional courtesy.
or Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, an honest lawyer and an old drunk are walking down the street together when they simultaneously spot a hundred dollar bill. Who gets it? The old drunk, of course, the other three are mythological creatures
A cruise ship carrying a doctor, a lawyer and a priest begins sinking, and the three end up in one lifeboat. They see a buncha choirboys clinging helplessly to a piece of the ship. The doctor says, “ We must help those little boys!”. The lawyer says, “Screw ‘em!” And the priest says:
“Do we have time?”
(If this doesn’t get any s, we’ll know SOME people can dish it out, but can’t take it….!)
COUNTER INTELLIGENCE ☙ Friday, April 11, 2025 ☙ C&C NEWS 
you but I hate your title! Why do you hate lawyers so much?
but you left out “open-minded”…
!)