Here’s something to consider, I offer.  The law as practiced and enforced in the USA is antiquated!  Why do I say that, especially since I studied law; was first in my class and awarded the Scholarly Award in Paralegal studies, which eventually changed my mind and determination about going back to law school?

I remember vividly that night sitting in a college classroom when the law professor made a statement which, literally, changed my opinion about U.S. law and justice.  His commentary on the law prompted my unrestrained shock when I blurted out, “So that’s why Justice is blindfolded!”   I went home from class that night to tell my late husband I decided I was not going to law school.  I realized I could not go along with a premise which, in my opinion, proffered “To get along, one has to go along.”

Where’s true justice?

As we fast-forward into the 21st century, everything geopolitical and otherwise, especially acculturating memes in the United States seemingly deleting personal liberties, personifies and enforces my question, “Where’s true justice?”

In my opinion, we live in a climate of corporate take-over of individuals’ rights.  Examples: mandatory Big Pharma vaccines where real informed consent and the right to self-determination are denied and made illegal by state laws, often at the behest of Big Pharma lobbying; mandatory AMI Smart Meters, which spy on households plus emit toxic radiation waves traveling over electrical wiring in the walls of every house retrofitted which, unfortunately, had its radiation-free-and-safe analog meter taken away, most times without consumers’ knowledge and/or consent; genetically modified ‘phoods’ literally force-fed to consumers without proper identification and/or labeling due to FDA mandate and probable input from Monsanto’s former chief lobbyist Michael Taylor, now FDA’s Deputy Commissioner for Foods and Veterinary Medicine who is NOT a veterinarian nor medical doctor—a former corporate attorney; chemtrails with their horrendous toxins sprayed daily in the skies above our heads treating us like lab rats in an experiment we never signed up for.  Nuremberg Laws are overlooked and deliberately not enforced, often due to ‘legal loopholes’ and/or corporate trade secrets.   There are many more examples, but I think readers get the idea: “Where’s true justice?”

Nonetheless, I think I can answer that “justice” question after all these years.

The denial of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, including individual state Constitutional rights, may be—and probably is—the only answer to that gnawing question.  Such corporate-sponsored actions are being perpetrated by vested interests who want to lord over the masses they wish to control legally, morally and medically!

Furthermore, there’s scuttlebutt George Soros, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential candidate-backer, wants to do away with, and replace, the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights by 2020!

If U.S. citizens allow that to happen—God forbid, then U.S. citizens deserve what happens to us, along with the horrors of ‘governance’ that go with a “plutocracy” run by, and at the whims of, the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Bushes,  Cheney, Clintons, Soros, Gates, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Trump, and other ‘oligarchs’ secretly positioned within Skull and Bones and Bohemian Grove memberships.  Kim Jong-Un on a different wavelength, should we be asking?  Anyone of any political-stripe who wants to deny basic human rights or implement draconian mandates on fellow citizens has to be questioned and neutralized for the common good, I offer.

The law, in my opinion, is to blame because it operates differently than science, which has been bastardized, too, in many respects and seeks to implement its own fiefdom rule, e.g., Transhumanism and Artificial Intelligence where computers will be placed into human brains and citizens will be chipped.  How de-humanizing can it get?

According to this article

The law is a different beast. The American legal system utilizes the adversarial system: Both sides in a case present arguments as to the merits of their positions before the entity that will be settling the matter (the trier-of-fact such as a judge or jury).

Past decisions, known as precedent, are the foundation of this process; as science leans forward, the law leans backward. Of course this doesn’t mean the law is backward. As a philosophy, the law places a different measure and meaning on precedent than does science. To oversimplify, science builds on prior knowledge, while the courts defer to it. [CJF emphasis]

“The law leans backward!”  What an appropriate response to where is justice?  Case law may be the system and legal meme keeping Justice blindfolded, in my opinion, because “the courts defer to it”—ouch!

Each legal problem and situation brings a set of different dynamics before the courts and principles of law, which lawyers cavalierly massage around to try to fit into established precedent case law in order to win their cases.

One perfect example, in my opinion, is the 1905 vaccine case law Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which is so outdated, it truly is pathetic.  We are living in 2017 while vested interests, including federal and state health agencies manipulated by pseudoscience and corporate lobbyists and lawyers, hang their legal hats on that case.  “Where’s justice?”  Furthermore, shouldn’t present day anti-vaxxers be held to Jacobson’s ruling: fined only $5 as was Pastor Jacobson, if the courts defer to case law?

However, lawyers parse case law and judges even may ‘manipulate’ it to the legal benefits of vested interests, I contend, and that’s a true denial of justice.  Let’s take off Justice’s blindfold and allow her to become a liberated Justice, especially since women have been demanding their rights for too long.

Source

Regarding updating the law and not the U.S. Constitution

Many Constitutional reform advocates, e.g., former President Obama and George Soros in particular, seek that route as it is the ultimate prize to take away from a country based upon individual’s rights. James Madison valiantly fought to incorporate the Bill of Rights, which have been expanded from the original ten Madison was able to include in founding documents.

Allowing the U.S. Constitution to be voted down, changed, or deleted as the basic law of the land would negate the very purpose and founding of the original 13 colonies, the Revolutionary War of Independence, and all the Conventional Congresses held in colonial times.  Our Founding Forefathers wanted no parts of a “kingship” or one-man-rule governance or what I’d call “vested interest” domination for the newly found republic.  Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

That is the ultimate challenge: Keeping the United States of America a democratic republic and not allowing it to become a North Korea or other fascist dictatorship lorded over by the new world order cabal or corporate totalitarianism.

We are at the crossroads of history once again; what fork in the road will we take?  Will it be true, real freedom or subjugation under a Gestapo-like, corporate autocracy?