SovCits in Court
Apr. 10th, 2024 12:56 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bunsen_h"Sovereign citizens" in court often claim that the court doesn't have jurisdiction over them. Commenters — some of whom really should know better — sometimes ask why, if they really believe that the court lacks jurisdiction, they are showing up at all. "If I didn't think the court had jurisdiction over me, I'd just stay home."
It's possible to be so delusional as to think that the court lacks jurisdiction, but not so delusional as to think that the court doesn't have the power of the state to use / abuse to compel attendance. Delusional enough to swallow whatever SovCit creed is in play, whole, but not so delusional as to fail to grasp that the consequences of not showing up would be dire and should be avoided. Failure to appear is often a crime in itself.
The proper way to contest jurisdiction is to bring it up, in court, per the defined protocols. The craziness lies in abusing those protocols, in using bogus arguments based on obviously-flawed premises, and in trying to argue the same points repeatedly after the judge has made a ruling.
It's possible to be so delusional as to think that the court lacks jurisdiction, but not so delusional as to think that the court doesn't have the power of the state to use / abuse to compel attendance. Delusional enough to swallow whatever SovCit creed is in play, whole, but not so delusional as to fail to grasp that the consequences of not showing up would be dire and should be avoided. Failure to appear is often a crime in itself.
The proper way to contest jurisdiction is to bring it up, in court, per the defined protocols. The craziness lies in abusing those protocols, in using bogus arguments based on obviously-flawed premises, and in trying to argue the same points repeatedly after the judge has made a ruling.
