Notice to drug-defense attorneys
The war on drugs is unlawfully waged
Dear drug-defense attorney:
I have written this letter because you and / or your associates hold yourselves out as drug defense attorneys. I have no personal knowledge of your law practice, but it is likely that you have been negligently defending your drug clients. This is because our drug laws operate differently than most attorneys – perhaps you – believe.
Our drug laws say that drug commerce is regulated in the executive branch and that drug crimes are prohibited in the judicial branch. This belies that there is a difference between commerce and crime. Almost all defense attorneys mistake drug commerce with drug crime. This is a mistake of law.
The U.S. and Indiana constitutions separate the terms commerce and crime. Commerce is regulated. Crime is naturally prohibited. To suggest that commerce and crime are the same is to misunderstand and misrepresent law. To willfully misrepresent law is to commit fraud. If you believe that drug commerce is drug crime, which is not true, then you are a victim of someone's fraud.
Hello. I am a 62-year old retired Indiana attorney (#11317-49, inactive status), an alumnus of the Robert H. McKinney School of Law ('86), and author of two unique self-published law books: BUSTED – A Whistleblower's Guide to the War on Drugs (2015) and America's Republican Form of Government (2017), available at Amazon.
These books are unique because – as best as I can tell – they are the first two books ever to define the republican form of government, which all attorneys take oaths to uphold. Not ironically, only if one understands the republican form of government, can one read, decipher and comprehend the Controlled Substance Acts, which have been torturedly-written to misrepresent republican law to us.
An accurate summary of the law established in Indiana by the Indiana and U.S. Controlled Substances Acts is as follows. See if your understanding of our drug laws does not differ from this accurate description:
Within the fifty United States, where Congress owes the states a republican form of government, the state and U.S. Controlled Substances Acts 1) do not apply to private individual drug possession, and 2) non-criminally regulate all intrastate and interstate drug commerce, including disfavored drug dealing. Only in the federal areas, such as the District of Columbia and coastal waterways, where Congress exercises plenary or absolute power as a non-republic, is drug dealing criminally prohibited.
Within the fifty United States, according to the Case or Controversy Requirement of state judicial and U.S. Article III courts, judicial subject matter jurisdiction requires an injury to a natural, legal or contractual right. According to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment, the law treats unwanted drug dealers the same as it does pharmaceutical company presidents. Only in the federal areas, where these clauses do not apply and where Congress determines everyone's rights, may Congress treat one drug dealer better than another.
Because both unwanted drug dealers and pharmaceutical companies manufacture, distribute and / or dispense drugs, then they are in the same legal, regulated class. The equal treatment that is owed this commercial class under the 14th Amendment is called administrative due process. The role of administrative law courts in the D.E.A. and in state regulatory agencies, such as the Indiana Board of Pharmacy, is to apply this equal adjudicatory process to determine these parties' legal rights to make and sell drugs.
Given this equal adjudicatory treatment, these administrative law courts may license drug dealers that meet their standards, and they may enjoin those drug dealers that do not. These administrative injunctions, if violated, may be enforced by judicial injunctions, using judicial courts' contempt powers. This regulatory process is non-criminal.
The Separation of Powers Doctrine and the Case or Controversy Requirement of American constitutions prevent judicial courts from acting upon this same regulatory subject matter, i.e., drug commerce, or upon the same legal issue, i.e., who may sell drugs to the public, neither subject of which is justiciable. Thus, not until parties have exhausted their administrative equitable remedies do judicial courts gain any power over any drug matter.
Within America's fifty states, judicial courts have no original, subject matter jurisdiction over drug possession, which is a natural right. These courts have jurisdiction only over cases, which include injury. Thus, the judicial power over drugs operates under non-criminal equity and solely over drug commerce – not drug possession, and judicial courts have power over this drug commerce only in their appellate – not original – capacity.
And thus, the practice of prosecuting and defending drug possessors or dealers in criminal courts bespeaks the obvious, i.e., that the war on drugs has been operating in the wrong courts, in the wrong branch of government. The culpability for this mistake of law is res ipsa loquitur. There is no disputing the rules of law (non est certandum de regulis juris) and ignorance of the law does not excuse (ignorantia jurs non excusat).
Because all state and U.S. drug laws regulate all drug commerce within the states, then all prosecutions in state judicial and U.S. Article III courts for mere drug possession and dealing have been malum in se, without judicial authority, and under false color of law. Because the Controlled Substances Acts regulate drug dealing within the fifty states using governments' non-criminal administrative law powers under equity, then governments' powers under criminal law have been falsely applied and defended.
This false practice is the result of American attorneys not being taught the separations of power that define our unique republican form of government. It is necessary to know these separations a priori in order 1) to properly read and comprehend the Controlled Substances Acts, and 2) to maintain the republican form of government, which all attorneys take oaths to uphold.
In conjunction with this letter to you, I have written similarly specific notices 1) to local, state and U.S. officials, 2) to civil rights attorneys, 3) to legal malpractice attorneys, 4) to the news media, 5) to malpractice insurance companies, 6) to the municipal bonding industry, and 7) to private prison companies. These letters refer to a Notice and Demand that I published against the false enforcement of our drug laws by local, state and U.S. officials.
These letters also refer to 6-part audio presentation to which you can listen and read along. This presentation is likely your most useful source: 1) to understand the proper operation of our drug laws, 2) to define the separation of powers under the republican form of government, and 3) to show how government officials and attorneys have been defrauded – by willful misrepresentations of law – into thinking that certain drugs are unlawful, or criminal.
All of my materials show 1) that all drug possession is either lawful or legal throughout every inch of the United States – land, air and water; 2) that all intrastate and interstate drug dealing is regulated under administrative law, and is not subject to criminal law, and 3) that unlicensed drug dealing is criminally prohibited only in the federal areas, over which Congress legislates with plenary power as a non-republic.
Thus, you cannot comprehend our nation's drug laws without understanding a) the republican form of government, which operates within the states, b) the non-republican form of government, which operates within the federal areas, and c) our federal republican system's various separations of power, which are not taught in law schools. This underscores 1) the need for remedial civic and legal education, and 2) the need for the wholesale rewriting of drug statutes (as well as gun, prostitution and traffic statutes, by inference) to remove their inherent fraud.
My goal is to change the unlawful behavior of government officials by arming defense attorneys like you with better knowledge than you have been using. My materials provide you with the grounds to defend your clients' rights and to clean up their false criminal records. It is your duty to discern the truth of my materials, and then to zealously use them on behalf of your drug clients.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. Feel free to contact me by email if you need more help.
Kurt St. Angelo
This website and all its representations are subject to this Disclaimer.