Notice to the news media
You have been misrepresenting our drug laws
Dear member of the news media,
This letter explains that you have been misrepresenting state and U.S. drug laws to the public. This misrepresentation has materially supported government officials' false enforcement of drug laws using the wrong courts in the wrong branch of government.
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 attorneys mistake drug commerce with drug crime. This is a mistake of law.
Mistakes of fact are excusable, but mistakes of law are not. This because the law is knowable. I will explain the law to you (below). Then you will have no excuse but to know it.
The U.S. and state 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. If you have been defrauded in this manner, then you have let your guard down. Again, this is because the law is knowable and only you are responsible for not knowing it.
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.
My 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 then read, decipher and comprehend the Controlled Substance Acts, which have been torturedly-written to willfully misrepresent republican law to us.
Simultaneously with the promulgation of this letter, I have written similarly specific letters 1) to local, state and U.S. government officials, 2) to drug defense attorneys, 3) to civil rights attorneys, 4) to legal malpractice attorneys, 5) to the municipal bonding industry, 6) to legal malpractice insurance companies, and 7) to private prison companies. You can read these letters at drugsarelegal.com. They are to get everyone on the same page.
This page is actually a tragic chapter in the history of the United States where our drug laws have been misunderstood and falsely enforced. They are misunderstood because they are fraudulently written, and because our country's legal professionals do not have sufficient a priori knowledge to properly read them. This has resulted in the wrongful enslavement of millions of people throughout the country. But worse, we have lost our republican form of government, which is citizens' inherited political birthright, guaranteed by our constitutions.
This is all explained in a 6-part audio presentation to which you can listen and also 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.
I recommend that you spend four hours listening to this presentation before ever voting again, or before contacting me about this campaign to end the unlawful war on drugs. Thank you in advance.
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 unapproved drug dealing is criminally prohibited only in the federal areas, over which Congress legislates as a non-republic.
Thus, one 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 American attorneys yet do not.
For the past fifty years, America's war on drugs has been wrongly waged in the wrong courts and in the wrong branch of government. This has filled our prisons with non-criminals, who have been unlawfully enslaved in violation of the 13th Amendment. Not only is drug possession a natural right within all the United States, which right is codified by their statutes, but state and U.S. governments have power only to regulate drug commerce – not the power to criminally prohibit it.
According to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment, governments are to treat everyone who manufactures, distributes or dispenses drugs the same. So favored and disfavored drug dealers are in the same commercial class. This equal treatment is called administrative due process. It is regulatory and operates out of administrative law courts in the executive branch.
According to the Case or Controversy Requirement, judicial courts are not open to mere commerce, but require an injury to a natural, legal or contractual right. According to the Separation of Powers Doctrine, judicial courts are not allowed to do the regulatory work of the executive branch.
Thus, the judicially-waged war on drugs violates the 13th Amendment, the 14th Amendment, the Case or Controversy Requirement and the Separation of Powers Doctrine, not to mention numerous other separations of power that are required to be maintained. Plus, it violates all applicable Controlled Substances Acts. That's a lot of law breaking!
An accurate summary of the law established 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 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 is in non-criminal equity and is 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 America's legal practitioners have been falsely enforcing and defending drug laws in judicial courts in the judicial branch instead of in administrative law courts in the executive branch. This malpractice is res ipsa loquitur because there is no disputing the law, nor who controls the instrumentality of harm. By definition, this false practice is either a mistake of law (negligence) or an intentional crime.
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 wrong (malum in se), without judicial authority, and under false color of law. Because the Controlled Substances Acts regulate drug dealing within the states using governments' non-criminal administrative law powers under equity, then governments' powers under criminal law have been falsely applied and defended. Hand-in-hand with this is that the Indiana Board of Pharmacy and the D.E.A. have been grossly neglecting their regulatory duties and powers over unwanted drug dealing.
As best as I can tell, no sovereign within the United States is enforcing its drug laws properly, and few if any drug defense attorneys are adequately representing their drug clients. The law is knowable, but these professionals do not know it well enough to even read the statutes. Drug statutes are constitutional because they secure everyone's natural and legal rights, which means that they do not violate these rights. Only government agents violate these rights by wrongly acting outside of the scope of their authority. Their mistakes of law have now victimized generations of Americans.
This underscores the intellectual and emotional obstacles that my explaining our drug laws to them now faces. If they all revert to stupid and childish denials, as they all might try, or if they try to ignore the issue, as they have in the past (see Audio 6), then the future of American law is in peril.
If officials meet over the drug-war issue, then they meet either a) to end the judicially-waged war on drugs in their respective jurisdictions, or b) to criminally conspire to continue it. So, the outcome of these officials' important deliberations will seal the fate of not only the war on drugs, but also their future personal liability. My intention is to help other attorneys 1) hold officials accountable for their future unlawful actions, and 2) hold drug defense attorneys accountable for their future malpractice.
And while the news and opinion media do not have the same public duties as government officials, I hope your industry will heretofore represent the law to the public as I have properly represented it to you. As well, I hope your members will come to understand the republican form of government so that you can see and extol its virtues. You would report news differently if you understood the kind of government to which you are entitled, which my audio presentation explains.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. Feel free to contact me, but please first by email.
Kurt St. Angelo
This website and all its representations are subject to this Disclaimer.