"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; Indeed, It's the only thing that ever has." Dr. Margaret Mead.


Judicial Accountability Initiative Law
An Inherent Right Of ALL People Everywhere

By Barbie, ACIC, National J.A.I.L. Admin.

In the past few months, a lot of our new people joining J.A.I.L. are from non-initiative states who want to "do what they're doing in South Dakota" in their states-- New York, Texas, Tennessee, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Georgia , Massachusetts, Kansas, just to name a few we've heard from lately. I've had to dampen their spirits by telling them that their state is not an initiative state, which means that J.A.I.L. cannot be passed by the People in those states, but must be presented as proposed legislation and passed by the Legislature.

The frequency with which I've had to say this to numerous new people who are on fire for J.A.I.L. after seeing the accomplishments developing in South Dakota, has caused me to be haunted with the idea that there is something wrong with this picture. Why are the People in only half our states able to pass a measure without having to go to the Legislature? Are only half our states so kind and benevolent as to "allow" its inhabitants to initiate the passage of laws?

The more I thought of it, the more I began to realize that the disparity between the initiative and non-initiative states is a serious injustice to the People as a whole. This injustice is as it relates to the right of the People to alter and reform their government when it becomes destructive of their rights. Do only some people have this right, while others do not?

The legislature is not in a position to "allow" or "disallow" this right of the People. It is a natural right --an unalienable right-- a right that cannot, by nature, be alienated or ignored by government. We are guided by the words of the Declaration of Independence-- NOTE: I said "words of" the DOI, whether or not the Declaration itself is considered to be a legal document of authority in this country-- it doesn't matter. We can be guided by those words because they represent self-evident truth, regardless of who signed the document, what organization the signers were members of, what hidden purpose they had in mind when signing it, or any fraud that may have been involved by the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The People must not be distracted by the fraud any longer!

The words of the DOI that are based on the laws of nature states as a self-evident truth of nature that the People have created government for the purpose of securing their inherent rights. That's not just a matter of opinion-- it's unadulterated truth --regardless of who expressed the fact or in what document it was expressed. It stands on its own!

Furthermore, the words of the DOI communicates the fact that whenever government breaches the responsibility for which it was created (instituted) by the People, the People, from whom government derives its just powers, have not just the right, but the DUTY, to repair that breach by altering or reforming their government in such a way that will insure the respect and protection of their inherent rights by its government. Bear in mind, the Declaration of Independence does not grant those rights-- they exist by nature, regardless of any document. The document merely assures us of the fact that independently exists. That assurance doesn't depend upon the authenticity of the document, nor of any document.

Likewise, state constitutions do not grant inherent rights, such as the right of the People to alter or reform their government when it becomes destructive of their rights. They merely acknowledge the right --at least the initiative states do. For instance, the California Constitution states "All political power is inherent [emphasis added] in the people. Government is instituted f or their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require." (Art.II, Sec.1).

The South Dakota Constitution states: "All political power is inherent in the people, and all free government is founded on their authority, and is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right in lawful and constituted methods to alter or reform their forms of government in such manner as they may think proper. ..." (Art. VI, A726).

Similar provisions are made in other state constitutions, acknowledging the existence of the inherent right of the People to alter or reform government in whatever way they deem necessary to assure the protection of their rights by government. But what about states that do not acknowledge this right? Does that mean that the People of those states do not have that right? Of course not!

J.A.I.L. is a means by which the People must perform their duty --an inherent right-- to alter and reform government, in this instance the judiciary, in such manner as they deem proper, in this instance by holding the judiciary accountable to the People for violations of law as specifically set forth in the J.A.I.L. amendment. Do the People have the right to do this in only some of the states? Absolutely not! The People have that inherent right in all states-- even the world, wherever nature exists. Remember-- no document grants that right to the People.

It is government's responsibility to respect and protect that right of the People as well as any other inherent right. In the "initiative states" government provides the means of signing petitions according to rules established for that purpose. Whether or not only registered voters possess the right may be questionable. Certainly only state residents of a minimum age would qualify for a state measure (in my opinion). But a model of the initiative process must be allowed in all states as part of government's responsibility of securing that right. It isn't within the discretion of government to "allow" such process for the People-- it is a mandatory responsibility of all governments.

The same right exists with the federal government. But, in my opinion, that's another "ball of wax" that should probably wait until we get the state systems obedient first before attempting to unravel the federal mess. The People will decide. The Federal J.A.I.L. Bill is written up as legislation, although it should be an amendment to the organic Constitution since it was not included in the Constitution when originally created. The People are sure suffering from that absence now. Had the J.A.I.L. provision been originally included in the Constitution, we'd be living in an entirely different world, where the sovereignty of the People and the laws of nature would be respected and obeyed.

J.A.I.L. - Judicial Accountability Initiative Law