getting set

 Now we are hearing about the assignment of a Special Master. I'm quite certain many folks just like me have never heard of that before. Turns out there are Masters and Special Masters. I looked that up to gain an understanding of what they are talking about. Master and Special Master are the same thing, only different. Their job is to independently review documents, evidence and advise the judge in a case. That's the simplest explanation I could find. It can make a significant difference in how the trial is conducted. Seem to me it is like Judge Judy's, Hot Bench! Whatever the case is I am learning more about the law every day.

 I am learning that lawyers speak a different language than the rest of us. You have to be a lawyer to understand any of it and I'm thinking many of them fall short in that regard as well. If you are paying attention and aren't a trained attorney, I'm sure you are as confused as I am. The FBI raiding an ex-presidents residence, unprecedented in modern history. Justified or not? I don't know, but I know an ex-secretary of state that kept a secret server in her basement, destroyed phones and bleached hard drives. No raid at her house though. It's illegal to enter our country without the proper paperwork yet thousands cross the border every single day. The lawyers call them migrants, and insist they receive benefits. Some lawyers do anyway, others call them criminals. Premeditated murder is a felony of the highest order, but abortion is a right. Some states allow the use of marijuana for recreational purposes while the federal government says it is a crime. Still trying to understand how it is legal for a state to make a law contrary to federal law when there is a law that says you can't do that. It's called the Supremacy clause and is in the constitution. Trying to understand how elected officials can take an oath to uphold the law, then say they will not enforce the law. And that happens all the time. 

 I've got a grandson just starting law school this year. I'll be asking him questions as he learns to speak that lingo. It seems to me that the law has little to do with what actually happens. What matters is winning the debate. That's what attorneys do, debate the issues. Can they find a legal path to allow or to block? Years ago we used to see the Judge's chamber with bookshelves lined with law books. They would pour through those volumes looking for what? Precedent is what they want. If it was decided before, it must be right. Except when it isn't right, and we overturn precedent. A lot depends upon who set that precedent. Was it a minor court or the Supreme court? Of course, the Supreme court can set precedent, and that precedent is very influential, but it isn't a law. The supreme court doesn't make law only issue opinions. Precedent usually wins the debate.

 I can't help but think with today's ability to retrieve data precedent must be far easier to locate. I never did believe anyone read all those books and could remember what was in them. I always suspected there were those that spent their entire careers searching those volumes for others. I knew about the Dewey Decimal System to help you locate a book in general terms but what system was used in those books? I don't know but there must have been some method. Today just type in your inquiry and bam, results are flooding in. All that's left then is sorting out the precedent you want to apply. I'm certain there are many to choose from depending upon the outcome you are attempting to get. It's a battle of precedent! Guess that is why something being unprecedented is such a big deal! Never happened before, what do we do? We have to be very careful in setting precedent because it will be used in the future, even when it may not suit our purpose. That can cause problems.