Skip navigation
× You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.

The Limits of the Law

Human law is law only by virtue of its accordance with right reason, and by this means it is clear that it flows from eternal law. In so far as it deviates from right reason it is called an unjust law; and in such a case, it is no law at all, but rather an assertion of violence.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae (c. 1260)

It is tempting for many to regard the law as a thing that is almost sacred, as an expression of the highest secular thought. Courts of law bear a striking resemblance to churches of religion. Both are often situated in large, imposing, intimidating buildings. Both feature large center aisles to accommodate large masses of people. Both have raised places in the front; an altar in church, a bench in court. Both priests and judges wear large, flowing black robes.

Where one places a deity at the altar, the other places a being upon an elevated bench, who is said to possess god-like powers over life, liberty and property.

A church administrator is called "Reverend" or "Your Eminence"; a judge is addressed as "Your Honor." Yet while one may opt for faith in a church, faith is surely misplaced in a court. For the law is not a religion, but a set of ideas designed to protect the dominance and the maintenance of those who rule.

Under all the robes, the architecture, the books and other such artifacts, lie the interests of those in power. As such, the law is inherently conservative, as shown by the extreme rarity of the grant of temporary restraining orders (TRO) or preliminary injunctions, thereby preserving, in most instances, the status quo .

What's wrong with preserving the status quo ?

If the status quo is an oppressive one, with white supremacy as the guiding principle, to preserve such a regime is wrong indeed. If the status quo is on the side of wealth and class, with the poor in a position where their interests are trampled on, then such a system cannot be called a fair one.

Black law professor Derrick Bell explains the law functions under what he calls "interest convergence," which means:

The interest of Blacks in achieving racial equality will be accomm- odated only when it converges with the interest of whites. However, the Fourteenth Amendment, standing alone, will not authorize a judicial remedy providing effective racial equality for Blacks where the remedy sought threatens the superior societal status of middle- and upper-class whites (Bell, Critical Race Theory , 22).

If this is so in law as generally practiced, what of prisoners' law, brought to bear by legions of jailhouse lawyers in every state of the union?

Many jailhouse lawyers know, only too well, of good, solid suits tossed out of court on the whim of a conservative judge, preening for his next judicial appointment. They know, from their own experience, that they are damned at the doorway of the courthouse, and it will be the rarest piece of luck if they can prevail in court (or even get in!).

Seen from Bell's perspective, the law protects white class interests, above all else.

That's what they are in business for.

Weiss uber alles (white over all) is the ruling, unwritten law.

As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login