“Government is elected into ‘office’ not ‘power’ as they frequently like to claim. The
ultimate constraint on the abuse of authority (office) is the people’s ability to withdraw
their consent to being governed. We never give ‘power’ to those we elect; we merely
give them authority to act on our behalf. We the PEOPLE have allowed today’s
governing bodies to mutate into tyrannies, because they are ignoring the principles of
consent and are securing ‘power’ for themselves.”
Key Difference: Common Laws are the body of customary law, based upon judicial
decisions and embodied in reports of previously decided cases, that have been
administered by the common-law court. These laws are developed based on rulings that
have been given in older court cases.
Constitutional Law is the body of law that defines the relationship between different
entities within a nation, most commonly the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature
bodies.
Common Law History
Common law originated in the early Middle Ages in the King’s Court (Curia Regis), a
single royal court set up for most of the country at Westminster, near London. Like
many other early legal systems, it did not originally consist of substantive rights but
rather of procedural remedies. Until the late 19th century, English common law
continued to be developed primarily by judges rather than legislators.
The common law of England was largely created in the period after the Norman
Conquest of 1066. The Anglo-Saxons, especially after the accession of Alfred the
Great (871), had developed a body of rules resembling those being used by
the Germanic peoples of northern Europe. Local customs governed most matters, while
the church played a large part in government. Crimes were treated as wrongs for which
compensation was made to the victim. These “laws” favored the ruthless Norman
conquerors and subjugated their English people. Church and state were separate and
had their own law and court systems which very often collided. 
During the critical formative period of common law, under the King, common law
became “Feudal land Law”, again favoring the politically powerful – the Feudal Lords.
The emergence of improved remedies in the King’s Court during the late 12th century
led to the elaboration and standardization of these rules, which marked the effective
origin of the common law.
Through the 13 th Century, the unity and consistency of the common law were promoted
by the early dominant position acquired by the royal courts. Whereas the earlier
Saxon witan, or king’s council, dealt only with great affairs of state, the new
Norman court assumed wide judicial powers. Its judges (clergy and statesmen)

“declared” the common law from town to town. Local customs were ignored and the
royal courts controlled “common Law” authority to favor the Royals and the Church
claiming the “law” was universal law. Throughout the 13 th century and into the 14 th
century “law” remained somewhat fluid and informal allowing judges to interpret the law
as they saw fit or as they were directed to in whatever way benefited their Lords and
royal councils even to a point of inequity and injustice to the people. This continued until
the implementation of the “Law of Equity” (14 th century) was implemented with its more
strict rules of “Proof” and “Evidence”.
Under Edward I’s reign the office of judge was transformed from a clerical position into a
full-time career. Admission to the bar (i.e., the right to practice as a “barrister” before a
court) was made conditional on the legal knowledge of the applicant. Law thus began to
emerge as a profession, which required permanent institutions and some kind of
organized legal education.
By the 16 th Century, case law was based upon previous decisions of cases, thus, case
law became the typical form of English common law. Even with this graduating process
of developing common law, history shows that throughout these early 15 th and 16 th
centuries, the “Crown” often intimidated and corrupted justices, sheriffs, juries, and
witnesses.
By the 17 th Century, common law courts had transitioned into handling local civil
jurisdiction cases while the Court of Chancery which functioned under procedures of
Roman Law held jurisdiction over claims of the royalist party – Those of parliament
enforcing the kings supremacy and the Church of England.
Major changes in Common Law did not take form until the late 1700’s where we see
that movements were made to enable legislators—rather than courts—to make the law;
and (2) the aims of law should vary with time and place. This resulted in a major trend
in criminal procedure which provided better protection of the rights of the accused.
The development of common law in the United States
Each colony passed its own statutes, and governors or legislative bodies acted as
courts. This was the first initial true form of “Common Law”. Civil and criminal cases
were tried in the same courts, and lay juries enjoyed wide powers. The American states
viewed law as a cementing force and used it to facilitate cooperation in the face of the
hazards of nature and other difficulties arising in the development of the new
continent. The pioneer spirit favored freedom and initiative and distrusted central
authority and a paternal government. Homespun local justice was preferred, as was the
common sense of the local jury. However, following the American Revolution, U.S. law
became increasingly statutory, so that by the late 20th century legislation predominated
over judge-made law. Hence the loss of true “common law” once again.
Historically, in the US, law had performed the function of a referee in a free economy
and was called in to apply generally accepted ideas of right and wrong to individual
disputes. Today, unfortunately, law has evolved to form an instrument of governmental
policy or results from social and political pressures on the government. Law, therefore,

is now increasingly administrative. The United States is a private corporation that can
make all the codes for its own purposes and subjects – “citizens” (review the definition of
“citizen” in Ballentine’s Law Dictionary). This not only violates common law but it is
diametrically opposed to Divine Law and Natural Law.
Common law is often used interchangeably with Natural law; however, they’re not one
and the same. Natural law is that all rights are essential or permanent by divine virtue of
human existence. Whereas with common law, there is no list of common laws. It is
simply the recognizable rights by individuals in a society that the governments and
judges are willing to acknowledge and enforce. Common law in its most basic form can
be broken down to two widely used phrases, treat others as you would like to be
treated; and no harm, no foul (crime).
The idea is that we are all free to do as we please so long as it does not cause harm to
other people on their property. And if everyone lives by this golden rule, then there is no
need for any codes or statues to be imposed on us by any “government” (by the way,
most governments are actually nothing more than gigantic private corporations which
we all have experienced are very practiced in violating our God-Given Rights!).
As our state and our country are returned to a “Constitutional Government” – The
Republic for the United States of America – Common Law will take on the
characteristics that our forefathers intended in that it will not violate Divine Law or the
Constitution, regardless of what part of the country you are in or what social pressures
in a particular area desires to dictate.
Laws play an important part in the society. Imagine a world without laws, it would be
complete chaos. People would do as they wish and there would be no consequences.
Hence, laws were established to ensure that everyone has a strict moral code that they
must follow. Certain things such as stealing and murdering are not correct. Laws also
ensure that people that disobey the laws must pay for their crimes and that no criminal
is above the law, no matter what their social standing is. Common law and constitutional
law are two types of laws that often confuse people that are not well-versed with the law
books. These are two different aspects of law.

Common Laws are laws that have come about by
having been enacted on based on previous court
rulings. These laws are developed based on
rulings that have been given in older court cases.
Common laws are also known as case law or
precedent. In a common law system, the judge’s
task is to “discover” the law—meaning that he
develops rules from certain principles and
precedents. These rules can be written as well as
unwritten. In a common law justice system, the
laws of a country depend on the rulings or
decisions of courts or other tribunals, where it is believed justice prevailed. The general
principal of this system is that similar cases with similar facts and issues should not be

treated differently. If there is a dispute between laws, the authority or precedent looks to
past cases and must provide the same reasoning and decision that was provided in the
first case. The laws can also be altered and evolved based on the circumstances. The
judges also have the authority to create new laws. Many countries live in common law
systems or mixed systems.
Our Constitution, however, does not task our judges with “discovering” the law or
crafting the right result in accordance with “natural law or the law of reason.” The U.S.
Constitution confines the power to make (or “discover” law, and the power to interpret it
to the legislative and judicial branches, respectively. This separation is intentional.
In Federalist #47, James Madison emphasized the centrality of separating legislative
and judicial power in preserving self-rule when he quoted Montesquieu as saying:
“Were the power of judging joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject
would be exposed to arbitrary control, for the judge would then be the legislator.”
 Constitutional Law is the body of law that defines the relationship between different
entities within a nation, most commonly the judiciary, the
executive and the legislature bodies. These rules state
the basic human rights of the man and women of that
state, including rights to own property, freedom of speech,
etc. The main purpose of the constitutional law is to
govern the law making bodies in the nation. It gives them
set boundaries of the laws they cannot violate. For
example, the law makers cannot violate the public’s rights
to do certain things such as freedom of speech, right to
petition, freedom of assembly, etc. The constitutional law of a country can be changed if
the government falls or changes. Additions can also be made to the constitution in form
of amendments.
In short, common law are the laws that are developed based on old court decisions,
while constitution laws are laws that were established when the constitution of the land
was written. Both the laws are used for governing the people and giving them with
certain rights.
Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, 304 US.64 (1938) makes plain that the federal courts have
no power to create a general federal common law.
Historically, Common law has led to unfair marginalization or disempowerment of
certain groups of people whether they are outdated or biased, past decisions continue
to shape future rulings and they continue until societal changes prompt a judicial body
to overturn the precedent or the legislative branch of government codifies a civil law.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
 Common law, also known as case law, is a body of unwritten laws based on
legal precedents established by the courts.
 Common law draws from institutionalized opinions and interpretations from
judicial authorities and public juries.

 Common laws sometimes prove the inspiration for new legislation to be enacted.

The Constitution of the United States for America (began on May 25, 1787 ratified it on
May 29, 1790).
The Supreme Law of the land (**LAW= Land, Air, Water)
In the United States, the supreme law of the land is the Constitution and any
constitutional amendments. This power overrides the rest of the law and government
and determines how much power they have.
It is typically an outline of the basic nature of a country, including aspects of the nation
that are meant to be permanent such as the form of government, citizens’ rights, and
governing processes and having such, ensures that the spirit and identity of a country
remain consistent for future generations.
Having experienced tyranny in the colonies and chaos in the confederacy, the Founding
Fathers knew that the country needed a carefully drafted balance between the two
extremes and a system that would lead to prosperity.
Balance of Power
The government and the people had shown their potential to skew that balance of
power and threaten the nation’s well-being.
The United States Constitution reigning supreme over both was the perfect solution.
Constitutional Law
Constitutional Law is the body of law that defines the relationship between different
entities within a nation, most commonly the judiciary, the executive and the legislature
bodies. These rules state the basic human rights of the man and women of that state
and nation, including rights to own property, freedom of speech, etc.
The main purpose of the constitutional law is to govern the law making bodies in the
states and the nation. It gives them set boundaries of the laws they cannot violate. For
example, the law makers cannot violate the public’s rights to do certain things such as
freedom of speech, right to petition, freedom of assembly, or pass illegal mandates, etc.
The constitutional law of our country can be changed if the government falls or changes.
Additions can also be made to the constitution in form of amendments.
In short, common law are the laws that are developed based on old court decisions,
while constitution laws are laws that were established when the constitution of the land
was written. Both the laws when implemented properly are used for governing the
people and giving them certain rights.
The original Constitution detailed exactly how the national government was to be run
and each colony/state ratified the US Constitution and their State Constitutions. This

unity of states revolved around the concept of checks and balances within the
government.
Accordingly, any person or group of people acquiring too much power was perceived to
be the greatest danger to the state and nation’s longevity.
Creating a balance
This balance was accomplished through the division of power between the three
branches of government:
 The legislative branch creates federal law.
 The executive branch enforces them.
 The judicial branch interprets them.
These laws can sometimes take the form of constitutional amendments, but no matter
what, the federal government and each state government can neither repeal nor modify
the original Constitution.
Legislative Branch
The legislative branch is divided into two houses in a system known as a bicameral
legislature. In the Senate, states get equal representation with two senators each. In the
House of Representatives, states’ representation is based on their respective
populations. Together, the two houses form Congress, and create the federal statutes of
the United States.
Within DeJur Government, a Senator is called Statesman and a representative of
Congress is called a Delegate. Their responsibilities, according to the Constitution are
pretty much the same – Representation Of the PEOPLE. However, under the De Facto
government we have experienced and witnessed the abuses of the De Facto
government perverting their authority and subjecting the “We the PEOPLE” to abusive
tyrannical oppression. Failing to serve we the PEOPLE and becoming self-serving
politicians.
The Executive Branch
The executive branch consists of the President, the Vice President, and the Cabinet of
officials appointed to assist and advise them.
The President and Vice President can interact with Congress, but their main job is to
manage and direct the rest of the national government and the military.
The Judicial Branch
Lastly, the judicial branch consists of the country’s court system, which delivers justice
in the United States. The Supreme Court is the highest court, which hears especially
significant cases at a federal level.
The Bill of Rights

The second part of the original Constitution is known as the Bill of Rights, drafted by
Founding Father James Madison, which includes the first ten amendments. They are
considered amendments because they were not part of the original draft.
When the Constitution was submitted to the states for ratification following the
Constitutional Convention, they would not approve it unless citizens were guaranteed
specific rights that stemmed from the core values upon which the country was founded.
According to the Declaration of Independence, the underlying belief is that all people
are created equal and deserve the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
That noble ideal served as the foundation for the Bill of Rights, which stands shoulder-
to-shoulder with the rest of the Constitution.

Federalist #47, James Madison emphasized the centrality of separating
legislative and judicial power in preserving self-rule
Federalist No. 47 is the forty-seventh paper from The Federalist Papers. It was published on
January 30, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius, its actual author was James Madison. 

**L A W
Land: Common Law
Air: The nature of matters that deal with energy, spirit and intellect.
Water: Admiralty Law – The law of the Sea