 |
Reconstructing the Constitutional Foundations of Jurisdiction and Justice
WHEN JUDGES REFUSE THE CONSTITUTION
WEBINAR INTERNATIONAL
From Ancient Times to Nuremberg: The Constitutional Foundations of Judicial Impartiality and Courts' Independence by Scott Erik Stafne
⭐ STAFNE’S CONSTITUTIONAL DOCTRINE
Stafne’s Constitutional Doctrine restores, with technical rigor and intellectual honesty, the ethical, moral, Christian, and republican principles defended by the Founding Fathers of the great American nation, including:
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
Alexander Hamilton
George Washington
STAFNE and similar scholars demonstrate that the Constitution is not merely a legal document: it is a moral pact, a structure of limits, a system of checks and balances, and a safeguard against judicial and governmental tyranny.
⭐ A LEGACY THAT TRANSFORMED CIVILIZATIONS
The principles rediscovered by Stafne — such as limited jurisdiction, the natural judge, due process of law, equality before the law, and limited government — shaped:
The French Revolution
The Independence of Brazil
The construction of the modern Democratic Rule of Law
The philosophical bases of international human-rights treaties, such as:
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José)
The UN Covenants on Civil and Political Rights
These values are non-derogable, pre-constitutional, and cannot be violated by judges, under penalty of constitutional rupture.
Stafne demonstrates, with historical and doctrinal precision, that some contemporary magistrates refuse to comply with and to enforce:
the Constitution,
the distribution of jurisdictional competence,
the limits of judicial power,
international treaties,
and the very ethical foundation that legitimizes the judicial function.
When this occurs, a model of arbitrary power emerges, without valid jurisdiction, violating:
due process of law,
the natural justice,
impartiality,
and the very democratic constitutional order.
Before any debate on rights or guarantees, there is a foundation that precedes and conditions the very existence of judicial proceedings:
➡️ the jurisdictional competence pre-defined by the Constitution and by the infra-constitutional laws that structure the Judiciary.
THERE IS NO JUDICIAL PROCEEDING Without valid jurisdiction, granted by the Constitution and by the statutes on judicial organization and division.
Any act performed by an authority without jurisdictional power is not a decision — it is a null act, incompatible with the Rule of Law.
It is this foundation that the American jurist Scott Erik Stafne brings back to the center of contemporary constitutional debate.
Does anyone seriously believe that a RETIRED GENERAL of the Armed Forces is in REGULAR active service and can command the troops?
And further:
Can a retired general issue operational orders, sign battle commands, direct military operations, give orders to officers in active service,
or exercise peace-time MILITARY COMMAND functions that can only be exercised by GENERALS who are in REGULAR ACTIVE SERVICE, with valid military investiture?
The answer is NO — absolutely not. It is legally impossible, constitutionally invalid, and institutionally unthinkable.
Yet this is exactly what is happening in the American judicial system: judges outside regular active service, or without valid investiture, are acting as though they had jurisdiction, when they do not.
And an act performed by someone without jurisdiction is, in law:
➡️ null; ➡️ nonexistent; ➡️ ineffective; ➡️ and constitutes usurpation of public office.
It violates the principle prohibiting extraordinary or exceptional courts or tribunals, resulting in the legal nonexistence of the proceeding and of any decision issued by someone who has no legal authority — an act that is legally nonexistent.
Mr. Stafne remains committed to guiding individuals and communities seeking justice in systems often governed by wealth instead of wisdom, and welcomes collaborations with others dedicated to restoring constitutional balance and integrity.
Registration
Guarantee Your Spot Now in this important legal and international debate.
Click on the link below to register:
https://www.nacle.com/CLE/Courses/From-Ancient-Times-to-Nuremberg-The-Constitutional-Foundations-of-Judicial-Impar-2821/578
Event Details:
Location Internet: NACLE - WEBINAR (SKU Code: INT4200)
Title From Ancient Times to Nuremberg: The Constitutional Foundations of Judicial Impartiality and Courts' Independence
Date Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Time 1:00 PM - 2:30 PM EST
Format Live Webinar
Duration 1:30 hours
Total Credits (CLE/MCLE) 1.5 - 1.8
Investment US$ 75 (Seventy-Five American Dollars)
CONTEÚDO PROGRAMÁTICO → PROGRAM
SYLLABUS
ACADEMIA.EDU
Outline and Revised Handouts for the NACLE Seminar occuring on November 18, 2025: "Judicial Disqualification and the Moral Foundations of Adjudicative Justice (Part One)" prepared by attonrey Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI
By Scott E Stafne
trophy
Top 3% ( nov. 18, 2025)
[ Top 4% on nov. 17, 2025 ]
description
41 Pages
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SHPSA.2019.05.001
Abstract (written by Scott Erik Stafne in collaboration with Todd AI): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This document contains the full outline and revised handouts prepared for the National Academy of Continuing Legal Education’s seminar on Judicial Disqualification and the Moral Foundations of Adjudicative Justice. It traces the development of adjudicative neutrality from ancient moral traditions, Roman law, and canon law through the English Act of Settlement and Dr. Bonham’s Case, showing how these historical commitments culminated in the structural guarantees of Article III of the United States Constitution. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< The materials also explain Congress’s statutory implementation of those constitutional mandates—specifically, the creation of independent courts composed of judges who possess good-behavior tenure and compensation protected from diminution. These structural protections exist not for the benefit of judges, but for the People, whose right to neutral adjudication depends upon courts that are free from institutional bias and personal interest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The outline concludes with a discussion of the growing internationalization of the right to independent and impartial courts, drawing especially on the Nuremberg “Justice Case” as a benchmark. That case demonstrates that judicial neutrality is not merely a domestic procedural safeguard but a universal human right—and that nations betray this right when courts are structured in ways that compromise impartial adjudication of facts and law.
📜 About This Course [NACLE website]
This Continuing Legal Education (CLE) course traces the evolution of one of the most fundamental principles of American law: the right to a neutral judge and an independent court.
Beginning with the ancient maxim nemo judex in causa sua (“no one should be a judge in their own cause”), the program explores how this concept developed throughout English legal history — including the Magna Carta, the Act of Settlement of 1701, and the seminal writings of Montesquieu and Blackstone — before being incorporated into the U.S. Constitution.
Through a detailed analysis of key constitutional texts, early judicial precedents, and historical milestones such as the Judiciary Act of 1789, the program examines how structural protections for impartial adjudication became cornerstones of American constitutional design.
The course concludes with a discussion of early 20th-century due process decisions addressing judicial and institutional bias, culminating in the Nuremberg "Judges’ Trial," where judicial impartiality became a matter of international justice.
🎓 CLE/MCLE Credits Available for North American Lawyers, by State
The course is accredited for Continuing Legal Education (CLE/MCLE) in the following US states:
State CLE Credits
AL (Alabama) 1.5
ID (Idaho) 1.5
MO (Missouri) 1.8
MT (Montana) 1.5
ND (North Dakota) 1.5
NJ (New Jersey) 1.8
PA (Pennsylvania) 1.5
RI (Rhode Island) 1.5
UT (Utah) 1.5
VA (Virginia) 1.5
WI (Wisconsin) 1.5
WV (West Virginia) 1.8
WY (Wyoming) 1.5
📝 Registration and Access via NACLE
The NACLE (National Association of Continuing Legal Education) offers the course.
Who Can Register Anyone interested in law, justice, or related areas. It is not necessary to be a formally accredited lawyer, judge, or academic.
Access Requirement Create a free account on the NACLE website and pay the course fee (US$ 75).
University Students There is usually no automatic discount; it is recommended to check for promotions or contact NACLE support.
Guarantee your spot in this important legal and international debate: https://www.nacle.com/CLE/Courses/From-Ancient-Times-to-Nuremberg-The-Constitutional-Foundations-of-Judicial-Impar-2821/578
Global Importance and Target Audience
Target Audience:
Jurists and Law Professionals: lawyers, judges, and academics.
Pro Se Litigants: citizens who represent themselves and seek to deepen knowledge about due process.
Scholars of Comparative International Law.
Activists and Human Rights Defenders.
Engaged Citizens: anyone interested in knowing and defending their transconstitutional fundamental rights.
Why Participate:
The seminar addresses transnational principles of judicial impartiality and court independence — essential for global law and governance. The focus on the legacy of Nuremberg and contemporary challenges, such as the influence of financial elites and the ethical application of AI, makes the event indispensable for professionals and citizens engaged in constitutional and international justice.
REGISTER NOW :
https://www.nacle.com/CLE/Courses/From-Ancient-Times-to-Nuremberg-The-Constitutional-Foundations-of-Judicial-Impar-2821
more informations
https://vitimasfalsoscondominios.blogspot.com/2025/11/imperdivel-webinar-internacional.html
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário