I wish you were my lecturer/tutor and I'm so happy I found this account. You're so gifted at knowing how to explain things so concisely. Watching this has made Constitutional Law make so much more sense to me. I feel like some lecturers struggle to break down the subject in a way that's easy to learn and struggle to be as straightforward as you. If you ever taught again, your students would be so blessed to have someone like you.
Prudence May is there an Australian version of Marbury v. Madison (1803)?? In the US, it's the case that held the United States Constitution was the supreme law of the land, and any law passed in contrary to the constitution is null and void- from the very moment it was passed
Hi there FWJR88, Australia doesn't have an equivalent of Marbury v Madison, because the capacity of the High Court to determine the constitutionality of legislation is written directly into the constitution - our constitutional drafters were writing nearly 90 years after Marbury v Madison, and so M v M was quite influential on the shape of our constitution.
Thank you so much for being with me throughout my JD study journey at USQ for the past year. Your continuous support through the series of educational videos on your channel has been invaluable. You're truly an exceptional tutor and lecturer! Landing to year two and I have just kicked off the subject of Constitution Law.
Thank you Anthony, your two-hour youtube video has helped me understand this subject. It is very thorough and easy to understand (which is really important for a law student), the way you explain things are far more competent than my textbook and my lecture notes. You are a gem!
Hi Anthony! I just wanted to drop a comment here and thank you for taking the time to put this video together. I am currently a few days away from my Constitutional and Federation Law Exam and listening to your lecture here has made me feel a lot better about it. Really appreciate you uploading this and I look forward to watching more of your lectures!! Josie (SA)
Thank you again for another great overview of my current law subject. Love the case note videos too. If you are still producing 2 hour courses, I would love to see a property series! Namely 1) real property/conveyancing and 2) personal property. I think the 2nd would be especially useful, given the global shift in focus from tangible to intangible assets.
Thank you for a great series of videos. My last pass is a direct result of this video. Like most people who comment on your contributions to TH-cam, I am grateful and very appreciative to the effort and time you give up for us. Thank you.
You sir are a legend!! I'm in my third year of a BA Law & Arts, & Consitutional Law is currently the bane of my existence. I'm typically a Distinction-average student with a GPA that sits around 6, & I'm worried that Cons will ruin my academic streak!! So, I'm watching this video in the 2nd last week of the semester just before we break off for exams & I'm hopeful that your excellent teaching style will give me the knowledge & confidence to do well in my Cons exam - wish me luck! 😄
Where have you been? You are the best, I have my final exam in constitutional law tomorrow and was blank today as my lecturer is not as clear as you and in your 2 hours I’m confident about my exam tomorrow! ThankYou!!
Doctor Marinac, your videos are brilliant. Just wondering if you have thought of making videos particularly explaining Equity and Commercial Transactions? Thanks, Jose
Hello Mr. Marinac, I must say you are an awesome Tutor. Because of you I was able to get my head around Contract Law. If I had the opportunity, I would take the next flight to Australia, jump in to your class and stay untill I have graduated. Thanks for being on TH-cam!
That's my pleasure! I no longer teach in universities, but your flight wouldn't be wasted - you could watch TH-cam while sitting by a pristine beach :)
Thanks so much for your kind words, Mira. I miss teaching too! Who knows, some university might offer me a sessional gig at some point in time. Until then, I'm teaching right here :)
@@AnthsLawSchool Sorry I just saw the message, I've been busy with my exam and school stuff. Somehow you're still teaching through TH-cam, which is good. I will continue watching your videos and if I should have any questions I will certainly ask you 🙂
I just got accepted into a JD course so I'm watching your videos to give me a head-up on what to expect in law school next semester. I'm so glad I found your channel. Guess who's going to ace his studies now :-) ... hopefully. Thank you, Anthony and may "The Force be with you"! (See, I did learn something).
@@AnthsLawSchool Thanks for the encouragement. Already ahead of you on that, I watched most of it last night. I must admit that you make it sound so easy. I know its isn't, but you have certainly paved my path. Kudos to you Dr M!
Dear Anthony, Thank you and I love listening you as you are explaining everything very clear and appreciate your all wonderful work. THANK YOU and You are an excellent lecturer! You are very special:-) Your videos are extremely HELPFUL!!!!
I'm glad you think so, Ryan! I always appreciate signal boost though, so please do feel free to share on the student fb pages in your institution. And I always appreciate feedback! :)
Thank you, for your knowledge and your content it has truly helped me understand more of my subjects. Your teaching style is so relaxed allowing your followers to grasp everything! I look forward to more and more of your video!!!!
I appreciated your efforts to deliver this fantastic information. I have recently bought a copy of the 1901 Constitution. It would seem there are massive hole in our laws.
Hi there, glad you found it helpful! Bear in mind the constitution, on its own, only gets you so far. It's important to understand the surrounding common law, and the caselaw which has developed since federation. And to avoid the pontification of self-appointed experts who really aren't expert at all. Any time anyone starts off with the sovereign citizen nonsense, run! 🙂
2nd year law student here.. I've been doing okay with my law units but as soon as I started constitutional law it just wasn't staying in my head. I have an essay due about altering the constitution in a couple days that I was really struggling with and this video has helped me so much. Thank you kindly :)
Would you explain how a private company, owns, both the Liberal and Labor party names, so isn't the Australian corporate government a foreign entity in this country.
Thanks for taking the time to record and post the very important topic, particularly now that it is not taught at school. I am curious as to how the Federal Constitution works with State Constitutions. Also which versions are current?
Great video. I've been researching how to challenge a State law under sections 76 & 109 of the Federal Constitution. I've found s 40 of Judiciary Act but can't find any examples of the application to the court. How about making a video on the "procedure" of "how to" challenge State law under Federal Constitution in Australia?
It's a pretty rare thing for an ordinary person to do, which is why there aren't many examples out there. I think the Federal Court has dome decent materials available on constitutional application though, and the Federal Court is likely where such a challenge would begin.
I paused it at 49:42 with a smile on my face and I think by now I am confident that my lecture slides are useless and I am beginning to understand in much broader detail about our Consti.
The real problem is that most university lecturers are paid to chase grant money for research; teaching is very much a second class enterprise for them. Me, I love teaching! I'm really glad you found this helpful!
@@AnthsLawSchool to be honest I love how you gave an example with football and simplified it so it could be fun and learning subject. Your examples put me in a right place 🙌🏼 our teacher just reads the slides and explains the cases. I don't need that because that's my job when I get home, they seem to be forgetting how to teach. Like she covered corporation power and all the other heads of powers but never went beyond her knowledge to explain things the way yo you did sir 🙌🏼🙏 thank you for that. Please come to Griffith university Nathan and teach us 😊👏🏼
Your saying that the UK through its Westminster statutes Act gave up its power to rule over one of its territories so freely. Which effectively left the Australian Constitution to free ball in to the hands of the Australian Government. Making our Constitution null and void effectively, to be changed at Will mercilessly by a few in power to change laws at Will without referendum ??? Please explain??
No. The constitution is clearly not in the hands of the government, because it can only be changed by a referendum. There have never been any changes to the constitution without referendum.
Hi Anthony, do you have any videos or links to videos that would helpful for an assignment on the Covid-19 outbreak and the constitutional issues that would prevent the Commonwealth executive from imposing lengthy detentions?
Not really ... the main thing would be to look at the restrictions on the Commonwealth authorising civil conscription (but the states still have this power), and possibly the consideration of habeas corpus. But emergency powers are pretty strong, and almost certainly include COVID-19 detention. And the Commonwealth has a clear s.51 power over quarantine. Cheers Anthony
Anthony, I've just start watching your 2hr special. I'm curious to know how the power was gained, determined , authorised etc to enact the Australia Act in 86? There is alot of talk about the australia act withdrawing us from the 1901 constitution of which you are discussing.. and at the same time hoodwinking the Australian ppl to be governed under the corporate? Curious of your opinion on these issues especially during and after covid.. Cheers Will
I'm glad it's useful Maree! And I agree, the law should be something everyone has a chance to learn about, not just the select few who find themselves in law school. It's ALL of our constitution and ALL of our law. Enjoy!
@@AnthsLawSchool i have to ask.... isn't our current constitution illegal?? Never put to referendum or signed off by commonwealth?? The only REAL constitution we have is from 1901, is this correct??.
@@AnthsLawSchool As an individual that has been interested in how the legal system actually works in reality, listening to your video's has been a great learning experience, I have been wondering if someone who only finished year nine back in the late 70's has a chance to study law at university? Thank you.
Thank you so much you legend!! Would you be able to do a 2 hour class on equities and trusts please?! Preferably for Victoria but understandable if not as you're based in Qld! May the force be with you too!!!
Equity and Trusts is on the list ... I will get there eventually, although I have to say it's not a subject that interests me even slightly lol. Hopefully some time this year!
Wonderful resource. One suggestion: please change the chagrined female public servant being chastised by two men to a man, and at least one of the judges to a woman! I'm not being pedantic; this is practical and practicable. Thank you for a terrific overview. Surprisingly interesting!!!
Thanks very much. You can probably see that this video was posted almost five years ago, when I was still really working out what I was doing. Nowadays I am very careful about inclusivity: not all my folks are white, not all my couples are straight, not all my families are nuclear, not all my authority figures are men, and you will find people with disabilities who are not merely illustrated in the context of their disability. So I like to think I'm doing a lot better nowadays, but I take your point about this earlier video. Thanks for watching!
Dear Anthony, I am an avid video contracts a & b supporter in addition to the finding legislation special. Is there any chance that you could instruct a series on constitutional/corporations law? immense thank you best regards fans Marion from uni canberra
Hi Anthony, you refer to "The Australia Act 1986". My research on this act shows NO Royal ascent .. Have I missed something here? Obviously its invalid without it. thx.
Hi Richard, Unfortunately there is a lot of disinformation out there about the process of Royal Assent. Lots of folks carrying on with nonsense about the need to affix Royal Seals etc etc. None of these have stacked up in court. The Governor General (Sir Ninian Stephen) assented to the Australia Act on 4 Devember 1985. He did so in accordance with s.58 of the Constitution, which empowers him to do so. It was then reported in the Commonwealth Gazette on 14 January 1986 (on page 216, to be precise). All perfectly in order.
Re:2hr Constitutional Law. Loved your explanation on this subject. Clear, concise and easy to understand. Don't be afraid to mention the Liberal party (Howard gov) by name in relation to the work choices though, in order to provide balance. 👍😊
Thanks Nola. There's always a balance to be struck. I don't want to use the channel as my own personal political platform, but at the same time there's no point ignoring reality. You could be right, it might have been helpful for me to mention the Howard government by name, but hopefully that doesn't detract from the constitutional point :)
Hello Anthony! thank you so much for this video! but just a little advice, could u record with a mic or headphone next time? the volume is too small that i can hardly focus on the content. love your lecture!
Hi there, Maybe try a different device? The volume plays fine on mine. You will be happy to know though that I have upgraded my equipment a lot since then! :)
Hi all, I'm thinking of studying law in this coming year or so and was wondering if you have any book suggestions that would help me get a leg up in my studies before I get to them (Including relevant required texts). Any help would be great :)
'legal writing' Paula Bardon is good to get a head start on legal writing/thinking. Also 'principles of criminal law' Bronnit/McSherry good first year text
Hi Anthony, I know its too vast to put in a 2 hour video, but do you know where I could find lectures on Corporation law in Australia? Are you planning on doing any?
Thank you for your videos. I have found them so useful in helping me grasp the fundamental basics of these topics. I would like to ask a question if that's ok? Once the High Court has made a decision which creates a law, can that decision be overturned in future if the government passes a bill in parliament which conflicts with or contradicts the High Court decision?
Hi Vivian, I'm really glad the videos are helpful! The answer to your question is yes, absolutely. In fact sometimes the parliament will quite explicitly say in the legislation that a Bill is intended to overturn a specific High Court decision. Naturally though the new legislation will only be effective for disputes which occur AFTER the commencement date of the legislation. But parliamentary law is supreme over judge-made law, on the basis that the parliament is comprised of the elected representatives of the people, and the High Court is not :) Hope that answers your question! Cheers Anthony
robb is there no equivalent of Marbury v. Madison (1803) in Australia?? In the U.S., Supreme Court precedent is known as Case Law and legislative acts can not overturn
@robb...tin foil has come off your hat buddy...quick run.... the government will start reading your thoughts...probably already on their way to your cave.
Thank you very much for the information regarding the structure and design of the constitution. Now I must defend that although the US states it has rights to bare arms it's more implied that through a process that gets more difficult as time progresses to help protect the common citizen whilst not taking away their ability to defend themselves from say a an entire country filled with dangerous wild life or criminals who get guns anyways through organized crime
I am just a normal citizen not studying law, and I watched this because I am concerned about the overzealousness of the Federal and State governments in a time of crisis, slowly eroding our civil liberties and accumulating more power to themselves in the name of public health. So I wanted to know the constitution for myself.
Hi Ali, Gaudron J speculated about implied rights arising from the fundamental nature of the constitution as a democratic constitution, and I think there is some merit in that. The problem with sections 7 and 24 is that all they say is that there should be "voting" by "the people of the Commonwealth". There is no right that attaches to any individual person. So, for instance, for many years Aboriginal people were denied the vote. We still deny the vote to non-citizens, even if they have lived here for many years. We deny the vote to some prisoners, and to all children. So there doesn't appear to be a right, as such.
1:47:40, the states, strangely enough, didn't like to be blackmailed... Famous last words. Isn't the high court appointed by the commonwealth? Doesn't that make any challenge by the state biased?
20:17 I was thinking probably the most famous example of a Parliament sitting less than one per year was the German Reichstag during WWII (and it sat very seldom after the Enabling Act of 1933 was passed) which is certainly a precedent to avoid. Somewhat relevant to the constitutional discussion is that the last piece of legislation the Reichstag passed made the head of the legislature also the head of the judiciary, formally dissolving any semblance of separation of powers, handily illustrating why you'd want to keep powers separate.
Yes, there are many lessons from 1930s Germany about how even a modern constitution in a sophisticated nation can potentially get warped. The biggest lesson of all, of course, is that we must never assume that such things exist only in the past.
It became essentially two concurrent legislative regimes excercising the same power but deriving it from different sources. It's always fascinated me how through adherence with m&f requirements for amending the constitution they both drew their power from, and succeeded its limitations.
Hi Marco, hope you are staying safe and healthy over in Italy at the moment. Australia has a common law heritage based on English law, and in many ways they are very similar, but the Australian courts are free to develop the common law for Australia in ways that diverge from England. Cheers Anthony
Anthony Marinac thank you so much for answering . I m studying law in Italy and maybe I d like to get PhD in Australia . Anyway I m fine and safe here in Italy but the situation is problematic and tough . You in Australia ? Thank you
Just a question, which may sound a little stupid. I never got the chance to ask my lecturer this, but is it possible for the UK to repeal their Australian Act that sealed our independence from the UK? Of course, it would be unfavourable and not likely, but is it theoretically possible?
Hi there! It's an interesting question, but the answer is a pretty clear: even if the UK was to repeal the Australia Act, the effect would now be negligible. Under international law, Australia is regarded as a fully sovereign nation, fully responsible for its own constitutional affairs. If the UK tried to make legislation for Australia, the most likely reaction would be laughter. So they can potentially repeal the actual legislation, but its effect is well and truly permanent. Remember also that there is a counterpart Australia Act which was simultaneously passed in Australia in 1986, so repealing the UK Act would not repeal the Australian version. All the best with the rest of your studies!
📜🌏🕵🏻Sorry I will check it all out another day.🤗Thanks for this clip mate. As I am semi illiterate. I learn better with clips.✌️😇👍Will save it in one of my play list. I'm sure other people will find this interesting to
I agree with Annie, but "constitutional law" is about the underlying laws which establish our system of government, and which specify the powers held by various institutions of authority, and the limitations on those powers. I hope you found the video useful!
@@AnthsLawSchool Hi Anthony, yes I did find the video useful. I have the book in front of me and read it front to back numerous times. Also the process of setting up the constitution. Remember, the peoples didn't have to vote for the rule book, and not all did. How come it is now compulsory to vote? Cheers,
Thank you so much for this video. It is really a helpful one. I just want to ask about s51(xxxi). Can you please explain and enlighten me about it? How can you know if the provision of the Act valid/invalid under this section? Thank you!
Hi Ivy, Subsection xxxi protects people from having things acquired by the Commonwealth except on "just terms". Unfortunately this provides little protection. Any statutory scheme which involves the acquisition of property from people or states will be within power unless the compensation scheme is so unreasonable that no reasonable legislature could have devised the scheme. The last few words of the 5th Amendment to the US constitution have a similar effect but are much stronger.
Anthony Marinac Gawd bless 'Merica. Like us or love us ;-) we do have the strongest established individual rights and liberties as outlined in a Constitution. I watched this video out of curiosity (my background is entirely U.S. legal); is Case Law not prominent in the Australian system?? In the United States, the constitution is a fairly short document and nearly impossible to change, therefore we rely on supreme court decisions. Good video.
@@FlatWorld_Jomhuri_Regime the more Anthony explains the Constitution the more I realise the lies we were told and that the United States IS the land of the free. We closely resemble China as proven by our lockdown and oppression by Government.
A friend of mine took her infant child to hospital because she noticed a swelling on top of the childs head and a was told an immediate blood test was needed....while at the hospital a mandatory report to child safty sparked an immediate investigation...when the mother was questioned about the childs swelling the mother said she does not know what caused it....less then 30 minutes later the mother was told the department would be loseing guardian rights and was told to leave the hospital... for the next few months the department accused the mother of causing the childs condition/swelling.... ... ....the mother informed me that the medical records/blood test results would prove that she did nothing wrong but the department refused to let her access the childs medical records...... so i wont say how but i menaged to get a copy of the medical results from the blood test and they proved a blood imbalance caused the swelling.... ....however to this day child safty Refuse to discuss the results and case workers liturally just got up and walked of meetings and cut visitation when ever the mother mentioned it........ . .....My Question is - can the constitution be used to inforce child safty to acknowledge the medical test results.......... This has totally destroys her families life but nobody will listen...... ...any advice would be much appreciated...
This sounds like an awful situation, but I'm always really reluctant to comment on individual circumstances. I don't know, for instance, where all of this took place, so I don't know what the law is there. In Australia, any lawyer would be able to take steps in relation to a situation like this - there is a great deal of law around child protection and child removal. The bottom line is that your friend needs a lawyer.
@@AnthsLawSchool it all took place in QLD, the matters for placement went before Qcat and then court but i kid you not, the mother was basically denied her right to even address the childs medical test results that clearly show the blood imbalance was the cause of the swelling ( i didnt obtain a copy of the results untill after court has ended but in meetings the department refused to acknowledge the results as i mentioned they simply walked out of meetings ) Even when the mothers lawyer at the time of court tried to mention the hospitals test results the Department argued that the test results were not tended to the court and went on to say they will not be releasing such information...... but now time has passed and the mother has thd hospitals official test results the department still totally refuse to discuss it...
@@AnthsLawSchool was in Brisbane QLD Australia.... i know you will be thinking surly there is more to this and yes there is tho the main issue its the denial to address the hospitals test results. The mother is not a smoker or a drinker and definitely does not do drugs of any kind, she is a Trade Qualified Baker who has worked most of her adult life
Isn't the only legal constitution the one from 1901?? The one we have now has never been signed off by the commonwealth and not put to the people, therefor illegal??? Can you answer
No. That is complete and utter nonsense. I used to be a parliamantary officer. I have personally seen the very first constitution Act, signed by Queen Victoria in her own hand. I have seen her original signature on the document. It's the same constitution we have now, other than the amendments. The self-described "constitutional experts" who sprout this nonsense don't understand even the most fundamental and basis understanding of constitutional law.
@@burfollydurmak4826 look I am sorry if I am rude, but I get these messages about once a week and usually just delete them. For some reason this topic attracts self-appointed experts who are genuinely just tin-foil-hat-wearing morons. It gets wearing. If I have unfairly included you those, I apologise.
@@AnthsLawSchool i'm no expert, i'm 52 and not allowed to vote, so i really couldn't give #@×%. Hence i never follow politics. My brother is a crown court prosecuter, he's always dealing with this topic.. I have no interest at all in any of this rubbish.. i'm so sorry to have bothered you.. cheers
Victoria Australia, I just got attacked by police on private property(Bunnings carpark exercising my rights as a traveller to travel the rds as living being a sovereign being in common law & International human rights law & Commonwealth law. that & in my car without plates. I refused ID confirmation as no crime had occurred & there was no victim. I was just leaving the store in my car & the police blocked the exit from Bunnings trade area smashed my car window dragged me out for breaking no laws. My knee was damaged & car was impounded. I was not even driving on a Rd. Anyone got any ideas?
Yep. Obey the law. The sovereign citizen concept that a "driver" is a legal fiction and a "traveler" is a sovereign being exempt from the law is nothing but pure, unadulterated, idiotic nonsense sprouted by the ignorant (or by those cynically trying to rack up Facebook views). If you want to drive a car, register it. If the police ask you for ID, hand it over. You're not a "traveler", you're not a "sovereign citizen", you're subject to the law like the rest of us.
@@AnthsLawSchool l did, my car was impounded. Unlawfully. I was driving on private property. There is no law that I have signed up for that I am to be a muppet played by UNapt VERMIN UNLITERATES. It's only due to the majority that follow blindly laws manufactured by an UNJUST government. I don't vote never signed up for this CESSPIT of UNapts. I follow The 10 commandments & there's a couple of them I'm not sure we're translated properly. I don't vote for RETARDS. It's because of ppl like you the world is so FUKD! God created the UNIVERSE man created PETROL! I've been dead many a time are you ready Mr do as you told by UNapts. Are you ready to meet your maker? I asked for advice not an unread UNliterate compliant muppet of the system. We see how far that gets you on the other side. Much easier to suck dick instead of think about anything the man says. I mean the muppet. Is that good Law?
I wish you were my lecturer/tutor and I'm so happy I found this account. You're so gifted at knowing how to explain things so concisely. Watching this has made Constitutional Law make so much more sense to me.
I feel like some lecturers struggle to break down the subject in a way that's easy to learn and struggle to be as straightforward as you. If you ever taught again, your students would be so blessed to have someone like you.
Hi Chloe, happily I'm back teaching! Glad to be on the team at James Cook University :)
Thanks so much for your very kind words!
Cheers
Anthony
Thank you so so much for this! You’ve given me back my confidence in this subject and subsequently my degree. You truly have a gift for teaching!
Prudence May is there an Australian version of Marbury v. Madison (1803)?? In the US, it's the case that held the United States Constitution was the supreme law of the land, and any law passed in contrary to the constitution is null and void- from the very moment it was passed
Thanks so much Prudence! I hope your studies are going great!
Hi there FWJR88, Australia doesn't have an equivalent of Marbury v Madison, because the capacity of the High Court to determine the constitutionality of legislation is written directly into the constitution - our constitutional drafters were writing nearly 90 years after Marbury v Madison, and so M v M was quite influential on the shape of our constitution.
This isn't the 1st time I tried to study law... but christ I'm glad Ur youtube channel exists this time! Thank you sooooooooooooooooo much!
💞💖😍😘🥰💖💞
Thankyou for your time putting this together. You are a great teacher. Your students are lucky to have you
Thank you so much for being with me throughout my JD study journey at USQ for the past year. Your continuous support through the series of educational videos on your channel has been invaluable. You're truly an exceptional tutor and lecturer! Landing to year two and I have just kicked off the subject of Constitution Law.
Thanks so much for this video Anthony! You certainly have a talent for explaining things, appreciate you taking the time to make this :)
My pleasure Rebecca! Good luck with your studies!
You don't know how helpful this video has been to us. Thanks Anthony!
That's my pleasure Abdul. Good luck with your studies!
Every Australian should listen to this so they understand how things should work in theory.
Thanks very much mate - spread the word 😊
Thank you Anthony, your two-hour youtube video has helped me understand this subject. It is very thorough and easy to understand (which is really important for a law student), the way you explain things are far more competent than my textbook and my lecture notes. You are a gem!
I'm really glad you found it helpful Anny :)
Hi Anthony!
I just wanted to drop a comment here and thank you for taking the time to put this video together. I am currently a few days away from my Constitutional and Federation Law Exam and listening to your lecture here has made me feel a lot better about it. Really appreciate you uploading this and I look forward to watching more of your lectures!!
Josie (SA)
Hi Josie, thanks so much for your comment! Good luck in your exam ... and I will definitely keep them coming :-)
Make sure you study section 53
Thank you again for another great overview of my current law subject. Love the case note videos too. If you are still producing 2 hour courses, I would love to see a property series! Namely 1) real property/conveyancing and 2) personal property. I think the 2nd would be especially useful, given the global shift in focus from tangible to intangible assets.
Thank you for a great series of videos.
My last pass is a direct result of this video. Like most people who comment on your contributions to TH-cam, I am grateful and very appreciative to the effort and time you give up for us.
Thank you.
So glad to help KD. Well done on getting through Constitutional :)
You sir are a legend!! I'm in my third year of a BA Law & Arts, & Consitutional Law is currently the bane of my existence. I'm typically a Distinction-average student with a GPA that sits around 6, & I'm worried that Cons will ruin my academic streak!! So, I'm watching this video in the 2nd last week of the semester just before we break off for exams & I'm hopeful that your excellent teaching style will give me the knowledge & confidence to do well in my Cons exam - wish me luck! 😄
How'd you go?
@@Asme1111-t8h I got 83% on my final exam & 85% overall 🥹🥹
You are wonderful dear Dr. Marinac!
Mr Marinac thank you for taking the time to make these videos. They are very informative and made easy to digest. I’m glad I found this channel.
Thanks so much, Jim. I'm glad the material has been helpful!
Where have you been? You are the best, I have my final exam in constitutional law tomorrow and was blank today as my lecturer is not as clear as you and in your 2 hours I’m confident about my exam tomorrow! ThankYou!!
Watched this the day of my exam - beautiful overview to ready me for a big big subject. Thankyou!
Outstanding! Good luck with your results, I'd love to hear how you go :)
I scored 73 for the unit. I was delighted, given I had floundered in the assignment so I must have nailed the exam!
You little ripper! Only a couple of marks shy of a distinction. Well done you!!!
I think I really should be paying you $5000 instead of wasting it on my lecturer. Thank heaps, SIR MARINAC!!
No worries mate! :)
Doctor Marinac, your videos are brilliant. Just wondering if you have thought of making videos particularly explaining Equity and Commercial Transactions?
Thanks,
Jose
I'll take it if you don't want it.
@robb....I'm guessing you're an active member of the Flat Earth Society!
This is helping me kcik start my exam review. Thank you. Very summarised and helpful.
1:55:30, the design of the constitution is actually pretty good. Why have a constitution that is easy to change...?
Hello Mr. Marinac,
I must say you are an awesome Tutor. Because of you I was able to get my head around Contract Law. If I had the opportunity, I would take the next flight to Australia, jump in to your class and stay untill I have graduated.
Thanks for being on TH-cam!
That's my pleasure! I no longer teach in universities, but your flight wouldn't be wasted - you could watch TH-cam while sitting by a pristine beach :)
@@AnthsLawSchool
It's a shame you don't teach any longer, but I will still be your great follower on TH-cam and take you as a mentor 🙂
Thanks so much for your kind words, Mira. I miss teaching too! Who knows, some university might offer me a sessional gig at some point in time. Until then, I'm teaching right here :)
@@AnthsLawSchool Sorry I just saw the message, I've been busy with my exam and school stuff. Somehow you're still teaching through TH-cam, which is good. I will continue watching your videos and if I should have any questions I will certainly ask you 🙂
By all means! Always glad to help :)
I just got accepted into a JD course so I'm watching your videos to give me a head-up on what to expect in law school next semester. I'm so glad I found your channel. Guess who's going to ace his studies now :-) ... hopefully. Thank you, Anthony and may "The Force be with you"! (See, I did learn something).
That's great Sam! You may also want to check out my "Law School Prep" video ... chock full of useful tips! All the best for your study!
@@AnthsLawSchool Thanks for the encouragement. Already ahead of you on that, I watched most of it last night. I must admit that you make it sound so easy. I know its isn't, but you have certainly paved my path.
Kudos to you Dr M!
Dear Anthony, Thank you and I love listening you as you are explaining everything very clear and appreciate your all wonderful work. THANK YOU and You are an excellent lecturer! You are very special:-) Your videos are extremely HELPFUL!!!!
Thanks so much Meryem! :)
My lecturer started talking about soccer and tried to use it as an examples 🤦♀️ this is so much better thanks
Thanks so much Anthony. Have not watched but saved for later in the week. Your work is priceless.
I'm glad you think so, Ryan! I always appreciate signal boost though, so please do feel free to share on the student fb pages in your institution. And I always appreciate feedback! :)
Anthony Marinac consider it done. 👍👍
Thank you, for your knowledge and your content it has truly helped me understand more of my subjects. Your teaching style is so relaxed allowing your followers to grasp everything! I look forward to more and more of your video!!!!
That's wonderful feedback, thanks Alan!
I appreciated your efforts to deliver this fantastic information. I have recently bought a copy of the 1901 Constitution. It would seem there are massive hole in our laws.
Hi there, glad you found it helpful! Bear in mind the constitution, on its own, only gets you so far. It's important to understand the surrounding common law, and the caselaw which has developed since federation. And to avoid the pontification of self-appointed experts who really aren't expert at all. Any time anyone starts off with the sovereign citizen nonsense, run! 🙂
Thank you for taking time to produce these videos much appreciated keep up the great work!
This is incredible and couldn't thank you enough for creating these
Thanks so much for your kind words - and you're welcome!
2nd year law student here.. I've been doing okay with my law units but as soon as I started constitutional law it just wasn't staying in my head. I have an essay due about altering the constitution in a couple days that I was really struggling with and this video has helped me so much. Thank you kindly :)
You're very welcome! I hope you nailed the essay :-)
I love you! Thank you! I’m thinking of studying law and you are helping me get ready.
Thanks Alaina! There's also a two hour law school prep course video on my channel that might help you too 😊
Would you explain how a private company, owns, both the Liberal and Labor party names, so isn't the Australian corporate government a foreign entity in this country.
Listened to every word of these 2 hours. thank you VM
You're very welcome!
Thank you so much! This really did help and gave me a good base to get started with my revision. You are a true legend!
You're very welcome Charlie!
Thank you so much for this video! You are such an engaging tutor, breaking things down simple and understandable. HUGE help for pre-exam study :)
My pleasure Courtney! Very best of luck with your exam :)
Can you please make a video of Property Law in 2 hours ? Would be very helpful as you explain concepts so well!
I'll put it on the list!
I agree, I'm studying property law and struggling!!
Thank you so much! This has been so helpful :)
Thanks for taking the time to record and post the very important topic, particularly now that it is not taught at school.
I am curious as to how the Federal Constitution works with State Constitutions.
Also which versions are current?
Great video. I've been researching how to challenge a State law under sections 76 & 109 of the Federal Constitution. I've found s 40 of Judiciary Act but can't find any examples of the application to the court.
How about making a video on the "procedure" of "how to" challenge State law under Federal Constitution in Australia?
It's a pretty rare thing for an ordinary person to do, which is why there aren't many examples out there. I think the Federal Court has dome decent materials available on constitutional application though, and the Federal Court is likely where such a challenge would begin.
Thank you for taking time and doing this video; love your teaching. God bless 🙏
You are so welcome :)
I paused it at 49:42 with a smile on my face and I think by now I am confident that my lecture slides are useless and I am beginning to understand in much broader detail about our Consti.
The real problem is that most university lecturers are paid to chase grant money for research; teaching is very much a second class enterprise for them. Me, I love teaching! I'm really glad you found this helpful!
@@AnthsLawSchool to be honest I love how you gave an example with football and simplified it so it could be fun and learning subject. Your examples put me in a right place 🙌🏼 our teacher just reads the slides and explains the cases. I don't need that because that's my job when I get home, they seem to be forgetting how to teach. Like she covered corporation power and all the other heads of powers but never went beyond her knowledge to explain things the way yo you did sir 🙌🏼🙏 thank you for that. Please come to Griffith university Nathan and teach us 😊👏🏼
Your saying that the UK through its Westminster statutes Act gave up its power to rule over one of its territories so freely. Which effectively left the Australian Constitution to free ball in to the hands of the Australian Government. Making our Constitution null and void effectively, to be changed at Will mercilessly by a few in power to change laws at Will without referendum ???
Please explain??
No. The constitution is clearly not in the hands of the government, because it can only be changed by a referendum. There have never been any changes to the constitution without referendum.
I live in the northern Territory! So could u please touch the subject of the differences between state & Territory laws & powers?
Hi Anthony, do you have any videos or links to videos that would helpful for an assignment on the Covid-19 outbreak and the constitutional issues that would prevent the Commonwealth executive from imposing lengthy detentions?
Not really ... the main thing would be to look at the restrictions on the Commonwealth authorising civil conscription (but the states still have this power), and possibly the consideration of habeas corpus. But emergency powers are pretty strong, and almost certainly include COVID-19 detention. And the Commonwealth has a clear s.51 power over quarantine.
Cheers
Anthony
Assignment .. yer ok...🤣
His answer lost respect and interest.
Good question.
Terrible answer by the “lecturer”
Going to come down to the legislation they're acting under, what head under 51 act was enacted, sort of turns on what detention means
Anthony, I've just start watching your 2hr special. I'm curious to know how the power was gained, determined , authorised etc to enact the Australia Act in 86? There is alot of talk about the australia act withdrawing us from the 1901 constitution of which you are discussing.. and at the same time hoodwinking the Australian ppl to be governed under the corporate? Curious of your opinion on these issues especially during and after covid.. Cheers Will
Thank you and I will keep watching this. It’s good to know our rights and so important to learn it.
I'm glad it's useful Maree! And I agree, the law should be something everyone has a chance to learn about, not just the select few who find themselves in law school. It's ALL of our constitution and ALL of our law. Enjoy!
@@AnthsLawSchool i have to ask.... isn't our current constitution illegal??
Never put to referendum or signed off by commonwealth??
The only REAL constitution we have is from 1901, is this correct??.
@@AnthsLawSchool As an individual that has been interested in how the legal system actually works in reality, listening to your video's has been a great learning experience, I have been wondering if someone who only finished year nine back in the late 70's has a chance to study law at university?
Thank you.
Thank you for your time.
My pleasure!
Finally! Our own version of BILL NYE the science guy for the school of law recognised as MARINAC, the law guy! Many Thanks
LOL high praise indeed! Thanks Sarah!
Anthony Thank you Sir I've a better understanding of the constitution.
Thank you so much you legend!! Would you be able to do a 2 hour class on equities and trusts please?! Preferably for Victoria but understandable if not as you're based in Qld! May the force be with you too!!!
Equity and Trusts is on the list ... I will get there eventually, although I have to say it's not a subject that interests me even slightly lol. Hopefully some time this year!
@@AnthsLawSchool thank you!! Completely understandable I don't think the topic will interest me either but I gotta do what I gotta do 🤣
the most important document on our land ,with some serious backing..... Cheers for this..
You're very welcome Naomi :)
Interesting and informative. Thank you very much!
My pleasure!
Wonderful resource. One suggestion: please change the chagrined female public servant being chastised by two men to a man, and at least one of the judges to a woman! I'm not being pedantic; this is practical and practicable. Thank you for a terrific overview. Surprisingly interesting!!!
Thanks very much. You can probably see that this video was posted almost five years ago, when I was still really working out what I was doing. Nowadays I am very careful about inclusivity: not all my folks are white, not all my couples are straight, not all my families are nuclear, not all my authority figures are men, and you will find people with disabilities who are not merely illustrated in the context of their disability. So I like to think I'm doing a lot better nowadays, but I take your point about this earlier video.
Thanks for watching!
1:42:00, that is interesting, regarding preferential treatment. How about distributing GST? WA gets a 0.70 on the dollar.
Thank you Anthony! Really useful stuff.
Cheers
You're very welcome!
Dear Anthony, I am an avid video contracts a & b supporter in addition to the finding legislation special. Is there any chance that you could instruct a series on constitutional/corporations law? immense thank you
best regards
fans Marion from uni canberra
Hi Imani, I will definitely get to Corporations eventually - for now though there are some great corporations case notes on my channel :)
Hi Anthony, you refer to "The Australia Act 1986". My research on this act shows NO Royal ascent .. Have I missed something here? Obviously its invalid without it. thx.
Hi Richard,
Unfortunately there is a lot of disinformation out there about the process of Royal Assent. Lots of folks carrying on with nonsense about the need to affix Royal Seals etc etc. None of these have stacked up in court.
The Governor General (Sir Ninian Stephen) assented to the Australia Act on 4 Devember 1985. He did so in accordance with s.58 of the Constitution, which empowers him to do so. It was then reported in the Commonwealth Gazette on 14 January 1986 (on page 216, to be precise).
All perfectly in order.
@@AnthsLawSchool thx looks like I have some reading to do.
Thanks so much! Great succinct refresh the day of my exam!
Glad it was helpful!
Such a fantastic video and a difficult topic, thank you
Glad it was helpful!
Re:2hr Constitutional Law.
Loved your explanation on this subject. Clear, concise and easy to understand. Don't be afraid to mention the Liberal party (Howard gov) by name in relation to the work choices though, in order to provide balance. 👍😊
Thanks Nola. There's always a balance to be struck. I don't want to use the channel as my own personal political platform, but at the same time there's no point ignoring reality. You could be right, it might have been helpful for me to mention the Howard government by name, but hopefully that doesn't detract from the constitutional point :)
absolutely awesome thank you, love ya guts mate, Aussie law student Tessxxx
The planting of the seeds Shelby as military and by the generation of regrowth towards the point of target for the generator battery
Thank you so much again. By the way you last 2 videos on tort law and contract law had helped me alot in exam. Thank you again
My pleasure, well done!
Hello Anthony! thank you so much for this video! but just a little advice, could u record with a mic or headphone next time? the volume is too small that i can hardly focus on the content. love your lecture!
Hi there,
Maybe try a different device? The volume plays fine on mine. You will be happy to know though that I have upgraded my equipment a lot since then! :)
@@AnthsLawSchool thank you Anthony!
@@chonglouis3615 the adds blasted out loud just fine tho.. 🤣🤣
Can you please posted a lecture about Equity?
It's on the list ... eventually 😁
very much appreciate your help.
My pleasure Ryan, glad you found it useful!
Hi all,
I'm thinking of studying law in this coming year or so and was wondering if you have any book suggestions that would help me get a leg up in my studies before I get to them (Including relevant required texts). Any help would be great :)
'legal writing' Paula Bardon is good to get a head start on legal writing/thinking.
Also 'principles of criminal law' Bronnit/McSherry good first year text
Would it be rude of me to plug my own book, "Learning Law", published by Cambridge University Press?
A Trust law in 2 hours would be great too!
Hi Anthony, I know its too vast to put in a 2 hour video, but do you know where I could find lectures on Corporation law in Australia? Are you planning on doing any?
Hi Ryan, Corporations is definitely on my list. I'm not aware of any offhand so I'd only be googling. Good luck though!
Anthony Marinac I’ll wait for yours to come out.
You are a legend. Thank you so so much for making this video!
You're very welcome, Emmaline!
You are an amazing lecturer. Tnx a lot
My pleasure! :-)
Amazing Information
Glad you think so!
Thanks to your help！
Australian constitution 121, 122-123
I apologise for my familiar arty.
.
Thank you Dr Anthony Marinac
🙂🙂
1.2
This was really helpful - thanks!
Glad it was helpful!
... it's just the vibe ...
It's mabo, it's the vibe ...
Thank you for your videos. I have found them so useful in helping me grasp the fundamental basics of these topics. I would like to ask a question if that's ok? Once the High Court has made a decision which creates a law, can that decision be overturned in future if the government passes a bill in parliament which conflicts with or contradicts the High Court decision?
Hi Vivian, I'm really glad the videos are helpful!
The answer to your question is yes, absolutely. In fact sometimes the parliament will quite explicitly say in the legislation that a Bill is intended to overturn a specific High Court decision.
Naturally though the new legislation will only be effective for disputes which occur AFTER the commencement date of the legislation. But parliamentary law is supreme over judge-made law, on the basis that the parliament is comprised of the elected representatives of the people, and the High Court is not :) Hope that answers your question!
Cheers
Anthony
@robb Bob Hawk etal removed the appeal process to the Privvy council in the 80's I think. . .so High Court of Australia is it.
robb is there no equivalent of Marbury v. Madison (1803) in Australia?? In the U.S., Supreme Court precedent is known as Case Law and legislative acts can not overturn
@robb...tin foil has come off your hat buddy...quick run.... the government will start reading your thoughts...probably already on their way to your cave.
Thank you very much for the information regarding the structure and design of the constitution. Now I must defend that although the US states it has rights to bare arms it's more implied that through a process that gets more difficult as time progresses to help protect the common citizen whilst not taking away their ability to defend themselves from say a an entire country filled with dangerous wild life or criminals who get guns anyways through organized crime
What a great video, very helpful!
Glad it was helpful!
I am just a normal citizen not studying law, and I watched this because I am concerned about the overzealousness of the Federal and State governments in a time of crisis, slowly eroding our civil liberties and accumulating more power to themselves in the name of public health. So I wanted to know the constitution for myself.
I hope this helped. The real challenge will be as the crisis ends, to ensure that all civil liberties are properly returned.
@@AnthsLawSchool you know that's not going to happen.
Thank you so much!
You're most welcome!
What about the implied right to vote (ss 7 and 24?)
Hi Ali, Gaudron J speculated about implied rights arising from the fundamental nature of the constitution as a democratic constitution, and I think there is some merit in that. The problem with sections 7 and 24 is that all they say is that there should be "voting" by "the people of the Commonwealth". There is no right that attaches to any individual person. So, for instance, for many years Aboriginal people were denied the vote. We still deny the vote to non-citizens, even if they have lived here for many years. We deny the vote to some prisoners, and to all children. So there doesn't appear to be a right, as such.
This all seems civil and peaceful. How it was made and obtained is a different story
Well, if you are talking about Indigenous Australians, that is true, and there are other videos on my channel specifically dealing with this issue.
1:47:40, the states, strangely enough, didn't like to be blackmailed... Famous last words. Isn't the high court appointed by the commonwealth? Doesn't that make any challenge by the state biased?
20:17 I was thinking probably the most famous example of a Parliament sitting less than one per year was the German Reichstag during WWII (and it sat very seldom after the Enabling Act of 1933 was passed) which is certainly a precedent to avoid. Somewhat relevant to the constitutional discussion is that the last piece of legislation the Reichstag passed made the head of the legislature also the head of the judiciary, formally dissolving any semblance of separation of powers, handily illustrating why you'd want to keep powers separate.
Yes, there are many lessons from 1930s Germany about how even a modern constitution in a sophisticated nation can potentially get warped. The biggest lesson of all, of course, is that we must never assume that such things exist only in the past.
It became essentially two concurrent legislative regimes excercising the same power but deriving it from different sources. It's always fascinated me how through adherence with m&f requirements for amending the constitution they both drew their power from, and succeeded its limitations.
I m italian I know nothing about Australian law so I ask you how much different is common law in England and in Australia ?
Hi Marco, hope you are staying safe and healthy over in Italy at the moment. Australia has a common law heritage based on English law, and in many ways they are very similar, but the Australian courts are free to develop the common law for Australia in ways that diverge from England.
Cheers
Anthony
Anthony Marinac thank you so much for answering . I m studying law in Italy and maybe I d like to get PhD in Australia . Anyway I m fine and safe here in Italy but the situation is problematic and tough . You in Australia ? Thank you
Thanks a lot you enlighten us, my ALLAH blessed you
You're very welcome, and I'm glad you found these materials helpful.
Just a question, which may sound a little stupid. I never got the chance to ask my lecturer this, but is it possible for the UK to repeal their Australian Act that sealed our independence from the UK? Of course, it would be unfavourable and not likely, but is it theoretically possible?
Hi there! It's an interesting question, but the answer is a pretty clear: even if the UK was to repeal the Australia Act, the effect would now be negligible. Under international law, Australia is regarded as a fully sovereign nation, fully responsible for its own constitutional affairs. If the UK tried to make legislation for Australia, the most likely reaction would be laughter. So they can potentially repeal the actual legislation, but its effect is well and truly permanent. Remember also that there is a counterpart Australia Act which was simultaneously passed in Australia in 1986, so repealing the UK Act would not repeal the Australian version. All the best with the rest of your studies!
Australia is still part of the Crown. The Queen of England is the Head of State. Tho they mostly allow Oz to its own devices.
📜🌏🕵🏻Sorry I will check it all out another day.🤗Thanks for this clip mate. As I am semi illiterate. I learn better with clips.✌️😇👍Will save it in one of my play list. I'm sure other people will find this interesting to
What do you mean by "constitutional law" ? is it reading and understanding the constitution?
This makes more sense if you're studying a law degree
I agree with Annie, but "constitutional law" is about the underlying laws which establish our system of government, and which specify the powers held by various institutions of authority, and the limitations on those powers. I hope you found the video useful!
@@AnthsLawSchool Hi Anthony, yes I did find the video useful. I have the book in front of me and read it front to back numerous times. Also the process of setting up the constitution. Remember, the peoples didn't have to vote for the rule book, and not all did. How come it is now compulsory to vote?
Cheers,
@@AnthsLawSchool knowing some of those limitations of powers would be extremely handy right now, especially regarding our public health officials. 🤔
Thank you so much for this video. It is really a helpful one. I just want to ask about s51(xxxi). Can you please explain and enlighten me about it? How can you know if the provision of the Act valid/invalid under this section? Thank you!
Hi Ivy,
Subsection xxxi protects people from having things acquired by the Commonwealth except on "just terms". Unfortunately this provides little protection. Any statutory scheme which involves the acquisition of property from people or states will be within power unless the compensation scheme is so unreasonable that no reasonable legislature could have devised the scheme. The last few words of the 5th Amendment to the US constitution have a similar effect but are much stronger.
@@AnthsLawSchool Thank you so much. :)
@@AnthsLawSchool in other words Border Force can take your stuff and there is nothing you can do about it.
Anthony Marinac Gawd bless 'Merica. Like us or love us ;-) we do have the strongest established individual rights and liberties as outlined in a Constitution.
I watched this video out of curiosity (my background is entirely U.S. legal); is Case Law not prominent in the Australian system?? In the United States, the constitution is a fairly short document and nearly impossible to change, therefore we rely on supreme court decisions. Good video.
@@FlatWorld_Jomhuri_Regime the more Anthony explains the Constitution the more I realise the lies we were told and that the United States IS the land of the free. We closely resemble China as proven by our lockdown and oppression by Government.
Love it 💕❣️
Thanks Shirley!
Note final layer of negative battery is the implanting of q seeds tomato and banana seeds
A friend of mine took her infant child to hospital because she noticed a swelling on top of the childs head and a was told an immediate blood test was needed....while at the hospital a mandatory report to child safty sparked an immediate investigation...when the mother was questioned about the childs swelling the mother said she does not know what caused it....less then 30 minutes later the mother was told the department would be loseing guardian rights and was told to leave the hospital... for the next few months the department accused the mother of causing the childs condition/swelling....
... ....the mother informed me that the medical records/blood test results would prove that she did nothing wrong but the department refused to let her access the childs medical records...... so i wont say how but i menaged to get a copy of the medical results from the blood test and they proved a blood imbalance caused the swelling....
....however to this day child safty Refuse to discuss the results and case workers liturally just got up and walked of meetings and cut visitation when ever the mother mentioned it........ .
.....My Question is - can the constitution be used to inforce child safty to acknowledge the medical test results..........
This has totally destroys her families life but nobody will listen......
...any advice would be much appreciated...
This sounds like an awful situation, but I'm always really reluctant to comment on individual circumstances. I don't know, for instance, where all of this took place, so I don't know what the law is there. In Australia, any lawyer would be able to take steps in relation to a situation like this - there is a great deal of law around child protection and child removal. The bottom line is that your friend needs a lawyer.
@@AnthsLawSchool it all took place in QLD, the matters for placement went before Qcat and then court but i kid you not, the mother was basically denied her right to even address the childs medical test results that clearly show the blood imbalance was the cause of the swelling ( i didnt obtain a copy of the results untill after court has ended but in meetings the department refused to acknowledge the results as i mentioned they simply walked out of meetings ) Even when the mothers lawyer at the time of court tried to mention the hospitals test results the Department argued that the test results were not tended to the court and went on to say they will not be releasing such information...... but now time has passed and the mother has thd hospitals official test results the department still totally refuse to discuss it...
@@AnthsLawSchool was in Brisbane QLD Australia.... i know you will be thinking surly there is more to this and yes there is tho the main issue its the denial to address the hospitals test results. The mother is not a smoker or a drinker and definitely does not do drugs of any kind, she is a Trade Qualified Baker who has worked most of her adult life
super stuff as usual
Thanks Nick!
Thanks so much mate bloody awesome
Reallt glad you thought so :)
Please I need your help.
🙏🙏🙏
love ur work! thanku!
My pleasure! Thanks for your enthusiasm!
Isn't the only legal constitution the one from 1901??
The one we have now has never been signed off by the commonwealth and not put to the people, therefor illegal??? Can you answer
No. That is complete and utter nonsense. I used to be a parliamantary officer. I have personally seen the very first constitution Act, signed by Queen Victoria in her own hand. I have seen her original signature on the document. It's the same constitution we have now, other than the amendments.
The self-described "constitutional experts" who sprout this nonsense don't understand even the most fundamental and basis understanding of constitutional law.
@@AnthsLawSchool wow sorry to ask...
Read YOUR own answer.....
Wow, how rude.
@@burfollydurmak4826 look I am sorry if I am rude, but I get these messages about once a week and usually just delete them. For some reason this topic attracts self-appointed experts who are genuinely just tin-foil-hat-wearing morons. It gets wearing. If I have unfairly included you those, I apologise.
@@AnthsLawSchool i'm no expert, i'm 52 and not allowed to vote, so i really couldn't give #@×%.
Hence i never follow politics.
My brother is a crown court prosecuter, he's always dealing with this topic..
I have no interest at all in any of this rubbish.. i'm so sorry to have bothered you.. cheers
Victoria Australia, I just got attacked by police on private property(Bunnings carpark exercising my rights as a traveller to travel the rds as living being a sovereign being in common law & International human rights law & Commonwealth law. that & in my car without plates. I refused ID confirmation as no crime had occurred & there was no victim. I was just leaving the store in my car & the police blocked the exit from Bunnings trade area smashed my car window dragged me out for breaking no laws. My knee was damaged & car was impounded. I was not even driving on a Rd. Anyone got any ideas?
Yep. Obey the law. The sovereign citizen concept that a "driver" is a legal fiction and a "traveler" is a sovereign being exempt from the law is nothing but pure, unadulterated, idiotic nonsense sprouted by the ignorant (or by those cynically trying to rack up Facebook views).
If you want to drive a car, register it. If the police ask you for ID, hand it over. You're not a "traveler", you're not a "sovereign citizen", you're subject to the law like the rest of us.
@@AnthsLawSchool l did, my car was impounded. Unlawfully. I was driving on private property. There is no law that I have signed up for that I am to be a muppet played by UNapt VERMIN UNLITERATES. It's only due to the majority that follow blindly laws manufactured by an UNJUST government. I don't vote never signed up for this CESSPIT of UNapts. I follow The 10 commandments & there's a couple of them I'm not sure we're translated properly. I don't vote for RETARDS. It's because of ppl like you the world is so FUKD! God created the UNIVERSE man created PETROL!
I've been dead many a time are you ready Mr do as you told by UNapts. Are you ready to meet your maker? I asked for advice not an unread UNliterate compliant muppet of the system. We see how far that gets you on the other side. Much easier to suck dick instead of think about anything the man says. I mean the muppet. Is that good Law?