By distinguishing Torts (נזקין) and Capital Crimes (דיני נפשות) as the two pillars of tzedek, this Mishnaic distinction between types of damages — strives to restore equilibrium through compensation — and capital cases — which restore rectification of moral disorder through the mitzva of the death penalty. Both operate laterally, not under a state control – no state-paid judges or prosecutors an essential protection from State imposed bribery.

Bribery of court officers by the State or others, severs judicial independence from royal or powerful wealthy individuals as well as from corrupt bureaucratic control. Uprooting bribery preserves the oath brit Torah Constitutionally established alliance which originally created the identity of the chosen Cohen people and defines the integrity of this people as well as their culture and customs social identities.

The idea of national legal insurance to maintain the courts salary economics’ & readiness to pursue fair compensation of damages inflicted by our People upon our own People, without turning justice into a revenue stream, separates Sanhedrin courtroom common law from all other legal systems in all recorded human history. When no cases arise, the system rests — pure potentiality, like the Mishkan between sacrifices; the National legal insurance premiums which the People pay into maintains court economic budget requirements independent from taxes paid to the State.

So tzedek becomes the procedural muscle of the brit oath Torah Constitutional alliance — ensuring that when the trust foundations of shalom, when breached through damages, that Judicial restoration of justice repairs the shattered bridges of trust among and between the chosen Cohen people.

This model views the Sanhedrin Courts, not comparable to the American “supreme court”. The latter court system, besides not being a Common law court system, does not have the Constitutional mandate to conduct ‘Legislative Review/משנה תורה over law imposed by statute decrees either from Congress or the President or both. Sanhedrin courts, as a constitutional trust court, maintains the rhythm of justice, something like Levitical guardianship educates the People in פרדס inductive logic reasoning, absolutely essential to operate Torah common law legalism. משנה תורה courtroom justice, neither legislative nor executive, despite the rule of both “other” branches of Torah governance which directs the destiny walk wherein the Cohen people walk before our God unto eternity.

After centuries of persecution culminating in the Shoah, the Christian world’s post-war moral posturing, utterly porn addiction obscenity. All European civilizations drenched in the stink of theological antisemitism, and has absolutely no shame whatsoever to then thereafter preach “love” and “forgiveness,”… what utter and complete farcical bunk, the same rhetoric that sanctified crusades, inquisitions, ghettos, and forced conversions.

Fundamental hypocrisy: the language of virtue that never produced justice. The Church spoke of agape and “truth,” yet weaponized both to erase Jewish life and covenantal sovereignty. Luther’s venom, the Church’s complicity with Nazi ideology, the theft of Jewish children — these were not aberrations but expressions of a theology that replaced brit with creed, obedience with domination. The vile Xtian system that rants continuously, broke record matra – of “grace”, while annihilating the Jewish people who first articulated divine law as moral obligation – words fail to express the utter contempt that this trash deserves.

The record of Christian Europe toward Jews is horrific and the hypocrisy of post-war rhetoric – just utterly gross to behold. Beyond ugly. The same civilization that preached redemption used its theology to de-humanize the people of the eternal Cohen oath brit alliance. “Grace” and “love” became ideological weapons once they were detached from justice and the sanctity of oath – which no Xtian believer ever learned much less so taught to their children.

Post-Shoah declarations of forgiveness ring hollow because no serious reckoning with that betrayal has ever been made for the crime of “By their fruits you shall know them”. When a culture builds its self-image around “grace” yet never submits to tzedek, it empties its own words. The Church’s post-Shoah apologies, however elaborate, rarely included a genuine juridical or covenantal reckoning — no confession before the people it harmed, no restitution, no education of its children in the full weight of that guilt.

“By their fruits you shall know them” is the exact measure: centuries of violence, humiliation, and theft were the fruit of that theology. The root failure was substituting creed for oath, belief for responsibility. Without a brit — a binding relationship of justice and trust — “love” becomes mere aesthetic sentiment, and “forgiveness” becomes moral amnesia.

In summation: A civilization that builds its self-image around “grace” yet never submits to tzedek hollows out its own words. The Church’s post-Shoah apologies—however elaborate—have lacked any true juridical or covenantal reckoning: no confession before the people it wronged, no restitution, no education of its heirs in the weight of inherited guilt. “By their fruits you shall know them” remains the decisive test; the fruit of that theology was centuries of violence, humiliation, and theft. Its root failure lay in replacing oath with creed, responsibility with belief. Severed from brit, “love” degenerates into aesthetic sentiment, and “forgiveness” into moral amnesia.

Connecting collective memory to national law is fascinating, particularly in the context of how foundational concepts like brit and nomos interact. Both underscore the idea that law is rooted in shared values and trust within a community rather than mere coercion. The discussion around empathy and its effects on justice, equally compelling. It seems that you highlight the delicate balance between understanding individual circumstances and ensuring impartiality in judgment?

The echo of צדק צדק תרדוף resonates strongly with me. It emphasizes the pursuit of justice, not just as an abstract principle of statute law legislative dominance, but that the courts possess a Constitutional mandate to review law decreed through legislatures? Do you favor the Courts having the dominance of Legislative review over statute Legislative and Executive Branches of Central government? Does Court dominance of Legislative Review equally investigate Central Banks like the 1913 established Federal Reserve Central Banking monopoly?

A crucial hinge in constitutional philosophy: whether justice (tzedek) derives from statute (the will of the legislature) or from Judicial common law brit-based precedent and interpretive review by courts. In terms of the brit, that it stands upon the oaths sworn by the Avot, the shofet doesn’t create law — he discerns fidelity to the oath, by means of the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic reasoning process/discipline. פרדס four-part inductive reasoning, it functions parallel to the judiciary’s review authority over both the Legislative and Executive branches of Central Government. Judicial common law Legislative Review of all statute laws imposed by Central, State, and Bureaucratic authorities, overshadows Government like clouds cast shade upon the Earth. Sanhedrin lateral common law courts, they guard against Government authority overreach — to ensure that enacted statutes remain within the bounds of foundational obligation established by the Torah Constitution.

When the judiciary loses this function most essential function of law – as prevails in all judicial court systems in every country across the world other than the oath brit common law Republic of Israel, decreed statute law drifts toward bureaucratic dictatorship – like which Stalin imposed upon the diminished Soviets. (The Soviet local Parliaments permitted Lenin and Troskii to overthrow the Social Revolutionary Government which ruled Russia after the 1917 Revolution overthrew the Czar of Russia. When statute law, be it Legislative/Parliamentary or Bureaucratic exceeds its authority through overreach or corruption or both, the system devolves into tyranny and anarchy. The balance to the system of statute law Big Brother Governments – Judicial Legislative Review – procedure, and most definitely not hierarchical — divine right of kings.

The 1913 Federal Reserve Act centralized monetary authority, illegally established a quasi-private banking Central Government established Corporate monopoly\institution, insulated from both legislative and judicial oversight — like the GMO crops likewise insulated from Class-Action lawsuits today. Such Big Brother Corporate government established monopolies utterly “vaccinated” from lawsuits from the common man. Effectively creating a fourth branch dictatorship, unbound by direct constitutional authority – originally established by the Framers of the Constitution! This treason betrayal initiated by the Democrat Wilson Administration severed money from the trust; the Constitution mandated Congress with the obligation to mint currency – not some privately owned Corporate banking monopoly established by the Government bribed through Corporate graft corruption.

Therefore, it seems to me that Judicial Legislative Review by definition must dominate the other two major branches of government. The Legislative branch prioritizes domestic policy whereas the Executive branch prioritizes foreign policy. These two branches compete to a certain extent establishing checks and balances to power. Judicial guardianship would employ Legislative Review to strip the creation of the Federal Reserve and restore free banking as the backbone of the American gold-based currency.

Judicial dominance can only remain legitimate if it operates as Legislative Review within the brit — not as rule by judges, but as rule by precedent and oath-consistency. Herein the absolute need to restore the Written Torah as the Constitution of the 12 Tribes of the Republic of States. A Torah Constitutional Sanhedrin court carries a mandate to judge statute laws by precedent and oath brit. Thus such a Sanhedrin common law court system remains rooted in the national Sinai consent; lacking the mandate of Torah constitutional law, as currently prevails today, irresponsible courts no different from irresponsible Legislatures, Parliaments, and Divine Right of Kings! The latter corrupt government judges by ideology or policy preference and usurps the Sinai oath-brit itself.

The judiciary’s authority should not be a matter of arbitrary rule; instead, it should adhere to established principles rooted in the brit. This underscores the necessity for judges to interpret laws consistently with the foundational oaths and values encapsulated in the Written Torah. The Written Torah to serve as the constitutional framework for the 12 Tribes of the Republic of States. The idea of a Sanhedrin court system as the arbiter of laws reflects an intention to create a judicial landscape that judges statute laws through the lens of historical precedent and ethical Sinai oath brit alliance commitments. This ties the court’s authority to a broader historical and moral context rather than some shallow reactionary political expediency.

The current judicial practices that lack any connection with Torah constitutional law – this critique abomination – extends to legislatures and other branches of government. It more than simply “suggests” that when Government functions without any Sinai oath brit foundational Constitutional guidance, that all governments risk becoming irresponsible and ideologically driven – like as specifically defines the post revolution Soviet governments.

The comparison to the medieval Divine Right of Kings narishkeit stupidity, more than simply mocks and derides the Dark Ages tyranny which had absolutely no accountable governance other than theft, oppression, sexual perversion, and judicial injustice. A system where laws and judicial interpretations, not merely personal or political – rooted in oath brit tradition – which maintains moral and ethical coherence – utterly unknown to Church Av tuma avoda zarah. Without this adherence, the judiciary risks the same church abominations of utter arrogance pride and stupidity, expressed through the pulpit & legislative\executive bodies. This total chaos corruption resulted in brutal peasant revolts which fractured the pre-existing Dark Ages poverty economies which fractured all trust and communal identity till some Arab or Muslim outside force compelled Europe to make Crusade barbaric pilgrimages to Jerusalem.

Judicial sovereignty through Torah oath brit accountability would have hung the Pope for war crimes following the slaughter of Jewish refugee populations across German kingdoms prior to the first Crusade; authority arises not from institutional power, but from fidelity to oath and Mishnaic precedents. The Written Torah stands as the constitutional charter of the Twelve-Tribe Republic — a framework of law, rather than some debased Nicene Creed code of religion. Its Torah text defines the nation’s collective obligations, boundaries, and procedures to rule within the borders of the oath sworn Cohen lands with fair judicial justice.

The Sanhedrin, as the supreme common-law court, derives its legitimacy not from legislative fiat or executive decree, but from its continuity with the brit Sinai and its mastery of the פרדס interpretive discipline. It functions as guardian of the oath time-oriented Av Torah commandments. Ensuring that chiddush Mishnaic rulings, derived from Sanhedrin precedents of Torah common law which maintains אל מלך נאמן faithful to the nation’s founding consent.

Judges simply not policy-makers but rather they interpreters of oath-consistency — shofetim who discern whether a law aligns with the moral-legal trajectory set at Sinai, much like a blue print with its front/Top\side views understands the depth of judicial conflicts. Sanhedrin judges, trained in the rigors of פרדס logic, reason inductively from precedent (as in binyan av) dynamic comparisons, rather than deductively from ideology or utilitarian algebraic static equations.