Civil Law or Common Law that is the question

Government & Politics Constitution & Laws
1

I have that thought long and hard about this and done research as well even though I am not a legal scholar or a lawyer just a libertarian that is concerned about the best approach to securing or rights and freedoms. Below is a conversation I have had with AI and while it recommended a common law system after molding it for a little while it came out with this solution.

Libertarian Hybrid Legal System Framework

Combining Civil Law Structure + Common Law Liberty + Direct Democracy Oversight

  1. Constitutional Foundation (Direct Democracy Layer)

  • Supreme authority: A citizen-ratified constitution with:

    • Strict limits on government power

    • Explicit protection of natural rights (speech, arms, property, etc.)

    • Direct initiative and referendum powers to:

      • Propose/repeal statutes
      • Amend the constitution
      • Veto legislation

  • Nullification clause: Any statute or precedent contrary to constitutional rights is void.

  1. Codified (Civil Law-Inspired) Areas — For Clarity and Reliability
Legal Area Codified Content
Criminal Law Only punishes crimes with clear victims (aggression, theft, fraud). Proportional sentences codified.
Procedural Law Strict due process rights: warrant requirements, right to silence, speedy trial, etc.
Tax Law If any taxes exist, they’re flat, transparent, and subject to referendum.
Family Law Defined primarily by contract (marriage, custody, etc.) unless involving coercion.
Administrative Law Agency powers clearly limited; all regulations subject to citizen repeal.

⸻

  1. Common Law (Precedent-Based) Areas — For Flexibility and Individual Justice
Legal Area Precedent-Driven Principles
Contract Law Enforces voluntary agreements; judges interpret disputes case-by-case.
Property Law Protects ownership rights and resolves disputes via evolving norms.
Tort Law Evolving liability standards (e.g., negligence, strict liability).
Corporate/Business Law Honors custom legal structures unless fraud/coercion is shown.

⸻

  1. Decentralization Layer (Federalism + Local Autonomy)
    • Local legal experimentation allowed (e.g., by counties/cantons)
    • Nullification rights for localities to reject federal overreach
    • Competition between jurisdictions encouraged

⸻

  1. Judicial Oversight
    • Judges are elected or rotated and strictly bound by the constitution
    • Jury nullification is protected
    • Courts may strike down unconstitutional statutes or executive actions

⸻

In Summary:
This hybrid system blends codified clarity with common-law liberty, under direct democratic control.
It supports natural rights, limits state power, and adapts to changing conditions—while always remaining citizen-controlled.

⸻

2 Likes
2

Thanks Martin for bringing this issue to our attention. First of all; I practically know nothing about these issues or lawfare (I’m a technocrat), but there’s maybe a third “law” we should pay attention to; The Natural Law?

On the other hand, I guess our LL leaders already have considered these options, and that might have been stated or discussed in an LL-document I still haven’t read (or found).

1 Like
3

Thats why I am posting so many threads because I have not seem what our positions are on these key issues. We need to have what I would call a British style manifesto that lays out what the overarching ideas that a prime minister has before they go into office

1 Like
4

I know very little about the law: never faced criminal charges, never been sued, never hired a lawyer. So for people like me that don’t know the first thing about what Martin has written about above, I will put in what AI has told me about Civil and Common Law:

Civil law and common law are two major legal systems, distinguished primarily by their sources of law, methods of adjudication, and roles of judges.

  • Civil law is based on comprehensive, written legal codes and statutes created by legislatures, with judges applying these codes to cases. Judicial decisions do not set binding precedents for future cases.legal.thomsonreuters+2

  • Common law relies on judicial decisions and legal precedents established by courts, with judges having significant authority to interpret and shape the law as new cases arise. These precedents (stare decisis) are binding on future cases in similar circumstances.investopedia+4

Key differences:

  • Source of Law: Civil law is codified (written statutes), whereas common law is largely uncodified and built on case law.law.berkeley+3

  • Role of Judges: Civil law judges interpret and apply codes; in common law, judges create and interpret law through decisions.libguides.law.widener+2

  • Precedent: Only common law systems use binding precedent (stare decisis); civil law decisions are not binding for later cases.reddit+4

  • Flexibility: Common law adapts more readily to new or unforeseen situations; civil law depends on legislative updates for changes.reddit+2

  • Geographic Distribution: Civil law is prevalent in continental Europe, Latin America, and many other regions; common law is found in the UK, US (except Louisiana), Canada, Australia, and other former British colonies.wikipedia+3

Feature Civil Law Common Law
Main Source Codified statutes/codes Judicial precedent (case law)
Role of Judge Applies written laws Interprets/creates law via cases
Precedent Not binding Binding (stare decisis)
Adaptability Legislative updates needed Courts adapt to new issues
Jurisdictions Continental Europe, LatAm UK, US (except Louisiana), ex-British colonies
1 Like