Pseudolaw Trap
Why Article 61 Claims Don't Work (And Why People Believe Them)
⚠ Critical Warning
This article exposes a dangerous pseudolaw trap that has caused real harm: legal defeats, financial losses, and criminal charges. If you've encountered Article 61 claims, this article will help you understand why they don't work and why they're dangerous.
Over the past 20 years, a pseudolaw movement has spread claiming that Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 remains in effect and gives individuals special legal powers. These claims are completely false. Courts have consistently rejected them, and people who've relied on them have faced legal defeats, financial losses, and criminal charges.
This article explains why these claims are pseudolaw, why they don't work, why people believe them, and what the real dangers are.
What is Pseudolaw?
Pseudolaw is a set of false legal theories that have no basis in actual law. Pseudolaw claims typically:
- Claim that a document (like Magna Carta or the Constitution) gives special powers that courts have never recognized
- Claim that displaying a document or swearing an oath makes someone immune from law enforcement
- Claim that government is illegitimate or that laws don't apply to the person making the claim
- Claim that special paperwork or procedures can override actual law
- Are organized around guru leaders who claim special knowledge of "hidden law"
The key characteristic of pseudolaw is that courts have consistently rejected these claims. When people try to use pseudolaw in court, judges dismiss the claims and often sanction the people for wasting the court's time.
The Article 61 Pseudolaw Claims
The Magna Carta Lawful Rebellion (MCLR) movement makes several false claims about Article 61:
The MCLR claims that Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 remains in effect today and operates as "supraconstitutional authority."
Reality:
Article 61 was removed in 1216 when Magna Carta was reissued and has never been restored. It has no legal effect today. Only 4 of the 63 original clauses of Magna Carta remain in force in the UK, and Article 61 is not one of them.
The MCLR claims that individuals can swear allegiance to a "New Rebel Baron" (like Lord Craigmyle of Invernesshire) and gain special legal powers.
Reality:
Swearing allegiance to anyone has no legal effect. This is pure fiction. No court has ever recognized such claims, and the "New Rebel Barons" have no legal authority whatsoever.
The MCLR claims that special paperwork can grant individuals extraordinary authority, including the right to execute government authorities.
Reality:
No paperwork can grant such powers. These claims are not only false but dangerous. Claiming the right to "execute" government authorities could constitute a criminal threat.
Why Do People Believe These Claims?
Understanding why people believe pseudolaw claims is important. It's not because people are stupid. It's because pseudolaw exploits real frustrations with government and real gaps in accountability.
People are frustrated because government officials violate the Constitution with impunity. Accountability mechanisms have failed. Pseudolaw exploits this frustration by claiming that there's a "hidden law" that can restore accountability.
Pseudolaw claims appeal to historical authority (Magna Carta, the Constitution) and claim that these documents contain "hidden" powers that can be unlocked. This appeals to people who respect law and history.
Pseudolaw movements are organized around guru leaders who claim special knowledge of "hidden law." These leaders are charismatic and confident, which makes their claims seem credible.
Once people believe pseudolaw claims, they interpret everything through that lens. Court rejections are seen as "proof" of corruption. Lack of success is seen as "proof" that the system is rigged.
The Real Dangers of Pseudolaw
Pseudolaw is not just wrong. It's dangerous. People who rely on it face real consequences:
When people try to use pseudolaw in court, they lose. Judges dismiss the claims and often impose sanctions (fines) for wasting the court's time. People have spent thousands of dollars in legal fees trying to pursue pseudolaw claims, only to lose and face additional sanctions.
People who use pseudolaw to resist law enforcement can face criminal charges. If you refuse to comply with law enforcement based on pseudolaw claims, you can be charged with obstruction of justice, resisting arrest, or other crimes. Some people have faced serious criminal charges for trying to use pseudolaw defenses.
People have lost money in multiple ways: paying gurus for pseudolaw "training" or "paperwork" (often hundreds or thousands of dollars), losing court cases and facing sanctions, losing property or businesses because they tried to use pseudolaw defenses, and paying legal fees to try to pursue pseudolaw claims.
Parents who use pseudolaw have lost custody of their children. Courts view pseudolaw reliance as evidence of poor judgment and inability to provide proper care. Using pseudolaw can disrupt families and cause lasting harm to children.
What to Do Instead: Legitimate Ways to Challenge Government
If you believe government has violated your constitutional rights, there are legitimate ways to challenge it:
- 1.Consult a legitimate lawyer: Find a lawyer who specializes in constitutional law or civil rights
- 2.File a lawsuit: Challenge the government action in court based on actual constitutional law
- 3.Appeal: If you lose at the trial level, appeal to a higher court
- 4.Contact civil rights organizations: Groups like the ACLU, Institute for Justice, and others help people challenge government overreach
- 5.Contact your elected representatives: Complain to Congress, state legislators, or local officials
- 6.Engage in political activism: Support candidates and causes that align with your constitutional values
These approaches are based on actual law and have a track record of success. They don't involve conspiracy theories, guru leaders, or special paperwork. They're the legitimate way to challenge government action.
Learn More About Constitutional Accountability
This article exposed the pseudolaw trap and explained why Article 61 claims don't work. To learn about legitimate ways to restore accountability and enforce the Constitution, read our comprehensive modules:
- BASIC Module: From Magna Carta to the Constitution: The Evolution of Accountability
- ADVANCED Module: Accountability Mechanisms: From Article 61 to Modern Enforcement
- ADVANCED Module: Prerequisites to Office: Restoring Constitutional Accountability
- Pseudolaw Debunking: Why Article 61 Claims Fail: A Legal Analysis
References & Further Reading
- Donald Netolitzky: "Ten Seconds to Implosion: The Magna Carta Lawful Rebellion" (2023) - Academic analysis of the MCLR as pseudolaw
- David Allen Green: "The TRUTH about Article 61 of Magna Carta" - Legal debunking of Article 61 claims
- R v. Meads (2012): Alberta Court of Justice decision defining OPCA and pseudolaw
- UK Parliament: "Magna Carta: Does it still matter?" - Historical analysis of Magna Carta
- National Archives UK: Magna Carta texts and historical information
- US Courts: Decades of sovereign citizen case law rejecting pseudolaw claims