Section 5

The Judiciary of the United States exists to apply and interpret this Charter, along with all laws, regulations, and legal authorities enacted or recognized under it. All courts must uphold the Charter, but only certain higher courts have the power to decide what it means. The purpose of the Judiciary is to protect and defend the Rights of the People. The courts do not exist to serve the power of the State when it conflicts with the Rights of the People.

A. Interpretation

A.1. Interpretational Precedence

In all judicial proceedings, the following sources of law shall apply, in this order of authority:

1. This Charter, including the Rights enumerated in Article I, prevails over all other sources in the event of conflict.

2. Common law interpreting this or prior Charters, to the extent it is consistent with this Charter.

3. Treaties duly ratified by the United States.

4. Statutes enacted under the authority of this Charter.

5. Common law interpreting such statutes.

6. Administrative law.

7. Executive Orders.

8. Regulations.

A.2. Interpretive Rubric

Courts shall interpret this Charter with a presumption in favor of Rights (see Article I, Sections 1–3). Any limitation on a Right must:

• Be expressly authorized by this Charter,

• Serve a compelling public interest, and

• Be executed using the least restrictive means available.

When Rights appear to conflict, the burden shall rest on the government to justify any legal classification, restriction, or distinction. That justification must be:

• Compelling,

• Grounded in the principles of this Charter, and

• Free from arbitrariness, political motivation, or discriminatory effect.

Courts must evaluate not only individual intent but also systemic patterns of exclusion, structural disadvantage, and disproportionate harm. Evidence of animus may include institutional conduct that suppresses or undermines equal Rights. Such findings shall trigger heightened scrutiny.

Original intent may guide interpretation but may not override current Rights recognized under this Charter. Where historical meanings or practices conflict with those Rights, the Charter prevails.

Courts must interpret moral and legal terms—such as “cruel,” “unusual,” “due process,” or “civilized”—in light of evolving national consensus and the legal norms of advanced nations. These references are persuasive, not binding, and must serve the Charter’s purpose: to uphold humane and just governance.