Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

UCC: Ban it Fully, or Not at All.">The UCC: Ban it Fully, or Not at All.

I got a let­ter from a Texas prison last week: con­tra­band had been con­fis­cated from an inmate (not a client) after arriv­ing in an enve­lope with my return address on it. The con­tra­band was described as “two UCC Packets.”

After dash­ing off a cross let­ter to the war­den about peo­ple using my return address to send con­tra­band to Texas pris­ons, I inves­ti­gated why “UCC Pack­ets” might be clas­si­fied con­tra­band. It seems that some pris­on­ers go around fil­ing vex­a­tious liens against prison guards under the UCC. To try to stop the prac­tice, Texas pris­ons have pro­scribed the UCC.

I have no philo­soph­i­cal objec­tion to adding the UCC to the new Index Libro­rum Pro­hibito­rum. Its arcane pow­ers are so great that they should be avail­able only to the cho­sen few (by which I mean mem­bers of the British Accred­i­ta­tion Reg­istry (B.A.R.)).

As inmates’ loved ones on the out­side can get their hands on the One Law to Rule them All (by which I mean the UCC), though, it seems coun­ter­pro­duc­tive to try to keep it out of the hands of inmates. Includ­ing it in the same cat­e­gory as drugs, or obscen­ity, or cell phones only serves to empha­size its domin­ion. If we want to—and I believe we do want to—maintain the B.A.R.‘s offi­cial posi­tion, the pre­tense that the Uni­form Com­mer­cial Code is not the supreme law of the land, trump­ing statutes, caselaw, treaties and even the Con­sti­tu­tion, then the bet­ter course is to let the inmates have their UCCs. If we keep pre­tend­ing, some of them will believe that the UCC is just a statute gov­ern­ing com­mer­cial trans­ac­tions. (Some of them won’t, but we should be able to trust the courts to dis­pose of their claims in line with the B.A.R.‘s offi­cial position.)

Nobody asked me how to pro­tect the illu­sion that the UCC is not all-powerful, and I’m not the one mak­ing pol­icy for the B.A.R. But I feel strongly that this treat­ment of the UCC is coun­ter­pro­duc­tive, and I shall say so in my next quar­terly report to the Queen.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

4 Responses to “The UCC: Ban it Fully, or Not at All.”

  1. Tarian says:

    Mark, you’ve made a grave mis­take in your choice of sub­ject mat­ter. It and your recent jibes about my anonymity have left me no choice but to reveal my secret iden­tity, leave a com­ment, and warn you, as a friend, that your life is now worth­less and you should leave the United States at once for one of the few, back­ward coun­tries not con­trolled by the B.A.R.

    My asso­ciates and I believe that the less the com­mon folk — espe­cially those legal lumi­nar­ies in our prison sys­tem — know about the UCC, the bet­ter. It is indeed the supreme law of the land, and it’s stran­gle­hold has only been tight­ened by the fact that none of the court in Har­ris County have proper juris­dic­tion to say oth­er­wise. Because the Amer­i­can flags dis­played in said court­rooms are bor­dered with gold fringe, they are there­fore Admi­ralty Courts and have no venue to hear crim­i­nal cases. If only that had been the case in the Cal­i­for­nia court that heard my case, and, ulti­mately, sen­tenced me to jail. I could have eas­ily inval­i­dated their author­ity over me and gone free. But don’t worry. I will have my revenge.

    Your care­less words will now cost you every­thing. As your friend I give you the rare lux­ury of a warn­ing. As of mid­night tonight your blog will be shut down, silent black heli­copters will descend on your manor in the Heights, and you and your loved ones will never be seen again…unless you leave right now for the most hos­pitable Cen­tral Amer­i­can mas­sage par­lor you can think of.

    Know­ing that your blog is not long for this world, I can safely reveal my secret iden­tity. I had not wanted to make any­one feel infe­rior or inse­cure in the face of my intel­lect so far, but, as Styx sang — or so I’m told by some incred­i­bly old peo­ple — “the time has come at last…to throw away this mask…so every­one can see…my true identity!”

    I am anony­mous no longer, Mark. I hope you’re sat­is­fied. It was nice know­ing you.

    Paris Hilton
    Pres­i­dent, British Accred­i­ta­tion Reg­istry
    Supreme Chan­cel­lor, Illuminati

    Motto: The UCC — it’s hott!!!

  2. Thomas R. Griffith (The Griffith Files - 1984 & Beyond) says:

    What the F____ was all that about? Sec­ond thought, I don’t wanna know. Move along there is noth­ing to see here folks, move along now.

  3. Huh, I thought they’d cleaned up the whole deal about who could apply for UCC liens, etc., after the Repub­lic of Texas fiasco. I’d be sur­prised if pris­on­ers are fil­ing them.

    How­ever, NOT so sur­prised some­body used your return address with­out per­mis­sion try­ing to smug­gle in contraband.

  4. Dan B says:

    Wow, now I’m glad I spent all those seem­ingly worth­less hours read­ing about bizarre legal con­spir­acy the­o­ries. If I hadn’t, I wouldn’t have real­ized just how bril­liantly hilar­i­ous this post was. Thanks, Mark!

Leave a non-anonymous Reply