text: Review What is the Rule of Law? -- especially the eight points in the section titled "Elements of the Rule of Law"
  Law is abstract; it is not a physical item that can be observed, touched or measured. However, our laws are documented; they can be found in a written format. Click here for links to some web sites that provide access to our laws. Writing the law is necessary so we have an archive from which to retrieve our understanding of these abstract concepts.
  Restated, with a policy question, we are asking whether the current law is the most appropriate law at this time given society's collective values. A legal question asks "what IS the current law, or what is the solution to the problem under the current law." It does NOT ask us to consider whether the current law is the desired law, or whether the current law should be changed.
  The focus of this web site is on legal issues, not policy issues.
  The law does not make decisions for individuals; however, the law, in some circumstances, requires individuals to disclose information so others can make informed decisions.
  The law will not prevent an individual from making a poor decision; for example, a buyer is responsible for determining what they are purchasing.
  Although our nation is approximately 230 years old, many of our legal concepts extend back hundreds of years; in some cases, thousands of years. Basic legal principles that we adhere to today have evolved over the centuries; many of these principles are based in English law. Our strong relationship to English law reflects our history, that is, we were part of the English empire and under English law until the time of the American Revolution. Even though we changed our government at that time, we did not discard all the legal principles. Accordingly, many of the concepts addressed in this course/web site have a long history extending back hundreds of years. Similarly (but to a lesser extent), our law also reflects the influence of French and Spanish laws.
  If government needs to take your property for a government purpose, you are entitled to be compensated for the value of the property (US. Constitution, Amendment V). However, if the property is needed for general safety, health, and well-being of society, government can take the property without compensating the owner. This government action would be considered an exercise of the government's police power; police power generally defines the limit of action government can take without compensating the individuals affected by the government action.
  "[¶9] Hoffman's argument he is entitled to just compensation is equally unavailing. Hoffman began his business long after N.D.C.C. ch. 24-16 went into effect, and the government's exercise of its police power to abate a public nuisance does not entitle the property owner to compensation. City of Minot v. Freelander, 426 N.W.2d 556, 560 (N.D. 1988)." Mountrail County v. Hoffman, 2000 ND 49, 607 N.W.2d 901
  The limit to government action will be addressed several times throughout the course.
  In the past 50 years, there has been increased pressure to standardize state laws so businesses involved in interstate transactions (and individuals who move about and live in different states) encounter fewer problems due to conflicting state laws. The leading effort in accomplishing this standardization has been the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.
  "The dormant Commerce Clause is the negative implication of the Commerce Clause [of the U.S. Constitution], pursuant to which states may not enact laws that discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce. Quill v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298, 312 (1992)." See Jones v. Gale, United States District Court for Nebraska, December 15, 2005; pp.4 -5.
  Congress has indicated, however, that in some circumstances state law will apply as long as it fits within federal guidelines.
  A thought about learning a communicating. As you proceed through this course and your career, you will need to clarify your writing. To the surprise of many, one strategy to clarify our thinking and writing is to slow our thought process (rather than speed it up) until we are able to recognize all the mental steps we take as we proceed from one thought to another. Our minds work so fast that we do not recognize that we have proceeded from step 1 to step 4 in our thought process and thus we do not recognize that steps 2 and 3 occurred. Our explanation of our thought process then, may only mention steps 1 and 4. but our reader or listener may not recognize that steps 2 and 3 have to occur to move from step 1 to step 4. Without us explicitly recognizing and stating that steps 2 and 3 are occurring, our reader or listener may not accept or understand that step 1 ultimately leads to step 4. Accordingly, we must discipline ourselves to understand and communicate our complete thought process; not just the obvious "stepping stones".