SocCit Follies
February 2, 2025 4:56 PM   Subscribe

In the context of sovereign citizen "legal" mumbo-jumbo, what does "I don't understand" mean?

I've recently gone down a YouTube rabbit hole of watching videos of sovereign citizens representing themselves in court (and being mercilessly shredded by the judges.) Now, most of the sovcit mumbo-jumbo I'm pretty familiar with. But one expression keeps coming up in their speechifying, and that's "I don't understand."

Normally, it would be easy to assume the person genuinely does not understand what bit of actual law the judge just threw at them, but it seems to be used with such regularity that it really seems to be yet another bit of sovcit lingo/"legalese" but damned if I can figure out what soft of magic "gotcha" it's supposed to invoke. Video after video, the sovcits at some point downshift into repeating "I don't understand" over and over to whatever the judge is saying. It's just so common that it must be a tactic.

I anyone here versed enough in the sovereign citizen script to know what "I don't understand" is supposed to do for them? Or are they genuinely admitting they don't know what's going on?

Thanks
posted by Thorzdad to Law & Government (7 answers total) 4 users marked this as a favorite
 
It is their way of refusing to acknowledge the relevance of the proceedings. "Do you understand that you are being ordered to pay your former wife a monthly amount as child support?" "I don't understand."
posted by drossdragon at 5:37 PM on February 2 [1 favorite]


It's an annoying delay tactic. Questions like "Do you understand the charges / the severity / the choices you have / your rights / etc" are frequently asked in court to ensure the defendant has the capacity to participate in the proceedings.

By claiming "I don't understand" the proceedings can't continue. In that case, the judge can hold the defendant in contempt of court. The judge could also rule that the defendant has to get a lawyer or have one appointed.

The judge can choose to deny them the ability to continue to represent themselves in court if they claim to be unable to demonstrate a sufficient understanding of legal proceedings and the complexities of their case. It's the justice system's responsibility to ensure the defendant's right to effective legal representation.

Some judges won't bother with all this crap and dismiss if the case is simple enough (simple traffic ticket, etc), others will go ballistic and enforce things to the absolute letter of the law. The SovCit is basically rolling the dice hoping they get a judge who doesn't feel like bothering with delays and continuations on a simple violation. In the cases of larger violations, the SovCit is succeeding in challenging and delaying the proceedings.
posted by erst at 5:39 PM on February 2 [5 favorites]


Best answer: This comment suggests that “understand” might mean that you are subject to something (in bananapants crazytown jurisdiction, obviously.)
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 5:40 PM on February 2 [6 favorites]


Best answer: They basically believe that they are not under the authority of the court, but the court is trying to trick them into coming under their authority (understand vs. "stand under" like that reddit comment suggests).

This ConspiracyWatch article analyzes a sovcit court appearance and describes this tactic.
posted by muddgirl at 6:03 PM on February 2 [7 favorites]


"I don't understand how you won't take my word for what this means, instead of what you say it is!" ;)
posted by kschang at 6:07 PM on February 2


That Conspiracy Watch article also cites Meads v. Meads, which is the ultimate putdown of SovCit brain rot.
posted by scruss at 6:57 PM on February 2


Response by poster: Many thanks!
posted by Thorzdad at 7:38 PM on February 2


« Older Adding "enemy alien" to my life experiences   |   I just got a sauna. I wanna get in there... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments