Interesting "theory" tested in court and shot down at least once.
That's what is interesting about our system. Over time it is self correcting and there is a path to appeal to the top court under the right circumstances. Option 1 is legislature can close the loophole. Option 2 is they wait until the law is "tested" - Our system has nothing to do with justice or fairness. It is about consistency. Equal treatment under the law. Does that really work for everyone - that's a huge debate.
There must be some discussion about jurisdictions and which law applies - Federal, state, county, municipality etc... Lawlessness would imply that the 50 acres is under no jurisdiction. Which could be true, I don't know.
The article implies that the reason there is no law is because they can't round up a jury of peers. Cases get moved all the time - polluted jury pool etc, etc. So just moving a trial is not necessarily a slam dunk acquittal.
We all get our primary framing of how the system works by TV. Having a son "caught up in the system for like 2 years now I can attest that TV is entertainment and not reality.
There are very narrow grounds on which something can be appealed to a higher authority - 1 is a matter of form - The process made mistakes, therefor the outcome was unfair and a violation of equal protections. The second is that the lower court law County, state to federal, violates a constitutional right.
I have to believe there are a ton of places in Alaska that have no residents.
I think if a person wanted to kill somebody just to kill, I would posit if that person was able to keep their mouth shut they could get away with it. Just for everyone’s edification, this is not something I have ever contemplated.