The Divine Right of Kings was a way that a ruler pretended to take their
power from God, in order to impose his/her might upon others. When a ruler took territory by force, it was all thanks to God, and therefore the Will of God that the shift of power took place.

Today, we see this manifestation on the football fields and awards ceremony platforms of the various places where we exist. And while giving thanks to the Deity is not inappropriate or bad (quite the contrary), it is not something which the Founders of the USA envisioned regarding the relationship between rulers and the ruled.

It was the Law, in their mind, which should be the final decider of right or wrong. The idea of “Rule of Law” is, on its face, a contradiction to prior millennia of human cultural understanding. Where we had a King (or Empress, High Priest, Chief, or whatever) who was special because God willed it, we were supposed to shift into a place where we were all equal in the eyes of the Law. Our fundamental framework rejects the notion of celebrity and champion being treated differently than the average guy on the street.

But our culture just doesn’t want to give-up on the past so easily.

When this manifests in celebrities being treated with more respect or leniency by a Court or a Prosecutor, then we certainly know something is wrong. When, because of perceived ‘power’ or ‘special’ status, one person is elevated in the eyes of the system over another, justice is not done.

Demanding from the system that which was intended is an important part of being an advocate, not just for the client, but for the fundamental concept of Rule of Law. Working through these ideas in the context of criminal cases is an important factor in getting the best results you can for your client.