Either the Chicago “sell the law” model or a Rothbardian libertarian legal code. All those who do not sign to the constitution, need not follow the laws. That dosen’t mean justice won’t be extracted in violation of those laws. The basis would be the NAP
In a real Republic, everything would be based on laws written by somebody or group (oligarchy). To change the laws would be to revise the entire constitution or abolish the republic. I like to say that a republic is the rule of DEAD men. Republics should be static as far as laws are concerned. Things can’t be based on self evidence when you have a court that “interprets” what those self evident laws are. That’s why they are “self” evident, they vary from each person’s view. They are not “collectively evident”.
Hoppe: “A compulsory territorial monopolist of protection and jurisdiction equipped with the power to tax without unanimous consent.”
Adler: “Government, with the authority to make laws, to adjudicate disputes, and to issue administrative decisions, and with a monopoly of authorized force where it fails to persuade, is an indispensable means, proximately, to the peace of communal life.”
I always find Hoppe hilarious. He can say things with a straight face, which are absurd, yet truthful.
In the HBO movie, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams are having a discussion about the newly founded US. Adams suggests that they must do what they can to save the Republic, Jefferson rhetorically asks, do we really have a Republic.