Attorneys as Officers of the Court, “Wards of the Court” and the Organic Laws
Attorneys are officers of the court with duties to both the court and the client, and statements of counsel are not evidence. Hiring a lawyer does not make an adult a ward of the court, and every person may represent himself or herself.
Attorneys as officers of the court
Lawtopolis publishes this discussion for informational and educational purposes, and as an exercise of the freedoms of speech, press, assembly, belief and religion protected by the First Amendment. It sets out what each statute and decision says and what courts have done with it. It is not legal advice and does not recommend any course of action.
Attorneys and counsellors are not officers of the United States; they are not elected or appointed in the manner prescribed by the Constitution for the election and appointment of such officers. They are officers of the court, admitted as such by its order, upon evidence of their possessing sufficient legal learning and fair private character.
Garland struck down a federal oath that barred former Confederates from practicing in federal court. Being an “officer of the court” means a lawyer owes the court duties of candor and honesty, alongside duties of loyalty and confidentiality to the client. In In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717 (1973), the Court used the same idea to hold that lawyers “are not officials of government by virtue of being lawyers,” and struck down a citizenship requirement for the bar.
Are clients wards of the court?
A ward is “a person who is under the protection, care, or guardianship of another individual, typically due to being a minor or legally incapacitated” (Cornell LII, Wex). Courts appoint guardians for wards. Hiring a lawyer does not make a competent adult a ward.
Many websites repeat lines attributed to Corpus Juris Secundum (“Clients are wards of the court”), but we could not locate them in an accessible edition. Moreover, two cases cited for the idea say otherwise. O’Reilly v. New York Times Co., 692 F.2d 863 (2d Cir. 1982), upheld a litigant’s right to fire his lawyer and represent himself, calling self-representation a statutory right under 28 U.S.C. § 1654. People v. Merchants’ Protective Corp., 189 Cal. 531 (1922), concerned a corporation unlawfully practicing law; the phrase “the court is his primary master” is not in it. In practice, a client controls the objectives of the representation, and every person may appear pro se in federal court.
Statements of counsel are not evidence
Statements of counsel in their briefs or argument while enlightening to the Court are not sufficient for purposes of granting a motion to dismiss or summary judgment.
This is a real and important rule. In other words, facts must come from witnesses, documents and sworn statements, while lawyers’ arguments explain what the evidence shows. In Holt v. United States, 218 U.S. 245, 250 (1910), the trial judge told the jury to regard “only the evidence admitted by him, not statements of counsel.” By contrast, the other quotations in the essay — attributed to United States v. Lovasco and McCulloch v. Sociedad Nacional — do not appear in those opinions. Even so, briefs are how parties present law and argument, so courts still rely on them.
The Organic Laws in the U.S. Code
The front matter of the United States Code prints “The Organic Laws of the United States of America”: the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and the Constitution (with its amendments). These are the founding documents of the national government. Today the Constitution is the supreme law; it replaced the Articles of Confederation in 1789, while the Declaration states the principles of the founding.
“Constitution for” and “Constitution of”
… do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The essay says Congress substituted “Constitution of the United States” after 1871 to signal a corporate charter. However, the original 1787 text already uses both phrases. The President’s oath in Article II, Section 1 reads: “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Other authorities cited on wards of the court and the overlay
- Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F. Supp. 383, 386 (W.D. Mo. 1953) — “A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the Federal Government and at the same time a citizen of the State in which he resides.” The essay omits the second half, which describes dual citizenship.
- Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 388 (1798) — Justice Chase: “An ACT of the Legislature (for I cannot call it a law) contrary to the great first principles of the social compact, cannot be considered a rightful exercise of legislative authority.” Accurate; the case held the Ex Post Facto Clause applies only to criminal laws.
- Blackstone, Commentaries (1765) — the law of nature “is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this.” Accurate; see the hierarchy of law.
- Buck Act, 4 U.S.C. § 110(e) — a “Federal area” means lands “held or acquired by or for the use of the United States” within a state, such as military bases. It does not declare states federal areas.
- 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b) — procedural rules “shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right.” This limits court rules, not statutes.
- UCC adoption — the drafters offered the Code to the states in 1951; Pennsylvania adopted it first in 1953, and every other state followed over the next twenty years (Louisiana adopted most articles but not Article 2).
- Code of Federal Regulations — 44 U.S.C. § 1510 provides for the CFR, and § 1507 requires courts to take judicial notice of the Federal Register. Regulations bind only if authorized by statute and adopted lawfully; see delegation of authority.
Summary: Attorneys are officers of the court with duties to both the court and the client, and statements of counsel are not evidence. Hiring a lawyer does not make an adult a ward of the court, and every person may represent himself or herself.
How to check the wards of the court claim yourself
If someone offers you a strategy built on wards of the court, ask for the court decisions that accepted it. In the decisions cited on this page, courts did not accept it. Instead, read the real statute or rule the claim cites, and then read how courts have applied it. Also, look at the cases listed above. They show what happens when people raise the argument in court. For a real dispute, talk to a licensed attorney in your state. You can start with our directory.
Sources and further reading
Official sources used on this page:
Related reading on Lawtopolis:
Sources
- Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866)
- In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717 (1973)
- O'Reilly v. New York Times Co., 692 F.2d 863 (2d Cir. 1982)
- Trinsey v. Pagliaro, 229 F. Supp. 647 (E.D. Pa. 1964)
- Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F. Supp. 383 (W.D. Mo. 1953)
- 28 U.S.C. §§ 1654, 2072
- U.S. Code front matter, Organic Laws
Official sources:
static.case.law/us/71/cases/0333-01.json
static.case.law/f2d/692/cases/0863-01.json
static.case.law/f-supp/229/cases/0647-01.json
law.cornell.edu/wex/ward
archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-trans…
Sources last reviewed: 2026-10-23
Lawtopolis provides legal information and education, not legal advice. Using this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and court rules vary by jurisdiction and change over time; verify every authority against the official source and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction about your situation.