It is ironic that Gandhi's success and Mandela's success were in large measure the result of judges who followed British common law precepts. Here in the U.S. we want to dispose of that common law. A further irony, for those who are fans of Scalia is that Scalia was not a big fan of the common law, preferring statutory law. He was much more of an authoritarian than a genuine conservative. It's the difference between the Napoleonic Code and US Constitutionalism - a heritage we are doing all we can to forget.
I do not get the distinction you are referring to as between the Napoleonic Code and US Constitutionalism. The N Code was essentially a break with feudal laws, imposing the citizenry as the new emperor.
USC is an appeal to Natural Law as codified in Mosaic law and the Magna Carta. We have avoided the curse of the French Revolution by insisting on natural human rights apart from the legislative process. The French have not. Theirs is a purer form of democracy. As such it establishes the morality of the majority rather than codifying under the authority of God and Nature.
The USC appeals to a body of truth superior to itself or its people. NC appeals to the will of the masses as the source of truth. The NC is secular. The USC is not.
“He was much more of an authoritarian than a genuine conservative”
That’s true, and a reason I wasn’t as enamored of him either. But if he was 15% objectionable, he was also 85% acceptable. His defense of Second Amendment rights being the best example.
What is happening now is a burlesque of both Common and Statutory law. It is judicial insurrection. That the former head of a federal police agency and the employees of that agency and its parent agency are engaging in a Hail Mary offense against the Constitutional head of those agencies shows that they are not using the law as intended but rather as a weapon in their insurrection.