Introduction
Today, I want to address a critical issue plaguing our justice system: judicial bias. As someone who has experienced the injustices firsthand, I am deeply troubled by the erosion of fair trial principles in state courts across the United States. From favoritism towards the prosecution to blatant antagonism towards defendants, it’s clear that the neutrality requirement enshrined in the United States Constitution is being trampled upon.
The Prosecution’s Preferential Treatment
One of the most alarming manifestations of judicial bias is the preferential treatment given to the prosecution. In numerous cases, judges have exhibited a propensity to side with prosecutors, often at the expense of defendants’ rights. This bias can manifest in various forms, from allowing questionable evidence to be admitted to the courtroom to imposing disproportionately harsh sentences.
Antagonism Towards Defendants
Equally troubling is the antagonism displayed towards defendants. Instead of serving as impartial arbiters of the law, some judges seem to view defendants with suspicion and disdain. This predisposition can lead to rushed judgments, denial of crucial evidence, and an overall denial of the right to a fair trial.
Rooted in White Supremacy
Adding to the complexity of the issue is the deeply ingrained pattern, practice, and customs rooted in white supremacy within the judiciary. This insidious influence perpetuates systemic biases that disproportionately affect marginalized communities. State court judges, emboldened by these entrenched beliefs, often operate under the illusion of being unaccountable for their actions, even in cases of wrongful and unlawful convictions. It is an insane asylum, when the administrators of law knowingly violate the law holding others to account, but believe that they can NEVER be accountable for their own actions and inactions, costing irreparable harm to individuals’ lives.
Historical Precedents
Throughout history, there have been instances where state court judges have been arrested or convicted, casting doubt on the integrity of their judgments. These cases serve as stark reminders of the dangers of unchecked judicial power and the need for robust oversight mechanisms. Examples of such judges for factual reference are Josef Altstötter, Noel Arrigo, Mark Ciavarella, Jacques Delisle, Thomas J. Maloney, Ernst Pöhner, Oswald Rothaug are just to name a few.
The Legal Framework: 28 U.S. Code § 144
It’s crucial to recognize the legal framework designed to address judicial bias. 28 U.S. Code § 144 stipulates procedures for challenging the bias or prejudice of a judge. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms is often hindered by institutional barriers and a reluctance to confront entrenched biases within the judiciary.
The Issue of Absolute Immunity
Moreover, the concept of “absolute immunity” further exacerbates the issue of judicial accountability. Judges are granted near-untouchable status, shielded from any repercussions for their actions, no matter how reckless or unjust. This lack of accountability undermines the very foundation of our legal system and erodes public trust in the judiciary.
A Call to Action
It’s imperative that we address these issues head-on. The integrity of our justice system depends on it. We must demand accountability from judges, advocate for reforms that promote fairness and impartiality, and hold those responsible for judicial bias to account.
Conclusion
As I continue my fight for justice, I urge you to join me in speaking out against judicial bias and standing up for the rights enshrined in the Constitution. Together, we can strive towards a legal system that upholds the principles of equality, fairness, and justice for all.
Sincerely,
Ewing Samuels
