Dear Friends,
It seems to me, objective law serves justice, while subjective law serves the powerful. Which is probably why law is usually subjectively applied. How can we tell if the law is being objectively or subjectively used? By observing several factors. Are the courts transparent? If they don’t allow cameras, microphones and non distracting video equipment (like cell phones) then they’re being opaque. Non transparency is a sure sign of a corrupt court system. Are the courts non partisan? Or do they pass judgments like, the 9 year sentence of a 68 year old mother of a slain War veteran… for documenting election fraud. Are the courts consistent? Even as violent rioters and arsonists in 2016 were let off, peaceful Jan 6th “trespassers” were given multi year sentences.
When exposing crime is itself a crime then the government itself is criminal. Because hiding a crime is itself a criminal act. If the courts break the law then… that makes them criminals. An objective court adjudicates the law as written and understood. A subjective court will rule on cases depending on the ramifications to the government, elite or themselves. Moreover, if the courts themselves don’t take law seriously… why should we? Their leadership, if followed, puts us on a path to chaos. Because when criminals run the criminal justice system, crime pays, and pays well. Where crime pays well, there will be lots of crime, and little commerce. Leading to a collapse in the nation with a subjective court system. While an objective legal system results in general and growing prosperity.
A judge that has a dog in the political fight, isn’t an arbiter of justice, it’s an arbiter of political favor. Judges are people. People are animalistic in that we don’t act against our own interests… knowingly. So, when a judge sees his or her sacred cow about to be slaughtered, they step in. That’s why it’s important that judges don’t husband sacred cows or keep fighting dogs. In the form of political preferences and class fraternity. Of course, there’s nothing like a good zealous political diatribe, against our founding principles… to show which dog a judge has in the fight. Clearly then, those judges that rule by self interests instead of legal precedent and law, rule subjectively. While those who rule without regard to class or political favor, only on law… rule objectively.
There is no reason a court needs privacy unless it’s to commit injustice in the name of justice. As judges usurp ever more power, they increasingly stand in front of the law. Law they’re supposed to follow. The main problem to this usurpation is public opinion. If the public were to see first hand the corruption in our courts, the courts would lose all credibility, and it’s credibility that courts rely on. That’s the only reason a court would need opacity. So they can maintain their corruption, and any documentation of it… gets the offender sent to prison. Moreover, a lack of transparency serves a subjective court while an objective court has no need of secrecy. Secrecy is for star chambers, kangaroo courts and despots. Making transparency a key means to deciding if a legal system is corrupt or fair.
What do you think? Are our courts transparent, fair and consistent? Recent news reports scream no, they’re not! Which means our legal system is subjective not objective. It serves the politically favored and not justice. When criminals run the legal system, that system is itself criminal, in need of cleaning out. The place to start would be to impeach all judges who have shown they have a dog in the fight. Put in consequences for judges that follow political expediency instead of the law. The criminals must be rooted out of our legal system. If its criminal to expose crime, then those that made it so, must be indicted. You can do something. Contact your senators and representative. Demand impeachments to get rid of corrupt judges. Tell them we want objective courts… not subjective ones.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
