From American Thinker. The Constitution is our pact of civilized behavior.  From it we’ve derived a system of institutionalized justice, which we call our criminal justice system.  It’s intended to include checks and balances to protect defendants from biases and ensure fair adjudication of their charges.  Those safeguards include the following:

• a presumption of innocence
• a right to due process
• a right to legal defense
• a right to a trial by one’s peers
• a right to trial before an impartial judge

Given our presumption of innocence, absolute justice can’t be guaranteed because conviction depends on the presence of evidence.  Instead, we have agreed to accept equal treatment under the law.  We agree to abide by the law in exchange for a system that treats us equally and is administered by officials who swear an oath to defend our constitutional protections.

View Comments (4)

Do you want state prayer alerts?

Then Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and Merrick Garland came along as the country’s top law enforcement officials and flushed it all.  Under them, the application of justice has become decidedly unequal. …

The presumption of innocence seems like a quaint idea from the past.  Was New York attorney general Letitia James presuming innocence when she made a campaign promise to initiate a criminal investigation of Donald Trump before she even entered office or saw any evidence of wrongdoing? …

Was due process followed when the FBI destroyed evidence of Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified documents — at Clinton’s request?  Did the FBI have a legal predicate when it launched an investigation of an incoming president — based on fabricated evidence provided by his political opponent?  How about when they raided the homes of reporters — with armed agents — to recover Ashley Biden’s diary?  Had a crime even been committed?

Is our right to competent legal representation being undermined when attorneys face disbarment for taking legal actions challenging election practices? …

Was a conservative from Montana tried by a jury of his peers — when that jury comprised mostly Democrats from Washington, D.C.? …

Was General Michael Flynn given an impartial judge for his trial?  Was Judge Emmet Sullivan being impartial when he refused to let the DoJ drop charges, and instead appointed his own counsel to argue the case before him? …

When the core principles of our criminal justice system are no longer honored, the citizens of a self-governed country will judge the pact of civilized behavior to be breached. …

What comes next?  Will citizens embrace a system in which guilt or innocence is a function of their beliefs instead of their actions?  Or will Americans avoid the system entirely? …

We are not a country of sheep.  We are descendants of fiercely independent and self-reliant pioneers.  Many Americans still retain those attributes. … Our old west may be a better predictor of where justice in America is headed. …

In the old west, criminals had easy prey — and they capitalized on it.  Rape, robbery, and murder were common.  But that chaos was unacceptable to the settlers. … The farmers, ranchers, and miners formed law enforcement committees — many of which were little more than vigilante mobs. …

But the committees operated without the infrastructure of institutional criminal justice. … The committees functioned as the police, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner — all in one untrained body with no uniform standards. …

I’m not advocating vigilante justice.  I’m predicting that it’s a natural consequence of human nature if our current leadership destroys the last vestiges of the “equal justice under the law” that we were promised.  When the system no longer protects citizens, they will find ways to protect themselves. …

How are you praying for true, unbiased justice in America? Share your prayers and scriptures below.

(Excerpt from American Thinker. Photo Credit: Canva)