Rogue Judges
The time is long overdue for major reforms in our judiciary. Injustice flows from the courts these days like the waters over Niagara Falls.
Today we see rogue judges, who are exclusively leftist Democrat appointed ideologues, dispensing orders and injustice to fit their agenda, the law be damned. If it were not for the antiquated removal process via impeachment, which makes removal impossible, removal would look like a revolving door, at least in the beginning, until the judges got the message that if you want to keep your job, then follow and interpret the law and shelve your political biases.
As we have seen since Trump’s inauguration, every leftist Democrat-appointed judge has colluded to block the electorate’s choice of Trump and the measures he campaigned on to turn the country around. In fact, for the first time in polling, 50% of people now believe the country is on the right track, and consumer confidence has rebounded massively. But, all that aside, these politically activist judges are being appealed and reversed again and again. So, what does that tell you? There is a profound bias that has no place in our judicial system, and it must be fixed.
Addressing An Objection
A quick aside here to blunt some anticipated and misleading counters to the statement that these are all Democrat appointees who ruled against Trump. Some were Republican appointees. First of all, as with the recent Trade Court ruling where the three judges ruled against Trump’s tariffs on European countries, two were Republican appointees, and one was appointed by Obama. Here’s what you don’t know: the rules of that court were that only five out of the nine could be of the same party, so there was a restriction on who could be appointed to fill a vacancy.
As the facts would have it, all three were Democrat activists—yes, Democrats appointed by Republicans. But the media didn’t tell you that! Also, in other jurisdictions, the senator of the state will make appointee suggestions, and this ties the hands of the president, and in many situations it’s a selection between bad, terrible and horrible. This has got to change.
AI Jurors?
But back to the question I am posing: Should we have Artificial Intelligence for Jurors? Jurors today decide not on the facts of the case, but on the message they want to convey to society. In my four decades as an attorney, I have seen horrendous results coming out of juries, as juries are nothing but a collage of different biases. We try to weed out the worst, but as any good attorney and even insurance companies know today, YOU CANNOT TRUST A JURY. Don’t let any attorney tell you otherwise, and if they do, fire them.
Now, in many instances, you may not be able to avoid the jury, but try you must. I have given many anecdotes in past articles that prove my point. As many of us recall in the O.J. Simpson murder trial, the jury did what was called “jury nullification,” where the jury ruled against the evidence. This is a gross injustice. In a more current case of Luigi Mangioni, who murdered the healthcare executive in New York City, I predict that if this goes to a New York jury, and given the sick lust that so many women have for this GQ murderer, there is a high likelihood they will set him free in a jury nullification of the evidence because of their sick biases.
The Facts and Only the Facts
So why do I say we need an AI Jury? Well, I’m presupposing that AI would be focused on only what is relevant and would be void of bias. Now, there is a question today as to who is programming AI. Some have suggested that those of leftist and liberal leanings are teaching AI to lie, and that is because the left cannot tolerate any dissent from their worldview or opinion. Also, this area in computer and programming sciences seems to attract the viagra-addicted geeks living in their mother’s basement. They are all too often on the fringe of reality and living in their own universe, which is problematic given that AI has some frightening and dangerous aspects to it.
Nevertheless, if AI could be programmed to judge based on the facts and only the facts, then more accurate and just decisions could come from a jury deliberation. In fact, we could get rid of juries, as there is no such thing as a jury of your peers anymore. Just think about it. The word “peers” means your equal. Given the makeup of jurors today, as we have seen so many times on TV, there are large segments of our society where they would be judged by those who are not their peers. It is criminal that such an obvious problem has not been corrected by now. The laws and rules of our courts must change. We are not all equal in ability or virtue. That goes without saying.
In a recent matter, which was a quasi-judical situation, where I was sitting on a panel in an appellate review, I argued against the wishes of a high-level political party representative, generally aligned with me ideologically, who was wanting to bend the rules and essentially retry the merits of the case, in violation of the rules regarding appellate review. I denied the request. Yes, this could be costly relationally, but it was the right thing to do. Most cannot do that, and particularly jurors.
It Could Be the Answer
Injustice should never flow from the courts as it does today. The courts and juries are in chaos and out of control as bias is running rampant, whether it be political, economic, racial or even petty things like not liking the way you look. It must change and soon. I’ve been pondering what that change would look like and have often joked that I’d just as soon have a robot make decisions based on facts and reality as opposed to the unjust biases of flawed men. Given the advances of AI, it could be the answer.
As with anything, there is the good and the bad. Just like nuclear power, it can bring light into your life and save lives, or it can destroy. So far in that regard, we have managed it, and it is giving life to electric beings, which is what we have become. All this being said, it’s time for you to start demanding a justice system that dispenses justice. Massive reform is needed, and needed now.
Jack L. Richardson, IV
P.S. Don’t miss tomorrow’s podcast episode, where I'll discuss more about much-needed judicial reforms. Subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you like to listen.