Across our nation failures of our judicial system offer proof that reform is necessary. Law enforcement all too frequently engages in violence before using alternate methods to subdue and arrest suspects. Our courts are inconsistent; the wealthy seldom receive punishment fitting their crimes, while minorities receive excessive levels of discipline. Compassion and understanding have been removed from the system and replaced with anger and rash judgement.
Nothing reveals the flaws in our system more than the treatment of juveniles.
The Supreme Court is often the last refuge for those whose Constitutional rights have been violated by the judicial system. However, two justices who were mistakenly confirmed, although their extremist views presented a danger to our Constitution, cannot be expected to use common sense in their decisions.
Evidence that Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas inject personal beliefs into their decisions occurred once again on Monday. The case presented to the Court involved sentencing juveniles. Montgomery vs Alabama argued that a previous Court decision should apply retroactively to inmates now incarcerated for life without the possibility of parole. Montgomery argued that only in rare cases should juveniles receive life imprisonment without an opportunity to seek consideration regarding their lack of maturity.
The decision was handed down with a vote of 6-2; only Alito and Thomas dissented. Recently Thomas was the lone dissenter in a Georgia case with death penalty implications. The 7-1 decision stated that 30 years ago prosecutors used Unconstitutional tactics to disallow all black men and women from serving on the jury.
Alito wrote the dissenting opinion regarding Montgomery. He claimed that the original jury was required to consider “all relevant mitigating evidence,” including the offender’s age. He further stated that the jury “considered but rejected youth as a mitigating factor.”
If every parent agreed with Alito’s judgement of those who have not reached maturity, few teenagers would live to become adults.
I abhor violence at any age. But let’s look at the situation in an honest manner. The system, especially in red states, is prejudiced towards minorities. A 17-year-old black man who assaults an individual in Texas, and that person dies, will be treated differently than a 17-year-old from a white, wealthy family.
If you doubt this as fact, take the case of Ethan Couch. At age 16 Couch was driving while intoxicated in Fort Worth, Texas. His truck drove over four pedestrians. All four died and Couch’s passenger was paralyzed for life. Couch used ‘affluenza’ as a defense. His attorneys claimed that his family was dysfunctional and that their extreme wealth was responsible for an unstable mental condition for the young man. He was sentenced to ten years of probation, yes probation, which he eventually violated. Videos of him drinking excessively at a party were posted online.
Alito and Thomas are political, not interested in justice. They join a large group of conservative extremists who would increase our growing prison population. The fact is that the United States has only five-percent of the world’s population, but 25 percent of incarcerated men and women. More than 50 percent of that population is imprisoned for drug offenses.
The problem with justices such as Alito and Thomas is that they are appointed for life and will be a cancer on the Court for years to come.
Op-Ed
By James Turnage
The Truth With No Restrictions 