Due Process Is NOT About How Prosecutors & Judges Feel The Law SHOULD be, It Is About How The Law Is Written By The Legislature
Prosecutors & Judges are NOT super-legislators who get to ignore the law like we've seen lately.
There seems to be a huge misunderstanding lately about how due process and the law works, or is supposed to work.
There is also appears to be a huge misunderstanding about who gets to decide what the law is and who it applies to, as well.
Maybe it’s time for an elementary school level civics lesson.
Here we go!
We have three separate and distinct branches of government as set out in the Constitution:
The Executive branch,
The Legislative branch, and
The Judicial branch.
Here’s what each one is tasked to do in the Constitution:
The legislative branch passes the laws.
The executive branch that includes prosecutors enforces the law.
The judicial branch branch applies the law to determine guilt or innocence in criminal matters, or liability in the case of civil matters.
Those in the executive branch and the judicial branch do not decide what the laws are in our country. That responsibility and duty lies squarely with the legislative branch.
Period.
If we look close at the criminal just system, lately, that is not what has been happening at all.
What we are seeing from the liberal and socialist side of the political spectrum flies in the face of all constitutional intentions and norms.
We have prosecutors from the executive branch exceeding any prosecutorial authority or discretion that they may have in a multitude of cases.
Prosecutors may decide on a case basis whether or not to pursue charges against an individual after reviewing the actual facts of a specific case.
After that review, they may determine that even though there may have been probable cause to charge or arrest an individual for a specific alleged crime, they, the prosecutor, may not feel that they can prove the charges to a jury or a judge beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the burden of proof for a crime.
If that is the case, they exercise their prosecutorial discretion, and not proceed forward with the case.
A prosecutor does not have the authority to simply not charge someone because of the potential political outcome, positive or negative.
That is an abuse of discretion.
A prosecutor also does not have the authority to simply decide not to enforce a specific charge against anyone because they disagree with it and would not have made it a crime in the first place. That’s true even if a specific law disproportionately affects one group or another.
If they disagree with a law they can challenge it but they cannot disregard it in its entirety.
That is unethical.
Prosecutors do not have veto authority over the legislature. If the legislature says something is a crime, it is a crime.
Many do not realize that under rules of ethics, prosecutors are actually bound to seek justice, not to just seek convictions.
When the law is applied disproportionately to those that prosecutors have political disagreements with or only to those they do not like, they are violating this ethical requirement that uniquely applies just to them.
But they are not alone.
All of this also applies to judges who are adjudicating cases that come before their court.
Judges do not have the authority to ignore laws or to not apply laws that they disagree with or that they believe will result in an outcome that they don’t like.
For a judge to do so, is a clear violation of their oath to uphold the laws and the constitutions of the United States, and if a state judge, the laws and the constitution of their state as well.
Judges also do not have veto authority over the legislative branch.
Even if a judge has a moral objection to a law that they are required to apply to a specific case or defendant, they do not have the option to ignore it or to not apply it as written.
Again, this would be a violation of their oath and an unconstitutional application of the laws itself.
They must apply the law as written.
If a judge disagrees with the way a law is written, they can hope, and they can even encourage, that the parties appeal their rulings to determine if the law is constitutional or not.
But for a trial judge, that is not their call.
The other option that judges have if they disagree with the laws they have to apply in their courtroom, is to resign and step down from the bench entirely.
If they feel that strongly about it, they can always run for office in the legislative branch and try to change things that way.
What they cannot do, is legislate from the bench.
All of this seems to have been lost in the shuffle.
This whole idea that prosecutors and judges can act and rule on matters that they are responsible for, and can decide whether to apply or enforce laws as they are plainly written, has placed the judicial system on its head.
It is getting worse every day.
Not incrementally, either, but more like a runaway train.
Under our constitution, Defendants and litigants have rights that apply to them no matter who they are or if the prosecutor or judge likes them or not.
The same applies to whether the judge agrees with their politics, or they respect their social class or social standing.
The constitution and the rights embodied in it are enured to all individuals, not just to the ones that the prosecutor or judge feels are worthy of them.
When some deals with the justice system, they are granted what used to considered due process under the law and equal application of the law.
We are no longer seeing that in our justice system and it is horrific!
This unconstitutional behavior by bad actors in these two branches of government that interact on a daily basis is what will eventually bring down the justice system, the constitution, and our republic as whole.
The law is not supposed to be about how a particular prosecutor or judge feels or doesn’t feel about the law or a defendant.
On the contrary, it is supposed to be purely about how the law is written and what the legislative intent behind the passage of that law was in the first place.
The legislative branch represents the peoples will, and the judges and prosecutors in the other two branches have to respect that will of the people.
Prosecutors and judges are not super-legislators. They are supposed to be public servants that do the will of the people as set out in the laws passed by the legislative branch.
If they do not want to do that, they should leave voluntarily.
But if they are too corrupt or power hungry or self-righteous to do the right thing and leave, then they should be removed in accordance with the other laws that allow that to happen.
Remember, even though federal judges are appointed for life, if they are consistently acting in violation of the constitution, they can impeached and removed.
We just need people in the legislative branch to step up and have the guts to do it.
The same applies to state judges. There may be even other methods to remove them for violation of their oath to apply the law and constitution as well.
So there’s your elementary school civics lesson for the day.
Now let’s apply it in real life!
Excellent! My thoughts exactly! For all practical purposes the government has abandoned the Constitution except when it suits their needs. The question is, "How do we undo this lawlessness?"