The Supreme Court’s credibility hinges on impartiality, not emotional activism. Justice Jackson’s admission that rulings stem from personal feelings, not constitutional fidelity, exposes a dangerous shift toward judicial policymaking. The Court’s role is to interpret law, not legislate from the bench through subjective “feelings.” This approach mirrors the same overreach seen in blocking Trump’s USAID freeze, where unelected judges prioritized globalist spending over fiscal responsibility. When justices substitute legal analysis for emotional grandstanding, they erode public trust and enable unchecked bureaucratic power. Courts must anchor decisions in text and precedent, not ideological whims. America’s judiciary isn’t a platform for activism, it’s the last line of defense against government excess.
California’s crime reporting gaps expose a systemic failure in accountability. With only 356 of 721 agencies submitting 2024 data, including LAPD, SFPD, and major sheriff departments, the state’s “second-lowest homicide rate” claim collapses under missing jurisdictions representing millions. The Marshall Project’s 2022 findings showed 44 states outperformed CA’s 1.9% reporting rate, while 2024’s 49% participation still omits critical urban areas. This isn’t transparency, it’s bureaucratic cherry-picking. When LA County (10M residents) and SF (875K) skip reporting, the stats become a smokescreen. Real accountability requires full data, not selective compliance that lets politicians parade partial numbers as progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment