CHAPTER 1
"Why the words, 'JUSTICE FOR ALL'?"
I began my teaching career in 1959 teaching Social Studies and English for grades seven through nine in a Junior High School. Our daily school ritual back then is still followed by many public schools today. Our local Fox 45 TV station, WRGT 45, airs each day in its morning TV News a tape of a specific class saying their Pledge of Allegiance.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All."
The fundamental question for each one of us boils down to: "What IS Justice for All?" Do we really believe that it is such a basic and essential commitment of our own society? The word, 'all', means every one of us including those who have been convicted of some crime and then incarcerated. This group of inmates has grown to huge numbers over the past few decades. The implication of that figure is taken from a short article in the November 2, 2015 issue of the Christian Science Monitor which described this numbers issue as follows:
"The United States is the world's leading incarcerator; it has less than five percent of the world's population but a quarter of the world's prisoners. Prisons cost states more than $50 billion a year and are second fastest-growing part of state budgets behind Medicaid."
Yet though these citizens may be in jail or prison or out on probation, they are still very much a part of the ALL. This book will be looking at the key question from a variety of perspectives. Some have been the victims of crimes, some have committed crimes, some have worked to bring them to justice, and others have worked to help those who served their time to make a successful re-entry into society. I hope to use my own several life experiences in and among these various groups to assist readers to consider the many aspects of our System and the many efforts to provide a 'YES' answer to the basic question, "Is our System of Justice really for ALL?"
I finished my two graduate degrees (1962 and 1967) and became an Education professor with specialties in K-12 Social Studies curriculum. Those degrees included graduate work in History, Geography, Economics and English. Given this academic focus along with the importance of a solid school curriculum and experiences for children from 5 to 19 years of age, my attention to the continuing school routine of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America has now 'raised several flags' in my mind.
When reading (and saying) the Pledge, I must ask you to be alert to the use (and non-use) of the comma! You will please note that there is NO comma after the word "nation" BUT orally we add a comma at that spot when we recite the Pledge. OK---I am a purist but I did teach English for six years before moving on to 'professing' in higher education.
Justice for All
Because the Pledge puts that societal goal as the final message point, this book will explore our nation's System of Justice as it exists at the most local level via mayor's courts, law enforcement systems from Barney Fife in Mayberry to Federal Marshalls and the FBI at the national level. Judges who are elected (or not), Prosecutors who also must be elected, and public defense attorneys who must please those who appoint them are all subject to the whims and human weaknesses of those who elect or appoint these essential elements of the system.
At one time there was the oft-stated goal of rehabilitation as the purpose of our Justice System. We wanted that those convicted could be re-affiliated into society in a productive contributing way. Has this positive effort been replaced by a growing philosophy of punishing as the prime goal? For too many inmates their long-delayed return (if ever) into society is with no real rehabilitation ever having been made available!
Our daily news brings us vivid evidence of illegal convictions of people who are just now being freed with their convictions overturned. After decades of illegal actions by the system's officials which have deprived them of their freedom, they now are back in society with us. Taxpayers are now having to have their governments pay out millions of dollars as punishments of the system's malpractices via the courts, the prisons, and/or the medical services provided or denied to those incarcerated. Not only are there major emotional and/ or financial costs to the humans so injured, but also real tax costs out of our collective tax pockets as the System is having now to pay reparations for the misdeeds!
One more brief example of an all too common "judicial malpractice" concerns the very basic tenet of our court system---trial by a jury of peers! Peers is commonly defined as people like the defendant. Bryan Stevenson's 2014 book, JUST MERCY, points out that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly found the System to be failing to provide a jury of peers with even a slight representation of African Americans. In the 1880's Stauder v WV. decision the Court said this lack was outside the Constitution and thus OK. But in 1986, Batson v Ky,the Court ruled such lack of peers on juries was unconstitutional. Once again but much more recently in Foster v Ga, the Court by a 7-1 vote on May 23, 2016 ruled that systematically removing peers from a jury IS ALSO UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Justice for All remains a goal which has been much too frequently ignored by the System in many parts of our country!
As we have our children pledge their allegiance to a system of JUSTICE FOR ALL, what will be their confidence in that flag and what it says but is not followed in practice? Will they be encouraged to trust the judicial system? Will they look for ways to scam the system? Will they retreat and isolate themselves in their school work, their lives, and their adult actions on behalf of our nation and society? Or will the current efforts to reform the system be seen to be appropriate and of significant benefit to us all?
There have been many cases of malpractice within the justice system by all levels of it prior to the actual trial and sentencing. This includes cases of local officers turning themselves into prosecutor-judge-jury and executioner as they put many bullets into an unarmed person or a choke-hold to death on a man who was selling untaxed cigarettes.
Prosecutors have been found guilty of withholding key evidence from the defense, of not calling witnesses who would agree with the defendant's version of events, of rigging a jury which would render a decision in their favor, AND there have been Judges who went along with such illegal actions. All misdeeds that took place prior to the actual Guilty decision was reached.
Then there is another major element in the system that encompasses the time a person spends as an inmate under forced incarceration. There have been major problems with medical services provided or with-held, of diets that contributed to more medical problems, etc. These problems within the system are less well known to the public, but must be made public and changes made to prevent them from continuing.
Finally, I will also share with you a number of very positive actions that are already in place to address the all-too-troublesome negatives currently being found much too frequently. A look at solid practices should give us all stimulation for becoming an active part in positive efforts to better serve our nation. Punishment does have a place, without a question, but being able to return a felon back into society and able to become a tax-paying contributing member of the community currently is too often found to be seriously missing.
This chapter has been devoted to giving my readers a brief view of the many aspects of the judicial system in our diverse nation. A look at the Table of Contents indicates that each of these problem areas receives direct and special attention. It is my hope that your reading will be both informative and functional.
My goal in writing this book is to help every reader to give serious and thoughtful attention to being fully informed about the failures of the system. My goal is that we will all focus that knowledge by becoming active participants in seeking the essential reforms that will enable our nation to meet the goals of The Pledge as so clearly stated in its final three words: JUSTICE FOR ALL.
James K. Uphoff, Ed.D. jamesuphoff@twc.com (937) 567-0955
CHAPTER 2
The Formula: (E + V) = JFA /sq. dl
The formula is much less difficult to understand when our nation more fully understands the vital importance and connection of the election process. How voting impacts the fairness of our Justice for All system and goal is crucial. Elections have very direct impact upon the Justice System. Many crucial leaders in the total system are directly elected by those who are eligible to vote. Thus who is allowed to vote is crucial because those denied the right to vote are also denied the right to help select these significant persons.
Consider how many "justice leaders" are elected to their position. Many local judges as well as those on appeals courts and on State Supreme Courts are elected. Almost all local city or county Attorneys/Prosecutors and state Attorney Generals are really the prosecutors. These elected officials may even appoint Public Defenders. The elected prosecutors have major powers to call Grand Juries, determine which charges, if any, to make against a defendant, and also defend their own jurisdiction if the county or state is sued. Some local law enforcements leaders such as Sheriffs are elected. They oversee the hiring and training of their deputies just as Police Chiefs do in other jurisdictions even though only their elected leaders are a step-removed in the employment and supervision process.
Also elected are those local village, township, city, and county commissioners/trustees. They, along with state legislators hire the local or state law enforcement leaders for their own jurisdictions. These legislators also make the laws and determine the general punishments that accompany the crimes for their own locations. They may also have major roles in the punishment dimension since the jails and prisons of our nation are created and funded by these elected governing bodies.
Another major group of elected officials are the local School Board members who make many decisions about the nature and success of the public school system. They appoint the leaders of their system and hire those recommended by the leaders. Given that some writers address what is being called, "The School to Prison Pipeline," * the elected Board of Education members are responsible for a significant part of our society and thus too often, also its juvenile Judicial System. All members of our society should seriously be involved in the local elections of school board members.
* Too often poor student success in school leads to criminal behavior as if the child is on a 'railroad track' that ends in his/her incarceration. Plus, juvenile prisons offer little real educational help for such students.
Now if many citizens who are typically fully eligible to vote are suddenly deprived of that precious fundamental right, they are no longer able to play a significant role in any of the actions or levels just cited. Purging voter rolls, limiting the times/places/ways when voters are able to vote and adding new obstacles for voters are actions which very negatively limit the ability of those voters to play a key role in our Justice System.
Historical Changes in Who Can Vote
In our nation's early days only white males who owned property were eligible to vote. Then the property requirement was removed. After the Civil War and especially in the South for decades such new requirements as literacy tests, special taxes, and intimidations were used to limit who could vote. Women have been allowed to vote for only the past century but our nation has generally been making progress toward voting eligibility for all citizens. The more people who are eligible to vote, the stronger our nations justice system will be.
Sidebar: One Vote Counts!
The title of the short story is, "The Mother Who Saved
Suffrage: Passing the 19th Amendment" by Jennie Cohen.
This even shorter version is about the last State to ratify the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which read" the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." On August 18, 1920 a total of 35 States had ratified, but one more was needed and Tennessee was considering this action. Its Senate had ratified but the House was divided 48-48 and was considering whether or not to say Yes or No and had just defeated a motion to table the vote by 48-48. The youngest member, Harry Burn — age 24, had been on the anti-suffrage (No) side but had just received a note from his mother, Phoebe Ensminger Burg (called Miss Febb by family and friends) strongly supporting the Amendment and urging her son "to be a good boy" and support it as well. He did then vote, Yes! He thus brought about the fury of his House anti-peers "while presumably avoiding that of his mother — which may very well have been the more daunting of the two. ... I know that a mother's advice is always safest for her boy to follow. ... and my mother wanted me to vote for ratification."
ONE VOTE MADE A MAJOR CHANGE IN OUR NATION!
Bernard Grofman wrote in 1990 A Twentieth Century Fund Paper entitled, Voting Rights, Voting Wrongs, The Legacy of Baker v. Carr (1962). The case decision by the United States Supreme Court (USSC) ruled that our Constitution mandated the principle of "one-man-one vote." That decision "dramatically changed legislative apportionment in this country." Grofman states that without this decision, "I believe that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would have emerged a far weaker document in terms of its enforcement mechanisms." Each person should be able to vote and have that vote count equally across districts for congressional and state elections.
But still today well into the second decade of the 2000s, our nation continues to deal with very explicit attempts to control the voting process. Meeting and furthering political goals of a party in control is being used to turn the voting public into numbers more likely to favor that party. This was encouraged when the USSC (2013) eased the mandated pre-approval requirements (Section 5) of the Voting Rights Act (Section 2 in 1982 amendments) "that prohibited the use of any electoral device that would have the purpose or effect of diluting minority voting strength."
From then on a number of states have passed laws to restrict dramatically the right to vote. While they claimed to be trying to prevent "voter-fraud", the legislators could provide no examples of there being any such problem. Recently, in 2016 the Federal Courts and even some state courts have been striking down as unconstitutional elements of these recent state voting changes. Citations have included "surgically crafted" actions such as cutting the times for Sunday voting — a practice found more commonly used by black voters.
The December 20, 2015 issue of the New York Times article by Jim Rutenberg led with the following title and summary: "BLOCK THE VOTE After the 2013 Supreme Court decision that gutted the Voting Rights Act, new tactics to suppress minority voting rights are flourishing – especially in states like Texas, where a growing Latino population is reshaping the electorate."
USA TODAY's August 3, 2016 lead opinion editorial carried the following bold-heading: "Rulings reveal trueagenda behind voter ID laws" Their key points quickly followed: "... Yet there is ample reason to applaud rulings from four federal courts in the past two weeks striking down laws in Texas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and North Dakota that could deny hundreds of thousands of potential voters — mostly minorities, often poor or elderly — their most basic right under the Constitution. Taken together, the rulings provide further confirmation that these laws were more about suppressing turnout than about preventing fraud."
