INJUSTICE

INJUSTICE
Lenten Photo Challenge: Day 4

Justice is supposed to be blind. Objective and impartial. Not taking sides or letting one's own opinions or beliefs get into the way when deciding and delivering justice.

But as a political science instructor once said to my class, "If humans were angels, we would not need laws. However, we aren't and we do."

There are all kinds of injustice in the world and most of them are beyond my skill to figure out or talk about.

What I want to talk about is something I have always had an issue with.

The U.S. Supreme Court. And as fate would have it, one of the Supreme Court justices just died and so now begins the fight to find an intelligent, objective, impartial judge to sit on the bench for the rest of his or her life. And who gets to pick that person? The people of the U.S.? Nope. The sitting president.

Why does one person get to pick another person to have so much sway over the law of the land for more years than most people ever spend at their own career or job? Sure the nominee must be vetted by congress and committees and such, but in the end, the person is picked by the president, who cannot help but add personal beliefs and opinions into the choice.

How is that impartial? I have already heard from those people who lean left that they are glad that Scalia is dead so that Obama can pick a more liberal, left wing judge to take his place. How is that justice? How is that impartial? All they want is to load the Supreme Court with justices who think their way and not impartially. So that their way of thinking will hold sway over the interpretation of the laws of the land. Isn't that the description of injustice? (Yes, the same thing can be said of right thinking people. Again. It is the same thing.)

Why is something like this big of decision allowed to be left to the choice of one person? Why are they not elected just like every other lawmaker/politician?

Maybe I don't understand it all well enough but is sure seems like an injustice to me.