Courts are supposed to be the guardians against biased claims

One of the key components of the American system is that we are all equal under the law. One of the cries we hear often from our lawmakers, on both sides, is that “no one is above the law.”

We are not guaranteed equal outcomes in society, but in a court of law, every American is considered equal.

Another protection is that all Americans are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

We believed these to be the cornerstone of what it means to be American. Not every country operates with the same legal protections for the masses that we have here.

The only way we are all treated fair in this country is the concept that we each can have our day in court, and that a jury of our peers will presume our innocence until such time sufficient evidence is presented by the state that a crime has been committed.

We also are protected of being denied our freedom or our property without due process.

But what we are seeing happen in America is eroding the undergirding of a basic fundamental requirement of American liberty.

Power is not just limited to the rich. Those with political clout also wield great power over proceedings in courtrooms and deciding what makes it to court and what doesn’t.

The purpose of having a judicial system is to protect every citizen from having their rights violated as well as making sure every citizen is protected from illegal activities.

It was never the intent of the justice system to engage in politically motivated charges. It was never the intent of the prosecutors to target a citizen and maliciously search for any activity that could be considered a crime, and there was a day when anyone who ran for the office of attorney general or any other position of prosecution claiming they would seek to target an individual would be disqualifying.

But we live in an age where politics are no longer about the process but the outcome. Court cases, to be trusted, are completely about the process. Due process.

We are each given these guaranteed protections, and court cases were supposed to be about justice, not political victories.

The new term that will certainly be added to the Oxford Dictionary soon will be the term “lawfare,” something that is common in other nations, but not this one. Or at least not until now.

The courts were the place where politics ended, where facts were the only thing that mattered.

Now, we have to consider whether or not the promise of equal protection under the laws exist.

Here in Kansas we have seen a court issue a search warrant later determined to be inappropriate to raid a newspaper office.

Here in Liberal former Mayor Joe Denoyer believed local residents were committing bribery and testified to the Kansas Bureau of Investigation such, using as his evidence that candidate Taylor Hardin got a hair cut because the people he accused of bribing candidates wanted him to have shorter hair.

We focus on these court cases circulating around Donald Trump and how partisan prosecutors in every case have filed criminal and civil charges against him, but this trend has been growing for some time.

Those who make these accusations are never held accountable because they come from a position of power.

An elderly couple, Don and Nancy Parsons, in Seward County didn’t have to answer real accusations with actual evidence and facts that they had done something wrong. They did no wrong, and the KBI investigation determined no wrongdoing.

But that didn’t stop the KBI from being able to examine the bank records of these two people to prove they did not bribe candidates to run for city commission as the outgoing mayor claimed. Instead, the exact opposite of what we all believe to be a presumption of innocence took place.

Those in positions of authority, or perceived authority, can manipulate the system. It is my hope that we don’t have short memories about these political attacks against the innocent. If a former mayor can do it once, he can do it again if ever given the chance.

America watched as the Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis has been called on the carpet because of her inappropriate relationship with one of her hired gun lawyers trying to accuse a former president of racketeering. 

Her behavior in court would have landed anyone else in contempt. But she is the district attorney. She decides who gets charged and who doesn’t. It even appeared the judge was afraid of her.

Democratic New York Senator Chuck Schumer admitted that the government can retaliate against anyone when he said Trump going after the intelligence agencies was a bad idea. “They have six ways from Sunday to get back at you,” he said.

Watching a prosector who is supposed to conduct trials be the worst witness ever has been appalling.

It’s getting extremely more difficult to trust in justice.