Justice is often depicted as a blind woman who holds an evenly balanced scale as it is meant to reflect that justice is supposed to be dispensed impartially and to all members of society. Of course, within American hegemony is a popular myth that judiciaries are impartial arbiters of constitution and constitutionality. Today, attorney Christopher Dilworth joins us in a two-part episode to debunk this myth while explaining the history of the US judiciary. Show Notes2:10: What do Lawyers do? Nuance-Cuck3:20 - Law is not a vehicle to change the world. 4:04 - Supreme Court, a bullwark against change5:30 - Streamlining straight to the Supreme Court6:54 - Hammer v. Dagenhart10:56 - IG Farben and Zyklon B with Neal Kayal13:34 - Atkins v Children’s Hospital: Minimum wage conflicts with Due Process15:22 - Scalia’s anti-intellectualness 17:17 - “Originalism” 18:15 - Qualified Immunity20:18 - Civil Asset Forfeiture22:30 - Police have no constitutional duty to protect and serve24:14 - Christopher Dilworth’s personal experience with the police28:20 - Esha’s Experience with the Russian Police29:24 - Janet’s Story with the Police37:02 - Legalized Sadism44:53 - Government’s involvement in bringing drugs - Gary Webb 48:04 - Three StrikesChristopher Dilworth can be found on <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/DillieHoliday">Twitter</a> Get full access to Historic.ly at <a href="https://www.historicly.net/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4">www.historicly.net/subscribe</a>

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

Blindingly Unjust Part 1 with Christopher Dilworth

historicly

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews