Blindingly Unjust Part 1 with Christopher Dilworth

<p>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. </p><p></p><p>Show Notes</p><p>2:10: What do Lawyers do? Nuance-Cuck</p><p>3:20 - Law is not a vehicle to change the world. </p><p>4:04 - Supreme Court, a bullwark against change</p><p>5:30 - Streamlining straight to the Supreme Court</p><p>6:54 - Hammer v. Dagenhart</p><p>10:56 - IG Farben and Zyklon B with Neal Kayal</p><p>13:34 - Atkins v Children’s Hospital: Minimum wage conflicts with Due Process</p><p>15:22 - Scalia’s anti-intellectualness </p><p>17:17 - “Originalism” </p><p>18:15 - Qualified Immunity</p><p>20:18 - Civil Asset Forfeiture</p><p>22:30 - Police have no constitutional duty to protect and serve</p><p>24:14 - Christopher Dilworth’s personal experience with the police</p><p>28:20 - Esha’s Experience with the Russian Police</p><p>29:24 - Janet’s Story with the Police</p><p>37:02 - Legalized Sadism</p><p>44:53 - Government’s involvement in bringing drugs - Gary Webb </p><p>48:04 - Three Strikes</p><p>Christopher Dilworth can be found on <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/DillieHoliday">Twitter</a></p> <br/><br/>Get full access to Historic.ly at <a href="https://www.historicly.net/subscribe?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoyMjI3OTU2LCJpYXQiOjE2ODAwOTY3ODMsImV4cCI6MTY4MjY4ODc4MywiaXNzIjoicHViLTgwNzkiLCJzdWIiOiJjaGVja291dCJ9.6kOh-5rZZnEZR7pJ0PyrRSe05_JM8B6hhrME6ea39Ug&#38;utm_medium=podcast&#38;utm_campaign=CTA_4">www.historicly.net/subscribe</a>