User:Average/Justice for All

Justice for all is a tricky and sensitive thing these days. Hence the important of grooming wisdom in the Judicial Branch. It's not clear that Jefferson was correct when he declared that "all are created equal". The Biblical narratives, for example, don't coincide with the origin of the Native Americans, for example. That of course doesn't mean that they should be treated less than equal or with less justice, but that their destiny may not be the same. This issue also touches on topics which are too sensitive to discuss here, regarding race, sexual orientation, alien species, historical guilt, etc.

In addition to the immediate facts of a case, justice must ultimately include historical injustices that occurred generations ago.

In the World Constitution, the Judicial Branch is not like the Legislative where items are simply decided by majority rule. Like a jury, there must be unanimity. This ensures greater justice is done. Cases can be appealed, but the prices double and the loser has to pay. The weight of this grows as cases are appealed, for each level of governance has double the number of Judges. The cost is minimal where it counts, starting with only 1 Judge at the City level, and no debate is necessary. Th unanimity requirement forces debate, investigation, and further research among Judges, so that wisdom can grow. If a simple vote were all that was required, life-time appointees could just do as little as possible: submit their opinion. And what or who would be able to do anything about it?