Court Shorts: Fair and Impartial Judiciary

How do federal judges have an impact on individual rights every day, even for people who may never enter a courtroom? Ten federal judges answer that question and others in “Court Shorts: A Fair and Impartial Judiciary,” produced in celebration of Constitution Day, on Sept. 17, discussing their commitment to impartiality, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
00:20 - Intro
01:24 - How do judges show their commitment to impartiality?
02:24 - How does the Constitution build impartiality into the Judiciary?
03:07 - How do judges maintain their impartiality?
04:16 - Are there limits on judicial power?
05:31 - What impact does judicial impartiality have on daily life?
06:30 - What impact does an impartial Judiciary have on democracy?
The seven-minute video addresses six questions about how judges apply the law in an even-handed manner. Judges touch on the impact of an impartial judiciary on daily life, how the Constitution safeguards judicial impartiality, and how judges maintain their impartiality in the cases and controversies that come before them.
“Every day that you walk out of your house and walk down the street, you are exercising your rights under the Constitution,” said Judge James E. Boasberg, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. “Who protects you when the government interferes with those rights that are stated in the First Amendment? The Judiciary does.”
Judges also share their perspectives on what impartiality means to them.
“We are not beholden to any one group,” said Judge Nancy E. Brasel, of the District of Minnesota. “We are not subject to outside pressures … to politics in particular.”
The video is part of Court Shorts a series of brief educational videos about the federal courts and Constitutional principles.
Find additional educational resources: www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...
• Sign up for U.S. Courts email updates: www.uscourts.gov/email-updates​
• Follow @USCourts on Twitter: / uscourts​
• Follow U.S. Courts on LinkedIn: / us-courts

[@marycolton5024]

Who protects you when it is the judiciary that is harming you?

[@josephsadowski4532]

When you have clerks ordering you to remove evidence from the motion you do not have an independent judiciary you have a confined justice system as your manipulating the case before it even starts, and when you have clerks waiting 37 days to order you to remove an order from anothe3r country closing the post office in the United States who is not accepting mail as to the Pandemic, your then manipulating the justice holding off the motion or just dismissing that motion destroying the case, and when you have a clerk's office refusing to file, like Chief Clerk of this court Angela D. Caesar, under 28 U.S. Code § 352 - Review of complaint by chief judge you do not have any independent judiciary as that decision could have and must have come from the Justice itself, as the complaint was against the clerks office for a showing a clerk or two are working for the Lawyerts, which was proven through filings making the clerk's office no better then what was found in 1983 in Illinois when 62 clerks were found guilty of setting up cases and 34 justices working with the justices and the lawyers was a list beyond control with payments to the clerks back in 1983 of $10,000.00 to disrupt a case to get it thrown out, yes the judiciary is as clean as they were and to allow a Judge such as the African in the video to wear a multi color Bow Tie advertizing he is Gay is not showing of independant, it is a showing of disfunction as to the Gay mentality is what was found back in the 70's in the Supreme Court as to being a mentally sick person who belongs in a mental institution, there is no independence in that showing, making the judges to be seen as Bias and Prejudice to the original filings such as the stripping the cases of pictures of injuries in a case, there is no independent justice in any Judiciary as the Judiciary has shown its colors as they are above the Laws of the constitution and will continue to be above the Constitution, as when the House, Congress gave permission to the High C they decided to cut me off, so I have to stop, there is no fair justice as they are people and to believe the appellate court is better, they protect the corruption and dis-allow reality in the courts as to their ways of cleansing the files before they get them.