The Patriot Perspective has recently switched its main platform from YouTube, and we would greatly appreciate it if you subscribed to us there. [HERE]
The American judiciary is supposed to be different from Congress and the executive branch. Members of Congress openly run as Republicans or Democrats. Presidents are elected through campaigns, party platforms, and political coalitions.
Judges, however, are supposed to apply the law, interpret the Constitution, and decide cases without allowing personal politics to guide the outcome.
That ideal becomes much harder to believe when former federal judges go on partisan television and sound almost exactly like Democrat political commentators.
On MSNOW Saturday, former U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin joined the network to discuss a federal court fight involving the Trump administration, the IRS, and a proposed $1.776 billion fund intended to compensate people who claim they were unfairly targeted by the government.
The segment framed the fund as a “slush fund” for Trump allies and repeatedly tied it to January 6 defendants, even though the broader issue concerns whether citizens who were wronged by the federal government deserve compensation.
Scheindlin, who previously served as a federal judge in the Southern District of New York, claimed that the judicial system was being used for an improper purpose and argued that Trump was effectively “on both sides” of the case.
She described the situation as “collusion” and suggested there was never a real case or controversy. She also referred to the proposed compensation fund as a “slush fund” and criticized the idea that Trump allies or people connected to January 6 could receive taxpayer-funded compensation.
For a political activist, those comments would be expected. For a former federal judge, they raise a much larger problem.
The judicial branch is not supposed to be another political battlefield. Alexander Hamilton famously described the judiciary as the “least dangerous” branch because judges were not supposed to control the sword or the purse.
Their authority depended on judgment, restraint, and public trust.
But when judges, even former judges, openly join partisan media panels and attack one political side in language that sounds indistinguishable from MSNOW commentary, Americans naturally begin to wonder how impartial the system ever was.
The left spent years insisting that the justice system was independent while Donald Trump faced criminal charges, civil lawsuits, gag orders, raids, investigations, and legal attacks unlike anything previously directed at a major presidential candidate.
Trump’s enemies called that accountability. Millions of Americans saw something else: lawfare.
Now, when the Trump administration seeks to address people who may have been mistreated by the federal government, the same political and legal class suddenly discovers deep concern about process, jurisdiction, collusion, and taxpayer money.
Their concern appears far more selective than principled.
The most revealing part of the interview came when Scheindlin discussed who might benefit from the fund. She suggested that people who pleaded guilty, were convicted, or served prison time should not receive compensation.
But that misses the core point.
A guilty plea does not automatically prove that a prosecution was fair, that a sentence was proportionate, or that government power was used properly. If federal power was abused, then the public should want accountability regardless of whether the victim was politically unpopular.
Judges do not need to be Republicans or Democrats to damage public confidence. They only need to appear political while pretending the system remains neutral.
Too often, the people defending the system sound like they are protecting one political side from accountability while using the language of law to do it.
The Patriot Perspective has recently switched its main platform from YouTube, and we would greatly appreciate it if you subscribed to us there. [HERE]
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
