Investigative Journalism | Exposing What Lies Beneath
Michael Phillips argues that the Democratic Party is repeating historical patterns by delegitimizing federal law enforcement, as it once did during the abolition of slavery. Today’s rhetoric toward Immigration and Customs Enforcement mirrors that past resistance, suggesting a dangerous precedent. Ignoring history risks chaos and undermines the rule of law.
The Politico article discusses Donald Trump’s second term and his legal battles over executive power but questions whether his actions are truly unprecedented. It argues that past presidents have similarly expanded powers but without the same scrutiny. The real concern, it suggests, stems from Trump’s lack of political approval, not constitutional violation.
Trump, Presidential Power, and Politico’s Short Memory Read More
Maryland’s family courts face skepticism due to the state’s long history of corruption and scandals, particularly in Baltimore. This pervasive distrust is fueled by allegations of bias and financial exploitation in custody and divorce cases. While no definitive proof of corruption exists, the environment promotes suspicion that justice may be influenced by money and favoritism.
Maryland’s Long Shadow of Corruption: How History Shapes Distrust in Family Courts Read More
On July 14, 2025, the Supreme Court rulings in Trump v. J.G.G. and Kennedy v. Braidwood dismantled the legal framework of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), declaring only Article III courts can issue binding decisions. This has led to a crisis in state courts, exposing potentially void past rulings and requiring significant judicial reform.
The Fall of ADR: How the Supreme Court’s 2025 Rulings Exposed the Unconstitutional Rise of Shadow Justice Read More
The family court system has undergone a deliberate transformation over decades, driven by federal funding that incentivizes revenue generation from private disputes. Laws like Title IV-D and PRWORA have turned courts into profit-driven entities, prioritizing efficiency over justice and resulting in systemic bias against noncustodial parents, primarily fathers.
Hijacked Justice: How Federal Funding Turned Family Court into a Profit Machine Read More
Early American colonists opted to ban lawyers, believing that professional conflict leads to more disputes. They fostered community-based conflict resolution, prioritizing peace over legalism. In contrast, modern America is inundated with lawyers, resulting in litigation culture where issues are escalated instead of resolved. Revisiting this historical approach may offer insights for today’s society.
The Colonists Were Smarter Than Us: They Banned Lawyers Read More