Access to Justice in California
Introduction
Human beings are accorded with inalienable fundamental rights and freedoms that give value and meaning to the general understanding of our existence. In pursuit of life and what comes with it, there is an infringement of individual rights in various ways (Mor, 2017). To address such challenges, it called for the creation of a justice system that will solve the moral dilemmas in society. In so doing, there is restored social order and conformity with existing rules of the land. However, this is not always the case, as many people are always hindered from accessing justice based on various factors. By looking at the speeches by California’s Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye to the Legislatures and the interview with CLR Co-Editor in Chief, Erick Silber, this analysis intends to provide a robust study on the same.
First and foremost, in both speeches, Chief justice acknowledges the critical dates in the history of the United States (Cantil-Sakauye, 2020). By recognizing the 100th anniversary since women were allowed to vote in the U.S and appreciating the proclamation of February 19th as a day to historical reflection for Japanese-American, the Justice provides a judicial setting for her presentation. When she alludes to the Women’s suffrage movement, she reminds the audience of the immense struggle for justice and equality that women especially went through in the mid-19th century to be allowed to vote and get elected into leadership positions. On the same note, the internment policies that the people of Japanese descent were subjected did not consider fundamental legal and human rights but remained to be seen as racial discrimination. The majority were forcefully moved to the internment camps after the attack on Pearl’s Harbor by Japan. Through the juxtaposition of the two scenarios, both speeches highlight the historical injustices that have seen people denied access to fair hearing and equity, as was witnessed during the Women’s suffrage movement and the internment policies of the Japanese-Americans.
Secondly, the speeches address the issues that deter access to justice for the people of California and therefoJusticehe people of the United States. Chief justice addresses racial and income disparity issues as one of the challenges that denies many people, not only in California but in the entire country getting justice (Cantil-Sakauye, 2019). These speeches resonate well with the majority of California who records the highest number of the poverty-stricken areas in the U, S. This implies that many cannot afford to hire competent counsel for representation in the court of laws and therefore are left with the only option of self-representation. The latter is highly incapable of winning the case of ignorance on the rule of law and, consequently, weak defense. This results in loss of the situation and eventual infliction of injustice on the poor masses. To prevent this, the Chief Justice champions for the programs that will see changes in the justice system activities that prove challenging for the poor people to access.
Besides, in both speeches, the Chief Justice highlights the extensive role of the judicial system. Not only does she court as a place of obtaining criminal justice but rather a home for social justice as well. The development of the program to address the homelessness crisis proves the significant role the justice system can offer. As such, she posits critical measures that can help on the same. Among them includes taking the accrued surplus to the executive arm, which will, in turn, be used to establish excellent housing facilities for her homeless citizens. Critically, in both speeches, such thoughts provide a background policy in which, if appropriately implemented by any arm of the government, will ensure there is a reduction in homelessness not only in California but to a more significant extent, the United States.
On the other hand, from the insightful interview between the Chief Justice and the CLR Co-Editor in Chief Erik Silber provided many aspects of the judicial system.
First, it proved to be inspirational. One of such includes the belief in self -actualization of the younger employees. The District Attorney of the Sacramento County allowed the Chief Justice on the very first day to consider taking up a courtroom case. In this sheer show of trust by the District Attorney, Cantil-Sakauye would then enjoy such experience that comes in the courtroom. For instance, the preparation and the presentation of evidence, the procedures in the courtrooms, among other things. This sense of trust and opportunity provided a foundational basis in which she would grow through various ranks to become a Chief Justice of California. Therefore, accolades can be given to the judicial branch to ensure that junior employees are allowed to build confidence and self-actualization.
Also, the diversification of the branch, especially California’s Supreme Court, is not only inspiring but also crucial for the development of an individual in various dimensions. The diversity in courts based on age, ethnicity, culture, and educational background, provides a productive environment for growth, both professionally and socially (Cantil-Sakauye, 2020). For instance, being together with the elderly in the same branch offers a room in which one can get mentorship and learn from the rich experience of the senior Attorneys in handling different cases. Equally, it sets out at a premise on the need to appreciate one another based on the diversities and that such differences should be celebrated and not cast as the seed for divisions.
Besides, the various aspects of her family and career story inspired me. First and foremost, the role of her mother stands out into shaping her career choice. Despite the mother being semi-educated, she ensured that she exposed her daughter to environmental stimuli that would later challenge the daughter into becoming what she is today. The Chief Justice. By taking her daughter to witness the first Filipino lawyer cannot be underrated. This was basically meant to instill a sense of positive mental conflict into the young daughter on the possibility of all dreams. Despite being born of the itinerant farm worker and less educated mother, with determination, she was able to defy all odds to achieve the mother’s dream, “you could do that.” This inspires me.
Next is the involvement in civic education programs for the people of California. Such an act makes her career path to be inspirational as it does not only operate within the confines of court but instead plays a vital role in the bigger picture of the society (Cantil-Sakauye, 2020). The engagement with the students, for instance, provides the learners with hope and belief that they can also one day be the Judges and leaders they admire, and that the socio-economic environment doesn’t matter. To a child studying California, which is recorded with 50% of the nation’s poverty, such exercises are essential in instilling hope and self-belief on the beauty of their dreams.
Accordingly, I would wish to ask Chief Justice two questions. The first one would be, how does she balance as a mother between parenting and her legal profession, which is always demanding. This is because many people often find a challenge in striking a balance between the two. As such, her response to this is essential in preconditioning young people on how to operate under such circumstances. Secondly, I would ask about their concern in ensuring equal access to justice by all citizens in the United States.
Summarily, both the speeches and the interviews of the Chief Justice can be summarized into one thing. The need for access to justice which includes not only criminal justice, but rather social justice as well. Therefore, she cites the pivotal role of the branch to the larger society in various dimensions, as discussed above.