The Subversion of Justice
As I reflect on my roots as an Ethnic American, with family stories passed down of those who crossed oceans to carve out a land of freedom and opportunity, the Declaration of Independence hits close to home. For those unfamiliar, this foundational document from 1776 lists 27 specific “grievances”—formal complaints—against King George III of Britain, justifying why the American colonies broke away. These grievances, detailed in this Wikipedia overview, highlight abuses like overreach by distant rulers. In this article, each grievance I reference links directly to its spot in that enumerated list, showing how history repeats in our fight against modern tyranny. Activist courts and federal agencies echo the “swarms of officers” in Grievance 10, tormenting folks like me and my kin through warped legal twists that speed up our demographic erasure. This ties right into the bogus 14th Amendment I unpacked in Part XIII (The Fraudulent 14th Amendment).
My main point here is straightforward: Institutions built to protect justice now corrupt the Constitution, forcing unwanted mixing, picking and choosing who gets prosecuted, and stripping away our shot at fair trials and local control. This isn’t some oversight—it’s a betrayal that parallels the judges loyal only to the king’s whims in Grievance 9 (sometimes listed as 11) and the federal meddling that crushes self-governance, much like Grievance 1 and Grievance 7, as I connected in my addendum to The Road to Revolution. I’ll break down key court decisions and their real-world fallout on our communities, list out the current “swarms” going after patriots, and wrap with my call for fixes grounded in originalism—the real way to honor what our ancestors fought for, like I laid out in Part XVI (Reclaiming the Republic).
Historical Ties: From Colonial Tyranny to Modern Judicial Betrayal
To really get this, let’s dig into those founding grievances that sparked our break from Britain. In The Road to Revolution, I traced how the colonies put up with far-off oppression, from blocked self-rule to rigged immigration policies that controlled who could join their communities. My follow-up piece, History Rhymes, spots the parallels: Grievance 1, where the king shot down good laws, lines up with today’s federal judges scrapping state defenses against invasion—like rules on zoning or schools that keep our neighborhoods intact and preserve the cultural fabric we’ve built over generations. Grievance 7, which slammed blocks on population growth through immigration, gets turned on its head now—federal dictates shove in endless non-Europeans, ditching the 1790 Naturalization Act’s focus on folks who could blend in without disrupting our way of life.
Grievance 9 blasted judges hooked on the king’s payroll and job security, guaranteeing crooked calls that favored the crown over the people. These days, unaccountable federal judges, pushed by globalist agendas, stomp on state rights to push displacement, often prioritizing international norms over the will of Ethnic Americans like us who trace our lineage back to the founders. Grievance 20 grieved over lost jury trials; now, forced pleas and mixed-up juries weaken that protection, making it harder for us to get a fair shake in a system increasingly stacked against our perspectives. And those “swarms” from Grievance 10? That’s the FBI, IRS, and DOJ hounding Ethnic American folks like us while letting invaders slide, all under the guise of enforcing “equity.”
The big flips started with Dred Scott v. Sandford in 1857, where Chief Justice Taney nailed that citizenship was for Europeans only, keeping out Africans and sticking to what the founders meant for their posterity. Scott, an enslaved guy, argued for freedom after time in free spots, but the Court said no standing as a non-citizen and tossed the Missouri Compromise for messing with slave property. That was pure originalism: “We the People” was about white Europeans, as I broke down in “We the People” Meant White Only. But after the Civil War, the forced 14th Amendment—laid bare in Part XIII (The Fraudulent 14th Amendment)—flipped it, handing birthright citizenship to everyone, even kids of invaders. Cases like United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) stretched it to children of legal residents, and Plyler v. Doe (1982) demanded schools for illegals, ramping up our replacement and straining resources meant for our own families.
The game-changer was Brown v. Board of Education (1954), calling segregated schools unconstitutional and ditching the 1790 spirit for forced blending.
They enforced it with raw power: In Little Rock, Arkansas, Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne and National Guard to shove our kids into integration at gunpoint, escorting the “Little Rock Nine” through mobs. If that’s not straight-up tyranny, I don’t know what is. Before Brown, our schools built strong cultural ties, fostering the values and history that bind Ethnic Americans together. After, it sparked what we call “White Flight,” with our people fleeing cities—urban white numbers dropped 20-30% in places like Detroit and Chicago from 1950-1970, leading to resegregation anyway. But today, there’s no escape left for us Ethnic Americans— we’ve been so outnumbered demographically that White Flight’s over. All we can do is dig in and brace, but hope’s fading as judicial overreach, dressed up as “compassion” for outsiders, seals our fate and erodes the communities our ancestors sacrificed to build.
Schools are more split now than in 1988, with Black-White mixing down from 45% to 30% in big districts, highlighting how these rulings haven’t achieved their stated goals but have instead accelerated division and decline in educational quality for everyone involved.
Court-Mandated Integration: Expanding on Education and Crime
Picking up from Part IV (Education), where I showed how DEI initiatives and overseas students push our kids aside, court orders ram integration that wrecks our setups and undermines the merit-based systems that once rewarded hard work. Brown lit the fuse for pushback, but Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971) okayed busing to hit racial targets. That dumped our children into tough spots, fueling White Flight: Boston’s white students fell from 60% in 1974 to 15% by 1980, with violence and falling standards that hit families like mine hard. Charlotte went from 70% white schools to 25%, gaps growing wider and leaving behind neighborhoods stripped of their vitality.
Affirmative action rulings pile on the pressure. Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) let race factor in admissions, edging out qualified folks like us: Top schools reject whites at triple the rate for preferred groups, denying opportunities to Ethnic American youth who play by the rules. The 2023 Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard nixed outright quotas, but sneaky “holistic” approaches hang on, with DOJ eyeing 45 colleges for anti-white slant. Before, Harvard’s Asian and white spots dipped 10-15%; now, DEI tricks keep the squeeze, tying into Part VI (White Collar Immigration), where H-1Bs snatch jobs from our grads and hollow out the middle class we once dominated.
On crime, linking to Part XI (Black Crime) and Part XII (Immigration’s Crime Multiplier), courts force sanctuary rules that override states and expose our streets to dangers we never voted for. Decisions like City of New York v. United States (1999) and later halts stopped states from helping ICE, claiming 10th Amendment breaches. Trump’s 2017 defund push got called coercive. The fallout? Since going sanctuary in the late 1980s, spots like San Francisco saw non-citizen numbers climb 15-20% from 2000 to 2020, with crime waves: Illegals racked up 1,351 murders in Texas alone over a decade. This blatantly favors invaders at our expense, crushing Ethnic American neighborhoods under waves of unchecked chaos and cost, turning safe havens into battlegrounds where our safety is an afterthought.
Selective Enforcement: Prosecuting Defenders, Ignoring Invaders
The DOJ’s obsession with “hate crimes” against non-Ethnics screams bias, hitting close to home as it silences voices like mine raising alarms about displacement. From 2000-2025, reports doubled, hitting 3,750 anti-Black cases in 2023 (vs. 1,200 anti-white), even as Blacks do interracial violence at 70:1 rates. Their focus: 61.9% on race-targeted incidents, zeroing in on minorities while shortchanging white victims and ignoring the patterns that affect our communities most.
Real cases show it: In U.S. v. Barger (Rise Above Movement), rally fight charges got tossed twice for picking on one side—Antifa walked free. Invader crimes like MS-13 hits often snag light pleas, leaving families devastated without justice. Kyle Rittenhouse’s self-defense case spotlighted media smears, but in mixed-up Kenosha, outright jury intimidation and threats came damn close to railroading the whole thing, showing how diversity in the courtroom can twist outcomes against us.
The FBI’s “Arctic Frost” spied on 92 right-leaning groups, like Turning Point USA, tagging them as “extremists” while ignoring cartels that prey on our borders. IRS messes: The 2013 Tea Party slowdowns blocked tax breaks; recent audits of Trump critics like James Comey and Andrew McCabe point to a sinister trend. Comey got hit with a rare, deep-dive National Research Program audit for his 2017 taxes—one of just 5,000 picked that year—and McCabe for 2019, one of 8,000. Even though the IRS watchdog cleared any foul play, the odds of both Trump enemies getting nailed like that? It stinks of the agency being used as a political hammer, targeting those who challenge the status quo that favors displacement.
Erosion of Rights: The Death of Jury Trials
Grievance 20‘s jury loss shows up in plea deals: 98% federal convictions, 95% state. Actual trials tanked from 20% in the ’80s to under 3% today, forcing defendants into bargains that bypass the community judgment our founders prized. In diverse places, slanted juries make it worse: Data proves racial mixes sway verdicts—diverse groups hammer whites harder, with Black jurors cutting breaks to their own. Florida stats: All-white juries nail Black defendants 16% more; mixed ones ease up on whites by 10%. This shuts down voices like mine, rigging the game for nationalists in city courts and making it feel like the system is designed to suppress dissent from Ethnic Americans fighting for our heritage.
Case Studies: Landmark Rulings and Demographic Devastation
Here’s a table summing up major rulings and their hits on us:
| Ruling | Year | Key Holding | Pre-Ruling Demographics | Post-Ruling Impacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brown v. Board of Education | 1954 | Segregated schools unconstitutional; enforced with 101st Airborne in Little Rock. | Homogeneous Ethnic American schools in many areas. | White flight: 20-30% urban white population drop (1950-1970); resegregation, achievement declines. |
| Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education | 1971 | Authorized busing for racial balance. | Charlotte schools ~70% white. | White enrollment fell to 25%; higher crime in majority-minority schools. |
| Grutter v. Bollinger | 2003 | Race permissible in admissions. | Balanced Ethnic American access at elites. | Whites rejected 3x rate of minorities; 850,000 spots displaced annually. |
| Sanctuary Rulings (e.g., San Francisco v. Trump) | 2017+ | Blocked defunding; protected non-cooperation. | Varied non-citizen populations. | 15-20% non-Ethnic growth in hubs; crime surges. |
Sources for the table:
- Supreme Court sides with immigration judges in speech case for now, rebuffing Trump administration
- Federal Judge Blocks President Trump’s Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship
- Today’s swarms: FBI’s watch on 92 groups, IRS probes—pounding nationalists while invaders get a pass, creating a chilling effect on anyone daring to speak out.
Judicial Overreach in the Trump Era: Legislating from the Bench
This pattern of judicial subversion has intensified in recent years, particularly targeting efforts by President Trump to stem the tide of displacement through executive action. From his first term to the present, activist courts have gunned for Trump’s immigration policies, overturning executive orders left and right in what amounts to legislating from the bench. Take the 2017 travel ban, aimed at restricting entry from high-risk countries to protect our borders—federal judges in Washington state and elsewhere issued nationwide injunctions blocking it, forcing rewrites and prolonged legal battles before the Supreme Court finally upheld a version in 2018. More recently, in 2025, courts have struck down Trump’s fast-track deportation policy and an executive order challenging birthright citizenship for children of illegals, with a Maryland judge issuing a preliminary injunction halting the latter nationwide. These rulings don’t just neutralize presidential authority; they usurp Congress’s role, prompting lawmakers to introduce bills to codify or counter the blocked measures, like proposals to end birthright citizenship through legislation rather than executive fiat.
It’s a vicious cycle: Courts overreach by interpreting laws broadly to favor open borders, invalidating Trump’s attempts to enforce existing statutes, and then Congress feels pressured to pass new bills to make those policies permanent or to override the judicial blocks. For instance, after courts limited Trump’s border wall funding by redirecting military budgets, bills emerged in Congress to explicitly allocate funds for barriers, turning what should be executive enforcement into legislative debates hijacked by special interests. This isn’t adjudication—it’s activism, mirroring the colonial grievances where judges served the king’s agenda over the people’s will. For Ethnic Americans like me, watching these courts dismantle protections against invasion feels personal; it’s our communities bearing the brunt, from rising crime to strained schools, all while judges play legislator from ivory towers.
Reclaiming Justice: Advocacy for Originalist Reforms
To turn this around, I push for originalism—a way of reading the Constitution based on what it meant when written, reining in these activist excesses. Drawing from ideas I’ve championed for years on restrained judging tied to history, we’ve got to scrap lifetime judicial tenure, demand state sign-off on federal judges, kill off plea pressures, and lock in even juries with smart venue picks. Invalidate the 14th’s scam like in Part XIII (The Fraudulent 14th Amendment), and cut funding to the swarms. As I called out in Part XV (The Tribute of Traitors), shift those bucks back to our kids and grandkids. This goes beyond tweaks—it’s about us Ethnic Americans taking back what’s ours. We’ve endured enough; time to tear down this court-built cage and rebuild a nation true to the blood and grit of our forebears.
A Personal Note from James Sewell
My friends, as I finish this piece on judicial overreach and the subversion of justice, my blood boils at how far we’ve fallen from the republic our forefathers bled to create. They listed those grievances against a distant tyrant, risking everything to secure a nation for their posterity—us, the Ethnic Americans who carry their legacy. Today, black-robed activists on the bench play the role of that tyrant, twisting the Constitution to force integration, shield invaders, and silence any who dare defend our communities. From bayonets enforcing Brown v. Board to nationwide injunctions gutting Trump’s border protections, these courts have become the sharpest weapon in our displacement.
I feel the weight of my ancestors’ sacrifice every time I see another neighborhood lost, another school surrendered, another patriot harassed by federal swarms. They endured Valley Forge so we could inherit a homeland, not watch it handed over by judicial decree masquerading as justice. This betrayal ends only when we demand originalism, strip these judges of their unchecked power, and reclaim the law for the people it was written to serve—us alone.
The hour is late, but the fight is ours to win. Stand with me, restore the scales of justice, and secure our birthright before it’s gone forever.
With unyielding resolve, James Sewell
© James Sewell 2025 – All rights reserved