
UPDATE (2025): The U.S. has withdrawn from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and paused funding to UNRWA, while still claiming commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Given U.S. Amerikkka’s track record and ongoing human rights violations, brutality within its courts and prisons, and systemic abuses in politics, it’s a meaningless gesture.
”Immunity must be abolished because it allows law enforcement – as well as other government officials – to repeatedly violate the constitutional rights of people without consequence.“
Police control access to footage, mostly refusing to release videos—especially in cases of clear misconduct or lethal force. Departments routinely withhold evidence from outside investigators and courts, manipulating narratives and obstructing accountability. Body cameras, once hailed as a promising solution for transparency, have instead become tools of selective disclosure, reinforcing systemic protections for law enforcement rather than exposing their abuses.

The claim that judicial immunity was never intended to be absolute is a revisionist myth. Formally established in Bradley v. Fisher (1872), the doctrine has always functioned as an absolute shield—not as a principled safeguard, but as a strategic tool of state power. It was created from political necessity, empowering judges to enforce Reconstruction without challenge, not from abstract justice.
This immunity was never a minor legal exception. It is a core, engineered feature of a system designed to be unbalanced, racist, and exclusionary—a legal architecture that places officials permanently beyond the reach of the “governed,” transforming injustice into sanctioned, unaccountable oppression from day one, just the like the rest of their system.
An interconnected web of agencies ensures that justice is functionally and financially impossible to obtain, while judicial misconduct escalates unchecked.
Absolute immunity—shielded by secrecy and an intentional refusal of transparency—remains the greatest barrier to accountability. This is especially true in family kangaroo courts, where judges and officials operate within a system engineered for abuse. The judiciary, its collaborating agencies, and their enforcers have built a legal fortress where inhumanity and criminal acts face no consequence, shielded by so-called judicial discretion, immunity doctrines, and courtroom secrecy.
This system sustains a network of tyrants. In the U.S., justice is a government fairy tale—a fiction designed to placate the masses and provide plausible deniability.