To See or Not to See: A Visual Analysis of "blind Justice"

To See or Not To See: A Visual Analysis of "Blind Justice"

To See or Not To See: A Visual Analysis on "Blind Justice"

"Blind Justice" is not only a beautiful and historical statue of a blindfolded woman holding scales in her right hand, but it is a metaphorical symbol relaying how the United States Judicial Department is supposed to work. It symbolizes that the Department of Justice is never swayed by anything other than the facts presented in order to make a proper judicial decision. In 2002, Clay Bennett, an artist with almost every award his profession offers, drew a political cartoon portraying "Blind Justice" as how citizens perceived the judicial system as it stood then. This was created by having the statue in the picture not completely blinded. There was a hole cut into the blindfold for one eye to see, while the hand that was not holding the scales held a pair of scissors labeled 'Justice Department.' According to this cartoon, the Justice Department proves to be unfair, untrustworthy, and not likely to change their ways. Many situations involving discrepancies with the Justice Department allow citizens to view the cartoon the way the artist intended it to be seen; deceit, lies, and cover-ups add to the mix to prove that society could not trust the Department of Justice when the cartoon was created, nor can they trust the department now.

One example of how the cartoon depicts the truth is when the government was caught in 2002 going against their own constitution. After September 11, 2001, the U.S. Justice Department allowed itself to make up its own rules and regulations regarding the treatment of al-Qaeda prisoners. A "leaked" memo in August of 2002 relating to the treatment of prisoners of war basically stated that Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners in the United States did not have to be treated as humanely as other prisoners. According to a former Justice official that worked on the memo, "The techniques discussed were 'aggressive' but 'lawful'..." (Locy, T. & Diamond, J., 2004) The question that needs to be asked is, "What does this mean?" "(the memo)... specifically authorized the CIA to use 'waterboarding,' in which a prisoner is made to believe he is suffocating (2004). Justice officials, CIA members, and even the president scrambled quickly to address this matter; the truth was never supposed to reach the public. Because the Justice Department had control over "Blind Justice," they thought that they could control the scales. The line of the law may or may not have actually been crossed by the Justice Department, but the ethical boundaries definitely were. How is America able to trust the Justice Department to do its job correctly if rules are broken and lies are the cover up for said broken rules?

The example above is not the only proof of unfairness and untrustworthiness in the government and more specifically, the Justice Department. Starting as far back as 2002, hiring in the Department of Justice was "rigged." Although hiring practices and techniques were changed in 2007, "A hiring committee at the Justice Department regularly decided who could get key job interviews based upon their political affiliations, according to a report by the department's inspector general" (Totenberg, 2008). Democratic lawyers

...