In a display of blatant judicial disparity, while former President Donald Trump finds himself ensnared by an escalated felony charge courtesy of Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, a group of anti-Israel protesters at Columbia University has had their destructive misconduct neatly swept under the rug. The protesters, who not only broke into but barricaded themselves within Hamilton Hall and proceeded to vandalize it, have mostly walked free, embodying a clear case of selective legal leniency.
During a recent hearing at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, the prosecutor invoked “prosecutorial discretion”’ to justify not pressing charges. He argued that because the protesters were masked and had covered surveillance cameras, it was ostensibly impossible to pin down individual responsibility for the property damage or assert that any of the 46 arrested had physically hurt anyone. Moreover, no police officers were injured during the chaotic arrests, and none of the arrested had prior criminal records—factors seemingly used to downplay the whole affair.
This decision contrasts starkly with the aggressive legal pursuit faced by Trump, whose mere misdemeanor was escalated to a felony in what many see as a politically motivated move by DA Bragg. This inconsistency in handling cases underscores a troubling politicization of justice, where ideological alignment seems to influence the severity of legal repercussions. Should these protestors manage to evade any consequences for their documented disruption, it would only cement the perception of a two-tiered justice system.
Such selective enforcement not only undermines public trust in our legal frameworks but also emboldens similar future disruptions by signaling that penalties will hinge more on political convenience than on the principles of law and order. This incident isn’t just a failure of the justice system to act impartially; it’s a chilling indication of where our societal values currently lie under our current leadership.
