A crisp winter wind blew through Washington, D.C., but inside a federal courthouse, the atmosphere was even more tense. What had been scheduled as a routine hearing quickly captured the attention of reporters, staffers, and legal observers—drawn by a growing sense that something important was unfolding.
A spokesperson for a well-known public figure entered the courtroom, calm and composed. At the bench sat the presiding judge, his expression unreadable. Without warning or formal presentation, he issued a sudden decision: “The defendant has violated the Federal Communications Act. A fine of $50,000 is imposed.”
There had been no opportunity for testimony, no evidence reviewed—just a pronouncement.
The spokesperson rose to address the court. “Your honor, we haven’t even begun. I respectfully request the opportunity to present a defense.”
But the judge shut her down. “There’s nothing to discuss.”
Still, she stood her ground. “Every injustice deserves a witness,” she said.
Her words hung in the room, firm and unwavering.
Moments later, the court recessed. When it resumed, a different judge—widely known for impartiality—had taken the bench.
Continue reading on next page…