Due Process of Law

When asked what is meant by "due process of law", I immediately thought of the right to a fair trial. But, it is more than that. Due process of law refers to the principle that all of a person's legal rights must be respected by the government. It is, simply, fairness.

Walter Burgwyn Jones, at the time of the New York Times trial, was circuit judge of Montgomery County. Jones was very devoted and determined. He held fast to traditional southern values and belived in the Confederacy. Jones did much to try and stop the Civil Rights Movement because he wanted to preserve the southern way of life. Walter Burgwyn Jones wrote Alabama Pleading and Practice at Law, that was a leading text of the times.

T. Eric Embry was the defense lawyer in the libel case against the New York Times, that became known as New York Times Company v. Sullivan. He used Jones's book to help him in his defense for the case. However, Jones essentially overruled his own book, by saying that The Times was within reach of the Alabama state courts because Embry followed Jones's advice in his book.

I do not find it surprising that Judge Jones did this. The fact that he did this shows just how hyped up the south was in preserving the southern way of life where whites had supremacy. This tells me that public opinion in Alabama was titled towards Judge Jones's point-of-view. They were willing to do anything, and twist any law or regulation, in their favor that would help them in the case.

What they were trying to do in this case was not acquire monetary damages (sure, maybe they were), but they were trying to begin the process of killing the press, taking away their freedom to report. They wanted to make it to where they could sue for libel when the reporters wrote anything about what was happening with discrimination and the Civil Rights Movement in the south. What they were trying to do was intimidate and regulate the press with this case, so that nothing about the Civil Rights Movement would get covered. This was done to rpeserve what they thought was an acceptable way of life. I also think they were running scared because they realized that all of this press coverage (true or not, libelous or not) could and would expose the horrors of discrimination, and it could spark more change to do away with it.

This just shows that even the people who are in charge of ensuring/respecting a person's rights (due process)don't always do that. Sometimes, as sad as it is to admit, people's own agendas get into the mix. People's rights sometimes are no match for a power-tripping judge. Lewis even said in the book that Embry thought "Judge Jones actually helped to plan the libel actions by Sullivan and the others" (26). It just goes to show that they way things should be may not always actually be the way things are, and that's truly dissapointing given that people's lives could be shattered in the process. And it would just be to ensure that the views of a power-hungry authority figure (or government) prevailed, regardless of the laws in place to protect the people they (it) serves.

In closing, I feel this case shows that, even though most of understand and agree with how things should be done (in regards to fairness under the law), we realize that that's not always the way it is. That's the change that needs to occur - fairness for all. You may not like it, but that's what our country was built on - fairness, equality and freedom. Everyone should have the right to those things, not just me, not just you.