A dear correspondent shared this thought with us.

Citizens should apply one basic standard that aligns with common sense and American conservative values: equal justice under law.

If investigators have evidence and a judge signs a warrant, they should act, whether the subject is powerful or popular.

If prosecutors cannot prove a case in court, they should walk away.

The system works best when facts, not feelings, set the course—and when elections are decided by voters, not by leaks or spin.

And, like my great-grandson, age 10, has said, “You should know this already.”

We understand that the original posting referred to the now-public investigation of a certain, rather radical, member of Congress.

But of course, it applies to ALL actions in courts. And for that matter, to general matters of life.

And it does not apply to the past. The past is unchangeable. We also cannot apply justice to groups of people. Of whatever sort of group: by birth, by ancestry, by income, by location.

Consider what is sometimes called “restorative” justice or even “reparation.” It is discussed frequently these day. The reparation part is. Restorative justice? Somewhat less. One way of describing the concept of reparations is that having those is supposed to be restorative justice but provided not to the person wronged, but to their descendants.

How is that, again?

Is this too simple a comparison? If an older couple is defrauded of a large sum of money, the perp is caught, and he is capable of doing so, repayment of what was taken is not given to the couple’s grand-children or great-grandchildren! We may argue that if they are deceased, it goes to their estate. Which may or may not include those physical descendants. And unless specifically designated, does not include people who are not their descendants!

There is, perhaps, a key point. It is the perp who is responsible for the restitution. Not their descendants, or if they are dead, (as we understand it) not even their heirs. If those people were punished by being forced to pay for something an ancestor – even a parent – did, that would seem to be not just unjust, but also a violation of Article III Section 3 “Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the life of the Person attainted.” As one source notes, “The Constitution ensures that the sins of the convicted individual do not extend to innocent family members.“

This is, of course, a very biblical concept. Although those who enslaved other people (or who were masters of slaves) did not commit “treason” it is understood that this concept applies to conviction of crimes in general by American courts. We understand this is tied to Article I Section 9’s prohibition: “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” (The same prohibition applies to States, as found in Section 10.)

None of us at TPOL are judges, or even attorneys. But this seems to be pretty clear-cut. Except for matters of impeachment, Congress does not hold trials and convict people in trials. And certainly not dead people, and those dead for 150+ years!

We submit to our readers that it is not equal justice under law to pay reparations, whether it is for ancestors that were slaves, for ancestors that were discriminated against, immorally incarcerated, or for what is claimed to be stolen land (or anything else). And to pay people, at the expense of others, because they are (or claim to be) members of some specific group based on ancestry, skin color, language, religion, or any other perceived difference, would seem equally unjust.

We also point out that it is a travesty of justice to punish people (whether in court or in Congress) for something that their ancestors did. Which stealing money for reparations or “environmental justice” or similar actions effectively does.

And all other things considered, it is a violation of common sense. How far back in time are such things to be applied? Are 21st Century Italians to be punished for the SPQR’s (Rome’s) destruction of Carthage and forced to pay reparations to descendants of the Punic founders and inhabitants of Carthage and its colonies? (Perhaps as determined by DNA tests? Should modern Moroccans (as the heirs/descendants of the Moors who ruled most or part of Spain for 700 years) be forced to pay for that 700 years to modern Spaniards?