# data[].attributes.body
What injustice-interest me

# data[].attributes.headline
Why are jnveniles being tried as adults?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why are jnveniles being tried as adults?

# data[].attributes.body
Usually a juvenile is tried as an adult in an adult court system because of the severity of the crime committed. Examples of serious crimes include murder, robbery with a weapon, and rape. Juveniles can be tried as an adult in some common ways. The juvenile case will transfer from the juvenile court to the adult court

# data[].attributes.headline
What are some social injustice for jnveniles?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are some social injustice for jnveniles?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding how children experience injustice

# data[].attributes.body
Voting Laws (i.e. redistricting and voter ID)

Policing Laws (i.e. traffic, search and seizure, and drug scheduling)

Environmental Laws (i.e. clean water and air, industrial waste disposal)

Health Care Laws (i.e. insurance mandates and coverage eligibility) (

Education Laws (i.e. public school segregation and integration)

Labor Laws (i.e. worker’s rights, occupational health and safety)

# data[].attributes.headline
What are some social justice issues in the united states ?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are some social justice issues in the united states ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Social justice issues can occur in relation to practically any aspect of society where inequality can arise as a result of unjust prejudices or policies.

Types of Social Justice Issues

Social justice issues can be delineated into two categories, which are interrelated and often co-dependent: Inter-Social Treatment and Unequal Government Regulation.

Inter-Social Treatment involves treatment of certain groups of people based on personally-held biases and prejudices. These prejudices most often manifest in relation to sociological categories such as:

Unequal Government Regulation involves laws and regulations that purposefully or otherwise create conditions that obstruct, limit, or deny certain groups equitable access to the same opportunities and resources available to the rest of society. These laws can intentionally (explicitly) or unintentionally (implicitly) create the conditions for social injustice. Areas in which government policy often gives rise to social inequality and injustice include:

Voting Laws (i.e. redistricting and voter ID)

Policing Laws (i.e. search and seizure and drug scheduling)

Environmental Laws (i.e. clean water and air, industrial waste disposal)

Health Care Laws (i.e. insurance mandates and coverage eligibility)

Education Laws (i.e. public school segregation and integration)

Labor Laws (i.e. worker's rights, occupational health and safety)

See Social Inequality for further characterization of these two categories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Social justice issues can occur in relation to practically any aspect of society where inequality can arise as a result of unjust prejudices or policies. Social justice issues can be delineated into two categories, which are interrelated and often co-dependent: Inter-Social Treatment and Unequal Government Regulation.

# data[].attributes.headline
A relatively common view among philosophers and other writers is that while justice and injustice may be interdependent, it is injustice that is the primary quality. Many writers have written that, while it is hard to directly define or even perceive justice, it is easy to demonstrate that injustice can be perceived by all

# data[].attributes.subject
A relatively common view among philosophers and other writers is that while justice and injustice may be interdependent, it is injustice that is the primary quality. Many writers have written that, while it is hard to directly define or even perceive justice, it is easy to demonstrate that injustice can be perceived by all

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Injustice, one in a series of allegorical capitals depicting vices and virtues at the Ducal Palace in Venice

Injustice is a quality relating to unfairness or undeserved outcomes. The term may be applied in reference to a particular event or situation, or to a larger status quo. In Western philosophy and jurisprudence, injustice is very commonly-but not always-defined as either the absence or the opposite of justice.

The sense of injustice is a universal human feature, though the exact circumstances considered unjust can vary from culture to culture. While even acts of nature can sometimes arouse the sense of injustice, the sense is usually felt in relation to human action such as misuse, abuse, neglect, or malfeasance that is uncorrected or else sanctioned by a legal system or fellow human beings.

The sense of injustice can be a powerful motivational condition, causing people to take action not just to defend themselves but also others who they perceive to be unfairly treated. Injustice within legal or societal standards are sometimes referred to as a two-tiered system.

Professor Judith Shklar has written that Western philosophers tend to spend much more time discussing the concept of 'justice' rather than 'injustice'. On the other hand, she states that both historical writing and fiction use instances of injustice as their subject matter far more often than they use justice.

In philosophy and jurisprudence, the dominant view has been that injustice and justice are two sides of the same coin: that injustice is simply a lack of justice. This view has been challenged by professors including Shklar, Thomas W Simon and Eric Heinze, who consider that justice and injustice are independent qualities. So, in this minority view, you can increase the justice of a situation without reducing the injustice. Heinze has even gone as far as to argue that an increase in justice can actually cause an increase in injustice.

A relatively common view among philosophers and other writers is that while justice and injustice may be interdependent, it is injustice that is the primary quality. Many writers have written that, while it is hard to directly define or even perceive justice, it is easy to demonstrate that injustice can be perceived by all. According to von Hayek, the earliest known thinker to state that injustice is the primary quality was Heraclitus, whose view was echoed by Aristotle and dozens of others down the centuries. Hayek said that writers often express the idea that injustice is the primary concept "as though it were a new discovery", suggesting the view is rarely directly expressed in theories on Justice. But Hayek went on to say that legal positivism has proved that injustice, not justice, is the primary quality.

A metaphorical injustice eating the innocent in Guillaume Rouillé's Justicie atque Iniusticie. On the twelve legs of the beast is inscribed a variation of the twelve abuses of the De duodecim abusivis saeculi, claimed causes of injustice.[8]

Scholars, including Judith Shklar, Edmond Cahn and Barrington Moore Jr. have surveyed anthropological and historical work on injustice, concluding that the sense of injustice is found everywhere there are men and women; it is a human universal. These writers, and others like Simone Weil, Elizabeth Wolgast and Thomas W Simon, hold that the sense of injustice is a powerful motivational condition - unlike the sense of justice, which tends to be conceived in more abstract ways, and tends to inspire contemplation rather than action.

Cahn held that, for evolutionary reasons, humans who witness others being subjected to injustice can respond as though it was an act of aggression towards themselves. There can be an immediate, visceral activation of the flight or fight system. As American civil rights movement leader Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, in 1963, "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere". Spinner-Halev spoke about enduring injustices where it will still persist to this day without any action to address them. A 2012 study published in Psychological Science found that even babies have a sense of injustice and dislike having it violated, even when they witness events that do not directly effect them.

In the field of jurisprudence, Cahn has argued that lawyers should know how to rouse a jury's sense of injustice - something best done by appeals to the particular, not by abstractions or boilerplate type statements. Barrington Moore asserts that the reasons why populations often submit to oppression for long periods of time is that they consider it inevitable and so their sense of injustice is not aroused. He says that a widely shared sense of injustice is an essential, though not sufficient, cause of rebellion. Writers including Simone Weil, Elizabeth Wolgast and Judith Shklar have said that an aroused sense of injustice can be an essential prerequisite to action needed for protecting the weak and afflicted.

A common cause of injustice is human selfishness. As Plato described at length in The Republic, people will often commit acts of injustice when they calculate it is in their interests to do so. Plato also adds that "The highest reach of injustice is to be deemed just when you are not". Human injustice is not always caused by attempt to gain unfair advantage or malice; it may be simply the result of the flawed human decision making. With the hungry judge effect for example, studies have found that judges sitting on review boards are less likely to reach decisions favorable to applicants depending on how long it is since the judges had their last food break. Misuse and abuse with regard to a particular case or context may represent a systemic failure to serve the cause of justice (cf. legal vacuum).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Injustice is a quality relating to unfairness or undeserved outcomes. The term may be applied in reference to a particular event or situation, or to a larger status quo. In Western philosophy and jurisprudence, injustice is very commonly-but not always-defined as either the absence or the opposite of justice.

# data[].attributes.body
On April 12, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. sat in a jail cell in Birmingham, AL for coordinating nonviolent actions against segregation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from a Birmingham Jail"

On April 12, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. sat in a jail cell in Birmingham, AL for coordinating nonviolent actions against segregation. In an attempt to stop the civil rights movement in Alabama, Circuit Judge W.A. Jenkins issued a blanket injunction against "parading, demonstrating, boycotting, trespassing, and picketing." Dr. King marched anyway, and was arrested.

Four days later, after reading a newspaper article from local clergymen condemning him for hypocrisy in breaking the law, Dr. King wrote the now famous " Letter from a Birmingham Jail," in which he broke down the difference between a just and unjust law, stating we, as human beings, have "not only a legal, but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." Four months later, Dr. King led the March on Washington, delivering the epic " I Have a Dream" speech, calling for equal rights for all human beings of every shape, color, sex, age, size, and belief.

Dr. King's speech echoed in my head fifty years later as I watched President Obama speak at his press conference on NSA monitoring, stating whistleblower Edward Snowden isn't a patriot because he broke the law. With all due respect to POTUS, I disagree. Snowden is more than a patriot; per Dr. King's definition, he's a moral champion.

Freedom of Privacy
"An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal." - MLK
As Dr. King so eloquently points out, the difference between a just and an unjust law is in the equal application of said law. The unjust application he's referencing is the basis of the American Civil Rights Movement -- the white majority was not held to the same standards as non-white minorities. I wish I could say this situation has been resolved, but, as anyone who's heard of Trayvon Martin is painfully aware, that isn't always the case. In the internet age, we not only have to fight a lot of the same racial and gender inequalities as Dr. King, we also have an ever-widening financial equality gap and rampant abuses of power. No matter how complicated things get, however, the measuring stick with which we measure justice has never changed.

Nothing in President Obama's speech gave the impression that the rampant NSA monitoring will stop -- he didn't even touch upon other government agencies using this overreaching digital spying technology on American citizens not involved in terrorism. He merely states that, while no laws will be implemented or changed, American taxpayers' money will be spent on a PR campaign to convince these very same American citizens that it's ok to give up all of our privacy to the government. Obama would have us believe it's ok for the government to know everything about us (the people), while they (the government) operates in the shadows behind an iron curtain of secrecy. Not even a year after all the hoopla surrounding government debt, sequestration, and the debt ceiling, the White House wants to spend our own money on convincing us to be ok with giving up our basic human freedom of privacy. You'll have to forgive the inherent sarcasm in my slow clap...

Middle Fingers for Patriotism
"We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was 'legal' and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was 'illegal.' It was 'illegal' to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers." - MLK
The fallacy in President Obama's logic is saying that breaking the law is what makes Snowden unpatriotic. Apparently, our Commander-in-Chief is under the impression that George Washington obeyed the law when he led an armed revolution on the ruling government of the time. Much like Bradley Manning, terrorist Paul Revere aided and abetted the enemy when he leaked British troop movements to the American patriots. Centuries before Edward Snowden's leak, Benjamin Franklin leaked confidential government letters. Why isn't Snowden's face on our currency?

With Lavabit and Secret Circle shutting down their secure email servers and tech giants Google, Apple, et al, bending to the will of the government and leaking our private and confidential emails to them, we had better figure that out very quickly. Drones are being produced on an almost-Terminator level. More and more power is finding its way into the hands of fewer and fewer people. We're looking down the barrel of a dystopian future within a decade. If we don't start speaking up now, it's only a matter of time before we miss the bus.

I don't know what it's going to take to fix this situation. As much as I'd like to give you the answer -- to tell you what to do -- I can't. I don't know how to convince the powerful people in our world to step off their pedestals and join us. I don't know how to ensure we have the same inherent human freedoms and unalienable human rights as those in power. All I know is I have to take control of my own privacy again.

If the government is going to monitor me without my permission, they're going to see me throwing a middle finger in the air, just like they did earlier this year in Houston. I won't resort to violence, nor will I be complacent in this travesty of justice and equality. I will simply continue living my life the way I want... with my middle finger in the face of every single government agency or representative who isn't vehemently opposed to the mass surveillance without transparency.

I encourage you to stop twiddling your thumbs and join me in giving the government the finger...
Brian Penny is a former business analyst at Bank of America turned whistleblower and freelance writer. He's a frequent contributor to Mainstreet, Lifehack, and HardcoreDroid and an affiliate of Manduka and Tazo. He documents his experiences working with Anonymous, practicing yoga, and fighting the banks on his blog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St.

# data[].attributes.body
lack of fairness or justice.

# data[].attributes.body
Google definition

# data[].attributes.body
Who do unjust law affect ?

# data[].attributes.body
What is the exact definition of injustice ?

# data[].attributes.body
What injustice do I know about?