Sentenced by AI: Guilty of Future Crimes

   With Artificial Intelligence gaining quick popularity and evolving as we speak, many believe this is a “today” subject. However, in the late 90’s a software sold to state governments and police departments began tearing lives apart, in a way not even an attorney can defy.

    A digital AI algorithm called COMPAS was created in 1998 by a company called Northpointe, Inc. (which now goes by the name equivant). This AI software is pretty much designed to predict the future. When someone is arrested, they fill out a long questionnaire about their life. The program combines their answers with their criminal record and compares them to thousands of past offenders. It then spits out a score from 1 to 10, 1 meaning the person is low risk (let them go home), and 10 meaning high risk (keep them locked up).

    Since this software is owned by a private company, the exact mathematical formula used to calculate a person’s score is a proprietary trade secret. Which means that if you get a 9 out of 10, your defense attorney is legally banned from seeing how the computer came up with that number. You are judged by a formula that is hidden from the public view, and even from the one person that is supposed to make your case.

    We would think that something judges trust so much would be impartial, however studies have proven this is not the case. An investigation by ProPublica in 2016 proved that the math is broken. The AI routinely made mistakes by flagging Black defendants as “high risk”, at twice the rate of white defendants, even when the Black defendants had cleaner records. Meanwhile, it mistakenly labeled white defendants as “low risk” far more often.

    People that don’t deserve it have been denied bail, given longer prison sentences or denied parole based on a number they can’t even see the background of. Lives have been affected drastically by a software that is still flawed even after the research findings, and no one is doing anything to stop it. Racism is still taking freedom away from innocent people, because judges rather believe a number from a software than a story from a real human. A number from a secret software that has clear racist patterns should not be able to decide whether a Black father can see his kids sooner than later. This type of issue should not be happening in today’s age. We all bleed red, we all deserve fair judgement, and AI marking people as “high risk” due to skin color is not fair judgement. 

    When did we decide to trust a computer more than a human’s testimony? And why, after clear results, has justice not been served to the people done wrong by this AI system? People today keep being affected by it, and it keeps ruining lives. Will it ever change the way it judges people? Or will America’s justice system one day realize that a number from a racist computer is everything but fair judgement to their people? 

For more articles like this, subscribe for free to Crucial Evidence down below. 

This has been your author and expert witness. 

Your girl, 

Jimena Valle

The right to have rights: Trump v. Barbara

Photograph: Al Drago/Getty Images

 The right to have rights: Trump v. Barbara 

    This past Tuesday was one for the history books. A case I never thought would become what it did took place in the Supreme Court, and it beat what could have been a major step back in discrimination laws.

    On June 30th, the Supreme Court witnessed Trump v. Barbara, a case against an executive order that would’ve changed what it means to be American. Birthright citizenship rights were at stake, and the Donald J. Trump administration intended to take them away from children born from undocumented or temporary immigrants. Under that executive order, children under these circumstances would be born stateless, and would not have what Chief Justice John Roberts defined as “the right to have rights–to freely participate in our political community.”

    The 14th Amendment from the United States constitution states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” So clearly, the executive order that Trump tried to enforce fell short on constitutional value, going completely against the 14th Amendment.

    Naturally, we would think that the person in office would be the first one to emphasize enforcing the constitution, but this has not been the case. A president supposed to be for the people has denied his own people as his, and continuously tried to enforce the executive order that would set us years back, when Black people could not be citizens. This was the sole reason for the 14th Amendment to be written in the first place, to ensure the government could never again decide that a certain group of people were not “American enough”.

    The arguments intended to back the President’s order were implying that children of undocumented parents have split loyalties, suggesting that a child’s right to be American should hinge on their parents' legal "domicile" or political allegiance. This is exactly where the legal drama splits wide open. While the hardline dissenters like Justice Alito bought into this narrative, arguing that the 14th Amendment should only apply to those who owe "sole allegiance" to the country at birth, the majority of the Court flatly rejected this revisionist history. Chief Justice Roberts made it clear that being "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. simply means you are on American soil and subject to its laws—period. By a 6-3 vote, the Court proved that the text of the Constitution cannot be twisted to fit political agendas.

    However, a closer look at the voting breakdown reveals a frustrating catch. While five of the majority justices firmly declared that birthright citizenship is a permanent, untouchable Constitutional right, Justice Brett Kavanaugh took a different, more bureaucratic route. He agreed that there is a federal law passed by Congress that says these babies are citizens. The President cannot just rewrite federal law with an Executive Order. Therefore, the President's order is illegal."

    He admitted it to be illegal, but only because the President overstepped his boundaries by overriding existing federal laws. By basing his decision on paperwork instead of the Constitution, Kavanaugh explicitly left a backdoor open, suggesting that Congress technically has the power to pass a law creating exceptions to birthright citizenship in the future. In plain English, he left us to read between the lines of this case a subtle “this isn’t over yet”, and we caught on to it loud and clear.

    The "split loyalties" argument was not entirely defeated—it was just sent to the wrong department. For now, the promise of the 14th Amendment stands, but it reminds us that our definition of belonging is always just one election or one congressional bill away from being challenged again.


For more articles like this, subscribe for free to Crucial Evidence down below.

This has been your author and expert witness.

Your girl,

Jimena Valle

 

Hi! This is me!

Introducing the Expert Witness: 

..yes, it's me.

    Hello dear readers, and welcome to Crucial Evidence. A blog in which I will share my journey from being a sophomore in college majoring in Music, to hopefully an attorney practicing in New York City. My name is Jimena Valle Rivera, I am 18 years old (turning 19 on October 1st okay?), and I am a second year student (starting this August) in the University of the Sacred Heart in Santurce, Puerto Rico. 

    A young girl from Utuado, Puerto Rico trying to make a name for herself in the music industry has been who I am for as long as I can remember. And trust me, I am still that girl. However, with time, my interests and passions have not changed, yet evolved, and I found myself in a state of doubt and uncertainty regarding what my future would look like. 

    Back in high school, choosing what I would major in once I got to college seemed like the most important desition of my life, and the one I dreaded the most. I had always been a showgirl. Dance, music and theatre surrounded me my whole life, so I didn't really allow myself to explore other fields that could interest me as well. Choosing something outside arts felt almost like a betrayal to my soul, so I ended up where I am today. A music major focused on Vocal performance. 

    Growing up I had always been what they call an "academic weapon". Straight A's were a non-negotiable, and not to brag, but teachers loved my work. However, as the lazy high schooler that many of us were, going for a career that actually required trying hard and studying a lot didn't seem like something I would be interested in. This made me discard the idea of becoming a lawyer one day as soon as it came to mind.

    In my junior year of high school, our history teacher made us listen to an episode of the podcast The Daily by The New York Times weekly, and write both a summary of the episode and what our opinion was on the subject discussed in it. That exercise alone sparked a new interest in the current world's biggest issues, creating a magnifying glass on top of everything on the news. Government issues did not seem like old man talks anymore, but where those topics were spoken of were the kind of rooms I wanted to be seated at. When my english teacher started talking about Project 2025 and what could possibly happen sooner than later, I felt a spark in me wanting to do something to stop it. Something to help everyone affected. 

    That's where this dream started, even though I was not aware of it myself back then. When news on social media started being about unnecessary wars and people being deported out of stolen land. When hearts broke after the 2024 elections and rumors about it being stolen from the people started feeling true. When the country started forgetting that we all bleed red, my wish for doing something went further than sharing awareness posts on social media. It took some time to get the clear mind I have today of what I want my future to look like, but I am really proud of myself for the fact that I can say today what I'm working towards with full confidence. I decided I am ready to take on the challenge. I realized I can do more for the people than what I allowed myself to see. A hard career path? Yes, one of the hardest. But I decided that I deserve the chance to have my voice be heard just as everyone else's, and that if I can help those that aren't heard, I will not remain silent and sitting with my arms crossed. So today, I can say proudly that i will be an attorney one day, and that you'll be able to read all about my journey right here, on Crucial Evidence.

    If you want to join me into my journey from sophomore year of college to becoming the best attorney the United States of America has ever heard of, see today's topics from a young woman's point of view and everything in between, keep reading! 

This has been your author and expert witness.

Your girl, 

Jimena Valle