Discrimination in the United State’s criminal justice administration presents a controversial issue causing rifts in today’s society. The justice system in this country continues to grow and modify ever since the creation of the Constitution, mending the faults as the years go on. In today’s world, the criminal justice is found faulty based on the key role of prejudice or bias. Whether the target be people of different races, ethnicities, or of different genders, society attacks the justice system for their rulings on specific cases, including Jaimie Davenport and Billy Cassell (Winerip 1). In particular, in The People v. Brock Turner, Turner was sentenced to only six months in prison and three years probation for sexually assaulting an unconscious college woman. This verdict put the country in an uproar because Turner’s sentence for such a heinous crime turned out better for him than the victim. In this case, the perpetrator suffered less than the victim by serving a light sentence while his victim will carry that night around for the rest of her life.  Many criminal cases that have not been brought to the media’s attention, but have similar outcomes. The decisions made by the system make the country wonder about what really determines whether someone is guilty or innocent. Many citizens take to various social media sites to express their opinions over controversial criminal cases. In a tweet or a blog post, people of the United States make sure their voice is heard, both in positive and negative lights. Because social media offers heightened awareness of discrimination in the justice system which in turn lowers the public’s trust in the system, the government needs to do more to crack down on discrimination.
   

Social media magnifies any popular topic, tending to shed light on the wrongdoings of the United States criminal justice system. Nothing remains private in a world that thirsts to know everything. Information on any topic, especially crime, fills social media constantly. Whether there is a 140 character tweet or a video link on Facebook or YouTube, good or bad news travels fast. Specifically to crime in the United States, protests or hate groups are formed over social media, stating when and where they will meet and what these people plan on protesting, etc. Social media is a dangerous device where “Communication is mobile, [and] motivation may be mass destruction and targets include the innocent” (Hanson 3). When protesters and flash mobbers, for instance, arrange to cause havoc in a specific city for a specific purpose, nothing worthwhile comes out of these situations. In a way, this is how teenagers and young adults reveal their frustrations with society, by adding more chaos to society.  The amount of personalization on social media websites, such as Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter, creates problems for law enforcement as well. When someone in law enforcement is convicted of a crime or is being investigated nonetheless, the first place to check for informalities would be their personal social media accounts. One police officer in New Mexico was involved in an on-duty shooting and when he was investigated by reporters, his Facebook occupation listed him as “Human Waste Disposal” (Hanson 5). Needless to say, this officer discredited himself and his entire department. A question that frequently comes into question: “Why are people not in trouble for posting vulgar words or actions on the Internet?” The answer to this question is simply that speaking out on social media qualifies as free speech, falling under the First Amendment. Although plenty of negative sides to social media present themselves in today’s society, social media contains beneficial aspects as well. For instance, if law enforcement search for a potential suspect on the internet, they have a high chance of discovering information that could convict the suspect or exonerate them (Hanson 6). All together, society in today’s world thrives behind a portable screen, whether on a cell phone or a laptop. The injustices in the criminal justice system become magnified when broadcasted on social media due to society’s need to have their opinion heard.
   

The rise of discrimination in the criminal justice system due to social media requires the attention of law enforcement officials to gain back the trust of the people. In the words of the public: “Troubled police departments can have a difficult time regaining the trust of citizens wary of law enforcement and weary of disorder” (“Restoring Citizens” 1). Not just in the instance of social media, but also with all of the violence in populous cities causes the city’s citizens to lose trust in their law enforcement. With unjustified shootings and robberies, citizens do not feel safe in the place they call home. With recent protesting and hate crimes, along with the never ending blast of social media opinions, the criminal justice system needs to take action in order to regain the trust of the United States’ citizens. One reason the justice system comes off as corrupt falls on the black versus white racial issue. In the instance of Davenport and Cassell and their parole, the outcomes of each hearing only validate the accusations of the racial bias in the country (Winerip 1). As a government elected by the people, the job of those elected officials should be to represent the ideals and opinions of the citizens of the United States, in order to regain their trust. Living in a society full of violence and hate will never repair the damage this country has gone through. Only by listening to the people and mending the wrongdoings step by step, the trust in the justice system will be regained and our country will be one step closer to peace.
   

Recent years have portrayed our criminal justice system as a corrupt and bias system that cannot be trusted by the citizens. By use of social media, the public voices their positive or negative views on the decisions made by law enforcement. In doing so, protests and riots form in the streets of major cities, causing even more violence. In order to regain the trust of the people, our government should re-evaluate why we live in the country that we do and remind themselves that we are a free nation of equal persons. By eliminating the factors of prejudice and hate, we will once again live in the land of the free and the home of the brave.