Justice, Warning, and Faithful Witness
40 Days exists to turn a documented experience of judicial-system failure into focused reform, truthful public warning, and faithful Christian action.
The work begins with practical due-process reform: consequential decisions should be explainable, obvious high-impact errors should be correctable while correction still matters, and serious constitutional harm should not leave people without a meaningful remedy.
But justice in the courts is not the mission’s outer boundary. 40 Days also calls churches to recover the biblical duty to seek justice and protect vulnerable people, and it calls Christians—especially those with public influence—to practice the honesty, humility, mercy, courage, and self-control they profess.
A public-interest reform effort grounded in Christian conviction
Strengthen due process
Advance narrow safeguards that make serious decisions explainable, correctable, and enforceable.
Document repeatable failures
Organize source materials so recurring vulnerabilities can be examined rather than dismissed as isolated frustration.
Restore biblical justice
Encourage churches to teach justice, impartial judgment, protection of the vulnerable, and responsibility toward public wrongs.
Call for faithful accountability
Ask Christians to apply moral standards consistently, including when misconduct comes from favored leaders or political allies.
Equip lawful participation
Give citizens, churches, and legal professionals practical ways to study the proposals and contact lawmakers.
Publish 40 Days
Place the documented warning and reform case before lawmakers, churches, and the public, including a Congress Edition for federal officials.
The consequences did not remain inside the courthouse
This mission grew out of more than seven years of litigation in state and federal courts. I prevailed in two appeals, but the process also exposed recurring failures involving factual accuracy, notice, unexplained decisions, timely correction, and witness safety.
Those were not abstract procedural concerns. The absence of effective protection and timely correction affected whether I could safely name and involve witnesses, accept work, seek medical care without fear of drawing others into the conflict, and rebuild an ordinary life. Relief that was necessary to litigate safely did not arrive in a form or at a time that prevented the harm.
I do not ask readers to accept my interpretation of every event merely because I state it. The evidence sections are intended to distinguish court records, documented events, allegations, legal arguments, and personal conclusions. Where practical, readers should be able to examine the relevant filings, orders, transcripts, and appellate decisions and reach their own conclusions.
Faithfulness matters even when success is uncertain
I would prefer to leave the litigation behind and direct my life elsewhere. But silence would require me to live as though the vulnerabilities I encountered were unimportant—or reasonably safe for the next person to trust. I do not believe I can do that honestly.
I believe the Lord has used these trials, together with the abilities, relationships, and opportunities He has given me, to place a responsibility before me. I do not claim certainty about every purpose God intends, and I cannot promise that this effort will succeed. I do believe I would be unfaithful to ignore what I have learned, conceal dangers I believe are real, or decline to warn and seek reform merely because speaking may cost me.
Scripture’s watchman passages weigh heavily on my conscience. I understand that responsibility as a duty to warn truthfully—not as proof that my interpretation of every event is infallible, and not as permission to exaggerate what can be proved. My obligation is to present the evidence carefully, correct my own errors, propose proportionate remedies, and leave the response and outcome to God.
Turn warning into evidence, reform, and lawful action
Advance focused judicial reforms
Promote three connected safeguards: brief reasons for consequential denials, expedited correction of apparent high-impact error, and a narrow system-level remedy for serious constitutional harm that ordinary review leaves uncorrected.
Document recurring failure modes
Show how due process can fail through inaccurate factual descriptions, grounds introduced without a chance to respond, deficient notice, conclusory denials, intimidation left unaddressed, and errors that become practically impossible to correct.
Restore biblical teaching on justice
Encourage churches to teach that honest judgment, protection of vulnerable people, rejection of partiality, and resistance to oppression are continuing biblical duties—not optional political interests.
Encourage faithful public witness
Call Christians to reject dishonesty, greed, pride, cruelty, idolatry, and needless division wherever they appear, applying the same standards to allies and opponents.
Equip people to act lawfully
Help citizens, churches, faith leaders, and legal professionals understand the proposals, examine the supporting record, share useful materials, and ask federal and state lawmakers to consider reform seriously.
Publish and deliver the warning
Develop 40 Days, supporting materials, and a Congress Edition that presents the evidence, constitutional case, biblical responsibility, and practical reforms in a form public officials and ordinary readers can evaluate.
Warning is not a prediction of inevitable judgment
The name 40 Days draws on the biblical pattern of warning while there is still time to change. The point is not to claim knowledge of a date, guarantee a particular national outcome, or place this project on the level of Scripture. The point is that preventable injustice should be confronted before its consequences become harder to reverse.
Biblical warning joins truth with mercy. Amos condemned worship that coexisted with injustice. Ezekiel’s watchman was responsible to sound a warning. Jesus named justice, mercy, and faithfulness among the weightier matters. Together, those passages reject both silent indifference and self-righteous condemnation.
Biblical foundation
Amos 5:21–24
God rejects religious observance that coexists with the corruption of justice and calls for justice to roll down like waters.
Ezekiel 33:1–9
The watchman is responsible to sound an honest warning; the hearer’s response remains the hearer’s responsibility.
Matthew 23:23
Justice, mercy, and faithfulness are weighty obligations, not secondary concerns that public religion can safely neglect.
A serious warning still requires restraint
Not a political party or candidate campaign
The principles apply across parties, institutions, denominations, and political loyalties.
Not an attack on every court or judge
Many judges and court employees serve conscientiously. The proposals address structural vulnerabilities that should not depend on universal perfection.
Not a claim that every adverse ruling is corrupt
Error, overload, inadequate procedure, and misconduct are different things. Good safeguards help distinguish among them.
Not a demand for unquestioning belief
Readers should examine original sources where available and distinguish what is documented from what remains alleged, inferred, or disputed.
Not a new church or personal following
The purpose is to direct attention toward justice, accountability, reform, repentance, and the teachings of Scripture—not toward a new denomination or personality.
Not a call for retaliation
The response sought is lawful scrutiny, proportionate correction, protection of rights and witnesses, institutional reform, and repentance where repentance is needed.
Practice the accountability we ask of others
40 Days should be judged by the same principles it asks courts, churches, public officials, and citizens to follow.
- State material facts accurately.
- Separate records, allegations, arguments, and conclusions.
- Provide original sources where practical.
- Correct material errors openly.
- Avoid sensationalism and unnecessary personal attacks.
- Apply moral standards consistently.
- Propose proportionate, workable remedies.
- Seek correction rather than destruction.
How the evidence should be presented
Case materials should identify dates, courts, docket information, procedural posture, and the source supporting each important claim. Criminal charges should be described as charges unless and until a conviction occurs. Disputed allegations should remain labeled as disputed. Commentary should link to the underlying document whenever practical.
The goal is not artificial neutrality about evidence that is strong. It is enough precision that readers can tell what the evidence establishes, what remains contested, and how a proposed reform follows from the documented failure mode.
The outcome is uncertain; the responsibility is not
I do not know how much institutional reform or public repentance this work will produce. That is not entirely mine to decide.
My responsibility is to tell the truth as carefully as I can, preserve the record, warn others about dangers I believe are real, propose proportionate solutions, and invite churches, citizens, legal professionals, and public officials to act while action can still matter.
If the effort contributes to substantial reform, I will be grateful. If it produces only a clearer record, a more faithful public witness, and a warning that someone else can build upon, it will still have served a purpose.
Begin with the work in front of us
Examine the reforms, review the evidence, help restore biblical teaching on justice, or ask your lawmakers to consider practical due-process safeguards.