The statement by the retired judge expressing sadness over the lack of cameras in the NY Trump trial constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue related to transparency in the judicial process.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It expresses a sentiment about transparency without attacking any individual or group. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others. It does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding and empathy by highlighting a concern about transparency in the judicial process, which is a public interest issue. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It focuses on the issue of camera access in the courtroom. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to discuss a matter of public interest. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.