In the year since the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in AT&T v. Concepcion permitting forced arbitration provisions in consumer contracts, it is clear that the Roberts Court has ushered in a new era of corporate tyranny that not only includes the elimination of the Seventh Amendment's right to trial by jury but also exposes the lack of credence this Court gives to the words etched in stone above the entrance to the Court: "Equal justice under law."

In the AT&T decision, Justice Scalia wrote that since the underlying goal of arbitration is to produce “streamlined proceedings and expeditious results,” the lower courts must give force to the private, mandatory arbitration provisions corporations are forcing upon consumers. Without a scintilla of record evidence in support, Justice Scalia opined that a consumer may actually be “better off” resolving an individual claim quickly rather than litigating a class claim for years. Accordingly, fairness, justice and right to trial by jury must be sacrificed to the expedition supposedly embodied in the forced arbitration agreements inserted into the consumer’s service agreement. And sacrificed they are.

In the most recent application of Concepcion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit determined that even where undisputed evidence establishes that a consumer cannot effectively vindicate any consumer right he may have in arbitration, that fact makes no difference in the viability of the arbitration provision. As held by the Third Circuit in Homa v. American Express, “even if [the consumer] cannot effectively prosecute his claim in an individual arbitration that procedure is his only remedy, illusory or not.”

In short, the Roberts Court has ushered in a private system of “justice,” controlled by corporations, whose procedures must be followed even if the outcome is completely illusory. Astounding. Revolutions were started over such things. Bill of Rights were passed to prevent such outcomes. Yet, here we are.