Justice Marvic Leonen emerged on the scene as a progressive maverick, quickly gaining popularity for his liberal and human rights-oriented decisions. Certainly, he is not a conservative and has always been attuned to the spirit of the times, both culturally and intellectually.

Because of this, he has earned the admiration of a lot of people, particularly those who support policies that are socially progressive. However, everything came to a crashing halt because of an infamous decision that has drawn the ire of the same people who used to place him on a pedestal. Suddenly, everything he has worked so hard for, including his innovative landmark decisions and community-based legal work, becomes inconsequential, if not outright trivial.

Justice Leonen is undoubtedly a great man. I like him both as a person and a professional. He even saw one of my stand-up comedy shows at the Music Museum and gamely participated, as he understood the rudiments of comedy — and everything in general, for that matter.

But by contextualizing his decision or objectively infusing nuance into the conversation, those who aggressively push for an impeachment trial know full well it would make their narrative less decisive. The key is to paint it as black and white so as not to make people see the complexities of the subject or recognize the validity of views opposed to theirs.

You see, we live in a world where discussions of opposing views are frowned upon because they make people realize that the truth is somewhere in between. Thanks to social media and how program algorithms work, we see the emergence of echo chambers where people automatically brand you as an enemy if you disagree with some of the things they believe in.

As a case in point, a clout-chasing lawyer masquerading as a woke advocate chastised my “Kapink” friend for sharing my post about the ICC arrest, claiming I am a die-hard Duterte supporter. This is despite the fact that I have always been against the former president’s war on drugs and was among those who criticized him for influencing the House to cancel the franchise of ABS-CBN.

The way it works, you cannot afford to be objective anymore. You have to support and accept everything hook, line, and sinker to remain part of the group. Any iota of resistance is always seen as a threat. Suddenly, you’re an enemy. A sellout. A traitor.

To a certain extent, I see myself in Justice Leonen. He sees things objectively and decides accordingly based on available evidence and his honest assessment of issues. Except that unlike me, he is a far greater man, way more brilliant and has accomplished a lot in shaping our legal landscape.