Although it is hard to tell given the Supreme Court's decision that the more money you have the more your voice counts, individual freedom is supposed to be more important than economic freedom. At least I thought the Court resolved that issue over a hundred years ago when we entered the post Lochner v. New York era. Sadly there are those here among us who want to roll back the law to 1905. I'm not kidding--they really do. So why should you care? Because individual liberty suffers. Individual freedom, the most sacred form of freedom, is eroded.
Which side should the law err on: economic freedom or individual freedom? Any sensible, mildly ethical person would say individual freedom, but this isn't what is happening.
I recently read the book Actual Innocence by Barry Scheck among others. It chronicled several stories of men put on death row or life in prison for crimes they clearly didn't commit. What's more is the incompetence of the DAs and police was appalling. Likewise, the apathy of the system towards these appalling situations is disturbing.
Barry Scheck points out we study airplane crashes, earthquakes, stock market crashes and climate change, yet NOTHING is done to study how to prevent innocent people from going to prison or being put to death.
Things need to change, but the current Court doesn't appear inclined to make such a change. They are too concerned with money speaking, and they are content to eviscerate civil rights legislation and ignore the concept of innocence. After all Scalia and his other Federalist Society ilk believe actual innocence isn't a federally cognizable claim.