How does a court, with a judge appointed and confirmed by elected representatives, a jury of independent citizens, utilizing expert testimony and long-established rules of procedure, equate with a kangaroo court?

For one thing, a law like this puts a staggering amount of power in the hands of whoever gets to define "emotional injury."

Emotional distress has been a concept in tort law for decades and the sky has yet to fall. It's generally measured as a combination of 'here's the awful thing that happened, imagine how you'd feel, jurors' and testimony from the victim and/or psychiatrist(s) assessing the impact of the emotional injury in terms of subsequent dysfunction.

Tort law is one thing. The US Code is another.

I can see this going the way of bitemark analysis.