The Absurdity of Public Judicial Elections

SeaBreeze

SeaBreeze

Endlessly Groovin'
Location
USA
John Oliver points out in a comedic way, some of the absurdities of elected judges. Informative video about how judges change their behavior during an election year, ask lawyers for campaign money, and look over their shoulders afraid to make unpopular decisions. They are subjected to public opinion and attack ads on TV. WARNING: mature language. What are your thoughts on this??


 

The problem here is the judges get little or no coverage so most answer Yes to allowing so and so another term. The judges don't even have to play to the media because the local media doesn't track decisions like individual political candidates . With disclosure elected judges could work. But "appointed" or appointed then approved/rubber stamped judges could be just as bad.
 
SeaBreeze said:
John Oliver points out in a comedic way, some of the absurdities of elected judges. Informative video about how judges change their behavior during an election year, ask lawyers for campaign money, and look over their shoulders afraid to make unpopular decisions. They are subjected to public opinion and attack ads on TV. WARNING: mature language. What are your thoughts on this??







Click to expand...

Watched the entire video (rare for me). It is so true. In many ways we fail ourselves when it come to the judicial system as evidenced by our supreme court.
 

I suspect that he is right. IMO the only way to have an independent judiciary is with tenure. Once appointed they should only be removed from office for proven misconduct, incompetence or on reaching the statutory age of retirement.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
I suspect that he is right. IMO the only way to have an independent judiciary is with tenure. Once appointed they should only be removed from office for proven misconduct, incompetence or on reaching the statutory age of retirement.
Click to expand...
I don't like tenure either it gives license to pretty much do what you want with impunity. I favor a review board approach. Not one that is a figurehead but one with the teeth to take a judge out. My great uncle on Moms side was a superior court judge in Los Angeles and former head of the California Republican party. He was appointed I'm sure by the "good ole boys network".
 
Are you kidding? You really think judges would cop out on a fellow judge? No! I say citizens, not lawyers (although they could consult), not politicians for damn sure.
 
Not kidding.
Who do you think would select and appoint a committee of citizens?
Politicians, of course. The same separation of powers problem just one small step removed.
 
They could be on the ballot. No ads only a description of qualification in the voters information that you get in the mail (here).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top