Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 121 posts

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#71

Post by jasonzemos »

> Over the years, their numbers have included construction workers, insurance agents, pharmacists — even an underwear distributor.

This is ironic for a conservative state because it's indistinguishable to me from Soviet communism. I can't help but think about this scene from Chernobyl (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idb_qsAAe1c) which illustrates the true tragedy of this broken system. Emma Goldman wrote in "My Disillusionment in Russia" (1923):

> Bourgeois dictatorship is replaced by the "dictatorship of the proletariat" — or by that of its "advance guard," the Communist Party. Lenin takes the seat of the Romanovs, the Imperial Cabinet is rechristened Soviet of People's Commissars, Trotsky is appointed Minister of War, and a labourer becomes the Military Governor General of Moscow. That is, in essence, the Bolshevik conception of revolution, as translated into actual practice.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#72

Post by gamblor956 »

jMyles wrote: post #39
billfruit wrote: post #31

Even to the Supreme court I thought the President could nominate anyone irrespective of their qualifications, no prior experience as a lawyer or a judge is mandated.

You are correct. In every case so far, SCOTUS Justices have been attorneys by profession, but as the internet makes it much easier to research law and legal precedents, it might be interesting to see what happens if someone with a different background joins that club.

That is only true of living justices. A number of SCOTUS justices in the past had no legal backgrounds whatsoever, with the last such judge serving until 1957.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#73

Post by justAnotherNET »

01100011 wrote: post #69

This is common in CA too, apparently. When I was getting a divorce, a lawyer I consulted with gave me the background on the judge handling my case. Apparently she was appointed by the governor to appease a particular voting block and as thanks for her activism work for that group. She knew nothing about family law but was given the job regardless. That situation is apparently quite common in family court since there…

That honestly explains a lot about our judicial system.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#74

Post by basementcat »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #41
billfruit wrote: post #31

Even to the Supreme court I thought the President could nominate anyone irrespective of their qualifications, no prior experience as a lawyer or a judge is mandated.

The problem here is less the lack of experience but rather that many of these judges are routinely violating the law and the Constitution. We cannot have a functional legal system if judges do not follow the law.

Judges interpret the law. The law and Constitution are not written in C (and even if they were, we all know that every compiler has "undefined behavior" that may need to be adjudicated) and we occasionally need a court system to resolve disputes and clarify legal ambiguities.

If the affected parties believe a judge made an incorrect decision, there exist procedures for appeal or even revisiting the question in a subsequent case.

If judges in a jurisdiction are elected, it is the responsibility of the electorate to make sure the judges they select are the most qualified (perhaps by studying previous decisions, academic publications, etc). Analogously, if judges are appointed by other elected officials, it is the responsibility of the electorate to select public servants who are good at appointing competent judges.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#76

Post by t-writescode »

beagle3 wrote: post #67
Balgair wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, with coroners it's more out of necessity than anything. One of the counties next to mine has few coroners and it's something of a problem, as you can imagine. We recently had a friend die and the coroner's report is still not complete, three weeks later. We still don't know what the cause of death is, and as it's suspected to to be a suicide, it's not been a fun time waiting for the results to come out. A…

But why elected rather than hired? It’s supposed to be a mostly scientific job with no agenda.

Prestige of being an elected office might draw more candidates to an otherwise undesirable job

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#77

Post by basementcat »

chrismeller wrote: post #68
alkonaut wrote: post #47

Are there many places that have elected judges? Why not require law degrees? It’s not like “elected” must mean “can’t require qualifications”?

This also applies to law enforcement. Many small towns have elected sheriff’s (or police captains or whatever they call them locally). How is that right? Sure, maybe they have to convince a county DA that there was a crime for actual prosecution, but the number of areas they could abuse their power before (or completely without) charges is insane. Look at it from the viewpoint of the Andy Griffith show... the circuit…

I think the idea is that the electorate has the responsibility of making sure office holders are qualified. If a small town decides that someone with no law enforcement experience is the most qualified candidate to be sheriff, then that is their choice.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#78

Post by gryfft »

basementcat wrote: post #74
StanislavPetrov wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is less the lack of experience but rather that many of these judges are routinely violating the law and the Constitution. We cannot have a functional legal system if judges do not follow the law.

Judges interpret the law. The law and Constitution are not written in C (and even if they were, we all know that every compiler has "undefined behavior" that may need to be adjudicated) and we occasionally need a court system to resolve disputes and clarify legal ambiguities. If the affected parties believe a judge made an incorrect decision, there exist procedures for appeal or even revisiting the question in a subs…

While your statement is technically correct, it does not address the issue.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#79

Post by new2628 »

anoncake wrote: post #58
mamon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is a scheme to keep masses in check by giving them illusion of power. If a politician starts promising people to give them what they actually want it is called "populism" and said politician will become a pariah, painted as irresponsible, crazy, etc.

If Democracy is the illusion of rule by the people, what is actual rule of the people?

Anything that works at the scale of up a few hundred people, or low thousands at most.

Re: South Carolina judges often lack formal training in the law

#80

Post by watwut »

basementcat wrote: post #74
StanislavPetrov wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is less the lack of experience but rather that many of these judges are routinely violating the law and the Constitution. We cannot have a functional legal system if judges do not follow the law.

Judges interpret the law. The law and Constitution are not written in C (and even if they were, we all know that every compiler has "undefined behavior" that may need to be adjudicated) and we occasionally need a court system to resolve disputes and clarify legal ambiguities. If the affected parties believe a judge made an incorrect decision, there exist procedures for appeal or even revisiting the question in a subs…

> Judges interpret the law.

That is possible only if you actually know the law. If you do not know it, you cant interpret it.

So yes, people are needed to interpret the law, but not really anyone. Kinda like we need programmers, but not really anyone.

Post reply on HN