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

Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 219 posts

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#181

Post by vmception »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #145

I mentored a convicted felon through Defy Ventures a few years ago. He had a wonderful idea for an app. Something that stuck with me for the last few years. Why isn’t there a yelp for the public sector including the judicial system? Every day you walk into a court room how do you know what to expect? If you are suddenly in front of a judge that decides your life’s fate wouldn’t you want to pull up historical data tha…

> If you are suddenly in front of a judge that decides your life’s fate wouldn’t you want to pull up historical data that tracks and publishes the judges decisions, the feedback from others who have been in your place, and be able to contribute after your experience?

A good lawyer has those things already. Having one of those is part of the privilege.

Starry eyed pro bono idealists will never realize this. They've put so much energy into making a difference that they can't see how much they can't.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#182

Post by sumedh »

chrisseaton wrote: post #91
godelski wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're not supposed to be appealing to anyone. Like... voters? > What would you like to see on a judge's website? Qualifications, what ideals are important to them, how they handled complex cases, etc > They shouldn't have any personal opinions! Unfortunately they are human, so they do have personal opinions. They are allowed to have personal opinions. They just aren't allowed to have party affiliations. But if yo…

This is bat-shit insane to me. The public elect the legislature who write the law... the judiciary implement it according to the legislation. They don't any personal opinions to it, that's not their job at all, they don't try to appeal to anyone, they just implement it. Is this not how it works in the US? In the US could a town elect a judge who says they're going to convict everyone who's left-handed?

> They don't any personal opinions to it,

Judges are the one who recommend the sentencing length, their is guideline and its upto the judge to give the minimum or maximum or in between.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#183

Post by deleuze »

SkyBelow wrote: post #135
elbigbad wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Assuming we're talking pretty usual traffic tickets and not talking about driving in a grossly negligent way, no one should _ever_ go to jail for traffic tickets. Largely this logic should apply to any malum prohibitum crime. There are plenty of other ways to enforce these fines/tickets.

Then you effectively are creating a maximum punishment that could easily be ignored by some of the population. Take speeding tickets. What if a person just decides not to pay and keep speeding? Not that they can't, but they don't. Eventually you lose your licenses. You continue to speed, getting more tickets, and now also getting tickets for driving without a license. You continue to refuse to pay the fines and conti…

Yeah that would be a great argument if it wasn't for the fact that anyone who can afford a lawyer is never going to go to jail for unpaid tickets.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#184

Post by smt88 »

tomohawk wrote: post #160

All judicial positions should have a set term, after which a new judge is appointed to the position, even at the Supreme Court level. For example, at the Supreme Court level, if each position was an 18 year term, each offset by 2 years, then a new justice would be nominated every other year to serve no more than 18 years. If a judge left early, the position would be filled until the end of the term. This would preven…

> All judicial positions should have a set term, after which a new judge is appointed to the position, even at the Supreme Court level.

The problem with this is exactly the problem with all term limits: you can "sell" your decisions at the end of your term.

Example: Kentucky's former governor pardoned some incredibly repulsive people because they were donors (or connected to donors)[1] and he had already lost his election.

1. https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article238...

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#185

Post by SquishyPanda23 »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #126
Reedx wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, even if she failed to pay 10,000 traffic tickets, how does it do any good to put her behind bars at all? They really couldn't think of a better way to deal with non-violent offense??

>how does it do any good to put her behind bars at all The good it does is deterrence to the rest of the population. Or that's how authoritarians like to see these sorts of dis-proportionate punishments.

Nobody gives a sentence like that as a deterrent. You give a sentence like that out of cruelty toward people you don't like who you want to stick it to.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#186

Post by godzillabrennus »

vmception wrote: post #181
godzillabrennus wrote: post #145

I mentored a convicted felon through Defy Ventures a few years ago. He had a wonderful idea for an app. Something that stuck with me for the last few years. Why isn’t there a yelp for the public sector including the judicial system? Every day you walk into a court room how do you know what to expect? If you are suddenly in front of a judge that decides your life’s fate wouldn’t you want to pull up historical data tha…

> If you are suddenly in front of a judge that decides your life’s fate wouldn’t you want to pull up historical data that tracks and publishes the judges decisions, the feedback from others who have been in your place, and be able to contribute after your experience? A good lawyer has those things already. Having one of those is part of the privilege. Starry eyed pro bono idealists will never realize this. They've pu…

How many people can afford a “good lawyer”?

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#187

Post by Fjolsvith »

logicchop wrote: post #53
Fjolsvith wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but that a prosecutable case couldn't be made for that So we suddenly have proven guilty without proof, but rather just because there's some suspicion. Doesn't seem American.

That's wildly naive and I think with a little bit of imagination you too can envision a scenario where it makes sense. It needn't be "wild guessing" on the judges behalf; there could be even absolutely convictable evidence that would cause any reasonable person to immediately and unquestionably believe in the guilt of the mother, yet might be barred because of a rule governing the admissibility of evidence (that's it…

If the evidence is not admissible, then it should not be considered, period.

As an example of a judge taking it on himself to "do the right thing", U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan tried to conjure up some way to continue the prosecution of General Michael Flynn by appointing a special counsel after the US District Attorney had moved to dismiss the case. [1] Judge Sullivan thus tried to act as prosecutor, despite a unanimous SCOTUS ruling that such action was not allowed, and was ordered by the Appeals Court to dismiss.

1. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/michael-flynns-case-ordered-...

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#188

Post by defen »

Mirioron wrote: post #173
defen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges could also order that "fugitive" slaves could be returned to their "owners", or that people convicted of treason could be vivisected, if you go far enough back in time. I'm not sure what point is being argued here. If you want to make judges personally liable for following the law and/or for making mistakes, why would anyone become a judge?

If you make soldiers personally liable for following orders then why would anyone want to be a soldier? I'm not saying this to be funny. Most other professions can be held responsible for doing their job, but doing it very poorly that causes harm to others. But somehow judges are exempt.

They're not liable for following lawful orders, though, even if the results are horrific and they personally disagree with the order. That's why no one gets charged when a drone strike blows up a wedding and kills 23 children.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#189

Post by salawat »

jogjayr wrote: post #178
salawat wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because unaccountable lifelong appointed judges works so well in other spheres, yes? Jefferson, Madison, at al feared the Judiciary for a reason. Particularly the Federal tier. Elected judges have a built in check in that they are subject to periodic reaffirmation of confidence from the populace. An appointed judge just needs the right connections once, and to not do anything on such a regular basis that they be…

What about appointed judges with a long term? 10 or 12 years - that's longer than legislators or executive branch people. It gives them more independence but also ensures a turnover of people and ideas. Do it on a rolling basis so that every 1 or 2 years a judge from the court has to step down.

Still somewhat leery of it, in particular with double the term length of a Senator. The longer in office, the more attractive a target for graft one becomes. I think Senators may be the upper limit I would be willing to see without reaffirmation.

Then again, maybe you could make a longer term work with some sort of "anti-election" mechanism. You vote in/appoint/have judges nominated by the bar, whatever, and periodically, a dismissal election is held. If a certain threshold of votes for dismissal/no-confidence are cast, then that triggers a conventional election/run-off for that judges spot. In that sense, the judge no longer has to actively politik, though those vying for the spot are free to campaign to try to get people displeased enough to trigger an election.

It still seems like it may only work with a populace who stays on top of their judges, but I actually kind of like the idea because in theory, good judges would never really be upset from business as usual, bad ones would very quickly become apparent in theory, since the number of corrupt supporters would be very unlikely to dwarf the number of "victims" of the judges corrupt acts, and you get away from some of the politicization of the position except when the public clearly has a change in the winds of policy in mind, in which case the election may put the judge back in office, but with renewed attention to the change in civil sentiment.

I don't know, it just feels better to me that way. I mean I do kinda get where Go's coming from, and I semi-dig it. I just don't think judges should ever be more than arms length away from the people whose lives they impact most.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#190

Post by gamblor956 »

SpelingBeeChamp wrote: post #155
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Convicted in 2011, disbarred in 2019. The guild will go to great lengths to protect their most guilty.

Don't forget that disbarment is not permanent in a majority of states.

Disbarment is quite literally the permanent revocation of your license to practice law in a jurisdiction. In most jurisdictions, if you have been disbarred, you can never practice law there again unless you disbarment is overturned, which generally requires a court order following a lengthy appeals process.

As a practical matter, the number of lawyers who get reinstated each year numbers in the single digits or low double digits.

Post reply on HN