From a comment earlier but worth discussion: “Seems our whole system of “checks and balances” has a weak spot - the judiciary is not accountable to anyone but themselves, unlike the other branches. Once they’re entrenched it’s hard to remove them, and there’s no periodic review of their rulings and what type of cases they choose. It’s a place where corrupt or subversive elements could get into and hide out.”
Other than initial appointments, what checks and balances are there on the judicial branch? How could the system be improved moving forward?
I always vote to not retain incumbent judges. They get too comfy if they are there too long.
That’s a good rule of thumb. Though the judges are always these minor figures that don’t get much attention it seems
Have you ever tried to looking a Judges background before voting , not easy can't even fine the party the are with.
I notic d this
...and who appointed them.
I do that too. Keep the scum stirred up.
I do the same. Doesn't matter their party affiliation.
That's not true at all. In the case of federal judges including the supreme court, first they need approval from congress before serving, and anytime afterwards Congress has the ability to impeach them.
The checks are real, they're just not used often. And having a corrupted Congress doesn't help, and means the controls will never be used to help the people.
For states, you should check the state constitution. California impeached their supreme court chief justice many years ago, with a ballot resolution after the state legislature never followed up. (Rose Bird, a real crazy commie.)
Improve the system? There is no better system. It's just been corrupted.
Well then it’s not a great system if it can be easily corrupted I think.
Good point
Prolly maybe, but any system can be corrupted. That is human nature. The 10% that are borderline personalty disordered, i.e. Psychopathic, Sociopatic or Narcissitic, will find a sneaky way to enrich themselves through deceit and gaming the trust-based contractual system.
The trick is in keeping to societal values, such as truth, honesty etc. And TBH the 'system' that was set up hundreds of years ago, was erupting in many centres, but it was so beautifully penned in the US. That system, starting with a constitution, is the best there is. Others can only copy it. Nevertheless, in defense of Monarchy - there CAN be benevolent Kings - but they have been inbreeding for centuries. (See: spiteful mutants. I digress/). Just a reminder - Monarchy and Imperial conquest is where the current 'system' descended from, and it was rebelled against.
I think that complete chaos is not an alternative as a 'system'. Why do you think the globalists have designed the rainbow package? To de-stabilize. If we can reclaim the 'old' system that is still hanging on by its fingernails, we can improve it by at last getting rid of the rotten apples.
Agreed. The system itself is excellent (best in the world) - but EVERY system ultimately depends on the people that run it and keep it going.
Our system depends on 1) real elections instead of fake, rigged elections, and 2) people that are not complete idiots to vote in those real elections.
Right now, the U.S. only has fake, rigged elections that are largely ignored by a population consisting of mostly idiots.
That is why, collectively, we can't have nice things. As a whole, the people of the U.S. currently do not deserve to have nice things...
Yes. Number one is properly conducted elections. The US, for example imposed ID-presented paper ballots, with thumb ink, on Iraqis. that election was internationally recognized as fair. But, the hipocrisy was that elections back home were impossibly corrupt, and worsening.
So, now the US elections are not credible. And EVERYBODY in the world can see it, and it needs to stop, starting at local levels.
Number two is a competence argument. This works on several levels: of course one needs literate, and educated people to do the moving-and-shaking stuff. Get rid of the smooth-talking transformative managers relying on very expensive comms departments. But the problem is: we live in a blanket of propaganda coming from those satanic mills. Many people still believe the government channels parading as newspapers or TV news, believing the myth that that information is credible, because it is 'mainstream'. The regular Joe cannot even discern smear articles from truth. So, there is an issue of pepe-competence to recognize the lies from the get go, and that there, is a culture change.
Culture changes are best effected via human networks.
How about if a judge gets a ruling overturned by a higher court, they get put “on notice”. If they have 3 or more rulings overturned, they are automatically removed from the bench?
Or something to that effect…
Or busted down to Night Court for a few years.
Wanted to see if it is possible to remove judges from the bench and found out that it is almost impossible, especially in NY.
UNBELIEVABLE FOLKS! NO WONDER OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS $HIT!
Please read both of the following articles.
https://reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-judges-misconduct/
https://links.truthsocial.com/link/112527508551991147
Nice digging
When the Constitution was penned. And the Government and it’s associated checks and balances initially laid out. Only a fraction of the population could vote. And only an even smaller proportion of that. Had the resources to run for state or Federal Elections. That and there wasn’t lawyers under every bloody rock like there is now. Given the crop of people who could stand for office was small. And ran in similar circles. There was just as much social and professional consequences to keep a Judge in check as there was legal repercussions should any malfeasance be found out. Or particularly unpopular rulings be made.
Not to mention Congress, the States, and President have the option to ignore a court’s ruling as has been several times. Though to much social upheaval.
But to answer you question. Let’s pose a Hypothetical Scenario. Let’s say a Judge is hearing a case. And it comes out there’s a potential conflict of interest.
Let’s say an Anonymous Hypothetical committee of other Judges. Let’s say 5. Is appointed by a Legislator with appropriate authority to decide if the potential conflict of interest of is sufficient enough to affect the Judges ruling on the case.
They must rule at a 60% majority. 3/5 either way. Whether the judge must be removed and a new one appointed. Or whether he’s clear to proceed with the case.
Not an ideal check. But it’s something more than exists now. Though you run into the same issue. As the same concerns can be had of whoever is placed in charge of appointing these committees.
The judicial system is corrupt because the people that appoint the justices are corrupt, or in the case of elected judges the same scum that gives you two choices of the same flavor of puppet also give you two choices of the same flavor of puppet for your judicial positions.
Getting rid of the cabal of evil power hungry elites is the only remedy.
Indeed...
u/#q15
Ah, the revolution starts tonight. :In a slavic accent:
Our bill of rights explains clearly who the courts answer to.
Actually there is a hierarchy, from arbitration-'judges'; to County/City to State, to Federal - and ultimately to the Supreme Court - literally in a pyramid structure.
The court that holds a federal court accountable is the Supreme Court - that is why there are nine judges, uneven to prevent a hung panel - all at the top of their game. However, Judges, and also members of the public, can appeal from below, provided they can frame their claim in terms of standing. One cannot claim standing in the Supreme Court until one has been materially and unconstitutionally harmed by a Federal Court.
This was the whole point with all those election cases, early on: no standing - to the delight of Democrats, who thought they had won the battle. However, this statement (no standing) from the Supreme Court was merely stating a fact. One cannot claim harm when one merely 'loses' an election. In any case, I think it was a Beta-dry-run for Trump's lawyers - i.e. bringing a case to the SC, in a history-setting case, regarding the POTUS. As the trumpet-playing civilian brothers have demonstrated - one has to keep trying, when they read your SC submission and then give you an instruction- to get it all according to protocol.
So, weirdly, we are watching a slow-motion trainwreck - all the corrupt judges, as they vulgarly display all their miserable habits and inner snot-gurgle mind-works with fingers all grubby from the money - despite their attempts at censorship. LOL at tweeters sending several tweets per minute.
Once they 'convict' Trump, somehow, the haters will think they won, again. However, this is where the long game plays off: This is when the patriot fires will start burning: We are going to see the Supreme Court in action on behalf of Trump - with standing as the Victim of corrupt judges. NOW he has standing. Obviously.
I can smell the trepidation coming from the jury. There are two choices. What if they find him innocent, because they manage to agree the whole thing is corrupt - through osmosis - good lord, they are swimming in instructions. The Democrats will get extremely dangerous then, as desperation must set in. They are already yelling in the street from their platform shoes. Not summer of love stuff - much worse.
If the jury finds Trump guilty, the MAGA crowd (LOL) will start waving flags, standing around with red hats on, tweeting and spreading mis-information on all their live-stream channels madly. Wut, FBI raids? Cops? On camera. KEK. All of the public, and the whole world, will know in four hours total, that America has truly collapsed.
Oh, and Trump's team had better move fast, after the jury decides on guilty, to prevent a riot. So, I bet the SC submission is already typed up. It will be hours, and then a few days. Or something. I think there is a whole lotta urgency mow. Who knows? Maybe they wait (while they leisurely type with one finger and humming), while the enemy destroys themselves completely. After all, those other cases are like dominoes, hanging on this verdict. They will all start screaming at once.
The solution to the problem, has nothing to do with government. The problem is corruption, and it's systemic. As long as men and women are willing to compromise themselves for filthy lucre, Truth has no chance to prevail. We need a big dose of morality, and it's almost illegal to talk about it anymore.
The legislature can impeach them. But they rarely do.
Higher courts are supposed to hold lower courts and judges accountable through the writ of certiorari process
Who holds the supreme court accountable though?
Congress
The judicial system is corrupt because we don’t demand trial by jury or invoke right to a speedy trial, and because we allow the judge to judge the cases rather than merely convene the cases, and because we don’t know about nullification or judging the law.
Among other things, I’m sure.
The judges should have much less power than they do. The true power of the court is the empowerment of the citizens toward the law and Justice.
The Bible’s commands towards “judge not” and “false witness” may very likely be referring to conduct relevant to real courts and not our current fake statutory slave courts.
Quite frankly, though, we have a good bit of work to do on the population at large to be able to handle these responsibilities. Lots of people can’t even be bothered to wear pants in public. Philosophical nuances of guilt or innocence against long running property rights and criminal tresspass judgments are going to be beyond most people for a while.