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