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?
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.