(September 3, 2015 at 12:05 pm)abaris Wrote:(September 3, 2015 at 12:02 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: For those judicial positions that are filled by elections, the winner could be a fast food cook and serve. It's about the number of votes received. The candidate actually knowing anything about the law is often a bonus.
That's what I suspected according to my limited informations on the system. And that's what I was afraid to hear. So, basically, a burger flipper could make life or death decisions.
In principle, yes. However, the check built into the system is the appeals process, in which you don't have to go far up the ladder before you run into a judge, or panel of judges, who actually do know something about the law.
Still, it's always seemed perverse and deeply stupid to leave any judicial position up to a vote, as if we were electing just another county commissioner or city alderman. Think of how ignorant the average voter is about issues that get discussed 24/7 on the cable news outlets. Now think about the likelihood that these same voters will have anything other than a cartoonish idea of the law based on what little they remember from high school civics classes and what they glean from television cop/court procedurals. It's scary.
