(September 3, 2015 at 1:44 pm)Nope Wrote:(September 3, 2015 at 12:22 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: 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.
But isn't that expensive? If you are already a low income person-maybe an abused spouse- how are you going to afford to keep making appeals? You are right, that is scary.
In the U.S., one gets all the justice one can afford.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
