Freethought & Rationalism Archive

EarlFlynn · 01-15-2003, 08:07 AM

Here's an interesting column in today's Globe & Mail on a ritual I wasn't aware of.

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/...nt_temp/4/4/4/

crazyfingers · 01-15-2003, 12:10 PM

Interesting story.

Alabama judge Moore and some of the members of the US supreme court could learn a thing or two from the author.

Psycho Economist · 01-17-2003, 08:24 AM

Very nicely written.

Thinking about Justice Moore, are Alabama's courts elected or appointed? In Illinois, even at the supreme court, our judges are elected. It could explain how somebody as un-judicious as Moore got where he did.

crazyfingers · 01-17-2003, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Psycho Economist
Very nicely written.

Thinking about Justice Moore, are Alabama's courts elected or appointed? In Illinois, even at the supreme court, our judges are elected. It could explain how somebody as un-judicious as Moore got where he did.

Moore is elected. I don't believe that electing judges is wise.

Feather · 01-17-2003, 11:32 AM

I don't know. Shrub the Cheney Puppet is trying to pack the USSC with his religious nutjob buddies. Do the pros outweight the cons of (supervised) appointment do you think?

Psycho Economist · 01-17-2003, 12:12 PM

Is appointment better: yes. Allowing a deliberative body to vett nominees, in some cases fillet them live, typically does give the minority power more control over the situation.

Also, the indefinite terms of judicial appointments makes it difficult for there to be enough seats open to truly stack a court, ideologically (unless the number of judges is being changed, then we're all fucked). Some of the liberal S.C. justices (Ginsburg, I know) have gone on the record saying they won't retire while Bush is in office.

01-15-2003, 08:07 AM	#1
EarlFlynn Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Edmonton, Alberta Posts: 1,806	Judges & Church in Canada Here's an interesting column in today's Globe & Mail on a ritual I wasn't aware of. http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/...nt_temp/4/4/4/

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-15-2003, 12:10 PM	#2
crazyfingers Contributor Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 13,699	Interesting story. Alabama judge Moore and some of the members of the US supreme court could learn a thing or two from the author.

01-17-2003, 08:24 AM	#3
Psycho Economist Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Peoria, IL Posts: 854	Very nicely written. Thinking about Justice Moore, are Alabama's courts elected or appointed? In Illinois, even at the supreme court, our judges are elected. It could explain how somebody as un-judicious as Moore got where he did.

01-17-2003, 11:32 AM	#5
Feather Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Gainesville, FL Posts: 1,827	I don't know. Shrub the Cheney Puppet is trying to pack the USSC with his religious nutjob buddies. Do the pros outweight the cons of (supervised) appointment do you think?

01-17-2003, 12:12 PM	#6
Psycho Economist Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Peoria, IL Posts: 854	Is appointment better: yes. Allowing a deliberative body to vett nominees, in some cases fillet them live, typically does give the minority power more control over the situation. Also, the indefinite terms of judicial appointments makes it difficult for there to be enough seats open to truly stack a court, ideologically (unless the number of judges is being changed, then we're all fucked). Some of the liberal S.C. justices (Ginsburg, I know) have gone on the record saying they won't retire while Bush is in office.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.