US Politics Thread

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Joking aside, this is something I find hard to get my head around.
Biden/Trump or anyone else for that matter. Why does the system allow their interference in the judiciary. The optics of it from outside America is terrible.
Surely ordinary folk in the states must see this too. Why is it tolerated.

It obviously suits both parties. But it’s a race to the bottom as far as real democracy is concerned.

It just leads to increasingly innovative ways to corrupt business.

Or so it seems.

I suppose it's always been this way, but politics there seems to be becoming more vindictive and polarised.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Sadly justice and the legal system in the US are hopelessly wedded to politics. Both sides as cynical and transparent as each other when it comes to appointing judges and handing out pardons.

It’s already been explained to you that justices accede to their positions by wildly different means depending on the jurisdiction. In fact, I think it’s been explained several times. Did you miss it, or did you ignore it?

These blanket generaliz(s)ations don’t make you look smart — they make you look uneducated.

Obviously you’ll post whatever as is your right but it’s pretty tiresome to those of us over here who actually vote for judges and/or watch judges get appointed, deal with judges, know judges, etc.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It’s already been explained to you that justices accede to their positions by wildly different means depending on the jurisdiction. In fact, I think it’s been explained several times. Did you miss it, or did you ignore it?

These blanket generaliz(s)ations don’t make you look smart — they make you look uneducated.

Obviously you’ll post whatever as is your right but it’s pretty tiresome to those of us over here who actually vote for judges and/or watch judges get appointed, deal with judges, know judges, etc.

I think on a UK based forum, it’s perfectly proper and reasonable to draw distinctions between our judicial appointments system and yours - when yours produces such an acutely politicised judiciary by comparison, especially if that subjectively appears to be against the wider best interests of democracy.

Whatever the nuances of the mechanism, your judiciary is undeniably less politically independent than ours. And people are entitled to be critical of that if they don’t think it’s a good thing.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I think on a UK based forum, it’s perfectly proper and reasonable to draw distinctions between our judicial appointments system and yours - when yours produces such an acutely politicised judiciary by comparison, especially if that subjectively appears to be against the wider best interests of democracy.

Whatever the nuances of the mechanism, your judiciary is undeniably less politically independent than ours. And people are entitled to be critical of that if they don’t think it’s a good thing.

Your critique isn’t a critique of American justice, but a slight misunderstanding of the different levels of justice within the U.S. Local, County, State & Federal system.

How does one vote for a Federal Judge? State Judge? County Court Judge? Justice of the Supreme Court?

Should lawyers vote for Judges? Other Judges? The electorate? The Senate? The House? Should they just be appointed by the President? Should the Senate even have “advise and consent,” and if so, what does it mean?

The system is clearly different in the UK, but in America, we get to vote for judges, either directly or through our duly elected officials. Americans like that when they are in the majority and don’t like it when they’re in the minority. Democracy can be a bear sometimes.

 

[bluethrunthru]

When they denote a politician with (R) in some cases it means idiot and not Republican