March 02, 2009
What if you sued a big corporation and won, but before the appeal they spent millions of dollars to help elect a sympathetic justice to the state Supreme Court? Let's say the verdict is then overturned with that judge's help. Would that be fair? Would it be fair for a judge that was endorsed by a newspaper to sit in judgment of that paper in some case? Looks like the US Supremes might be gearing up to decide what role big money elections should play in the judiciary.
i figgered you must be referring to this case. it's really the tip of the iceberg here in WV. i'll reserve the rest of my comments for discussion over beers.
another hot topic here in west virginny:
http://action.thisisreality.org/page/s/coenbrothers
forgive me, we take turns with the state's computer n i fergitt how to do that linky thing all the time.
no worries just paste em in and we'll fix them in post-production -- mgmt
« Older The 2008 Feltron Annual Report | Creedocide Newer »
To post comments to a thread you must login or create a profile.
In MO, the state judges are appointed, and the only judicial elections are a "should we retain judge X?" question. Certainly, that system invites corruption, too, but at least the judges are nonpartisan and don't have to run around campaigning.
I do think that the judiciary should be shielded from the political process at least some.
posted by Valatan at 10:32AM CST on March 02