Bid to punish judges has eye on state (war on judges getting really ugly)

An initiative providing for the ouster and criminal indictment of judges who make bad decisions appears headed for a test vote in South Dakota next year and, if it succeeds there, will be attempted in other states, sponsors of the measure said this week.

The Southern California-based sponsors of the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (JAIL) have taken aim at what they call "black-collar crime" across the country. They already have their sights set on the 2006 ballot in Nevada, and they report related efforts in Idaho and New Mexico.

They hope to start the ball rolling on a path that will lead to California.

The South Dakota initiative would create a special grand jury to hear complaints against judges based on an open-ended list of possible grievances. The list specifically includes not only crimes such as graft but certain flaws in reasoning, such as ignoring evidence and "sophistry."


http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/courts_legal/story/13870091p-14709539c.html

I suppose "being a Jew," will be added to the list, shortly.

Nonetheless, if such a law passes, I suggest progressive groups us it immediately to wrack up complaints against reactionary, GOP judges... "An eye for an eye," as they say in a Certain Book...

for "Hollywood Liberal".

Same with "cultural elite."

decision to vote Bush into office in 2000. How about that? Look at the thousands of people that have been KILLED because they voted him into office.

and it just fucking figures it has it's roots in cali.

god, i HATE initiatives.

You prefer oligarchy over democracy, then? Because those are your choices: government by the majority, or by the minority.


"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion." Thomas Jefferson, September 28, 1820

nor do i think it's been particularly successful.

so you can't read my beads on this.

We haven't had a lot of democracy in the US. Or for that matter in the world. So I can't imagine how you can think you can make any sort of informed judgement about it.

On the other hand, we have had a lot of oligarchy, and are 'enjoying' it now, too. I believe the evidence is in about that: it works well for the over-privileged few (are you among them?) but very badly indeed for the rest of us.

If the US were to move toward real democracy, are you a modern Tory who would fight to maintain oligarchy and plutocracy? (I ask purely out of interest)

(edit:fix typo)

and jerks like you confirm my suspicions that most are idiots.
unfit to make an informed and intelligent decision .

'mob rule'.

How's rule by the elites been working out for you? Do you ever let yourself wonder what life might be like without predators keeping you corralled so they can more conveniently prey upon you?

:rofl:

most populist movements in this country have been racist, bigoted and/or xenophobic. It's the Repugs that have been the populists lately, if you havn't noticed. Sorry, I have lost all faith in "the common man" since Mr Common Man bought Shrub's "Saddam supports AQ" BS.

when it comes to minority rights. Frankly as someone who has watched 14 straight referenda or iniatives pass which banned same sex marriage I am not to keen on the wisdom of government by referenda.

It's a two-way street, you know. The haters can get up an initiative--but so could you. Most people want to see themselves as fair and decent, so you have an advantage over the haters who generally have to frame their goals dishonestly, or use outright trickery to get signatures.

So how many? Has it been at least 1-for-1? If not, why not?

which was the partnership registry. That was the first time a gay rights initiative passed. Since then only in Maine have gay rights had a victory at the ballot box. We lost two previous attempts to keep Maine's law on the books. In short, people aren't terribly fair minded when it comes to gay rights as has been repeatedly demonstrated. Issue 2 passed handedly in Colorado and narrowly failed in Oregon. In Cincinnati it passed (that one was upheld by the SC since all it did was ban on the city level legislation protecting gays). I also donated money to the failed Cincinnati effort.


Frankly no one in North Carolina seriously thinks gay rights even just employment rights would pass as a referendum here.

Perhaps it needs to be framed up better?

Just as a thought experiment, how about an initiative that says a person is exempt from paying taxes in any year any government office prevents them exercising a civil right that has tax benefits?

Or an initiative that says people have a property interest in their job, and anyone sacked from their job has the right to appeal to a jury composed of 10 randomly-chosen people who work in the same occupation. If the jury finds that the sacking was unfair, the company has to reinstate or compensate.

I.e., frame as general rights, potentially applicable to anyone.

though NC is one a hard core right to work state. We are the least unionized state in the nation. I think your formulation might work in places like Ohio but here it might not. I am amazed at how anything which sounds vaguely union gets trashed.

I'll bet bosses, what's your guess?

That's the wonderful part about real democracy. As Jefferson said, when a small group of people (an insulated legislature) controls government power, they can be easily bribed. But in a democratic society, the majority would have to be bribed and no special-interest group is wealthy enough.

they're based out of cali, but they don't have the balls to try it out here FIRST. they KNOW it wouldn't fly here!!

There was a case here in Central Florida where some people were 10 minutes late to traffic court, seems they'd been given the wrong room. The judge did not allow them to explain, but promptly jailed them for contempt. At least one of the women states she was strip searched.

Now, that judge made a REALLY, REALLY bad decision. But a law like this is too open to interpretation an making judges political slaves rather than impartial jurists. What happened to Greer was bad enough.

She might have a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

WHat is the big issue that has South Dakotans (at least one) so inflamed as to want to jail the hudges (at least one)?

Don't tell me this is related to Aryan Supremists! Potato scamming? Lack of snow in ski season?

Do tell. Inquiring mind wants to know.

Slimed in 3 strikes, there's an interesting story!

We already have a method of getting rid of judges: impeachment. If that needs to be buffed up, then let's buff it up.

This is another end run around the democratic republic we've got, and it needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1933081
thread title (11/18 LBN): House passes Sweeping Budget Cut Bill (in wee hours after initial defeat)

Bad news. But the fight goes on - neither of these is a final defeat.

items on the ballot in southern California. Period.